Forum necroposting

[Coderis]

I'm wondering why this forum has a rule about not commenting on posts that haven't been active in 2 months? Why not auto lock them if that's what you wish instead of harassing members and give them warnings for replying to them?

When I play Pokémon Reborn I often google pokemon reborn plus the subject which will give me many old posts but related to what I'm trying to figure out which helps me a lot. Without much thought I often give my 2 cents to the topic which has costs me 2 warnings this far. I just wanna socialize with current events in game I'm at. I think the rule is pretty silly that something like this triggers warnings unless the reply rekindles some old post full of drama or if the subject is no longer relevant to the game which haven't been the case to those posts I've replied to.

[DashingStorm]

Simple solution; Don't post in threads that are 2+ months old and create one of your own (in the appropriate section).

[Tomas Elliot]

Besides, necroposting is a warnable offense in virtually every forum around the web, so it should hardly come as a surprise to anyone. It's basic internet etiquette really.

[Coderis]

I've never met it before Catherine.

[Tacos]

The approach that should be taken is to avoid necroposting, considering it's clearly stated in the Community Rules. If you want any questions answered about our rules, I'd be glad to answer them for you. I don't believe I've seen any of my fellow mods harassing anyone over this rule, but I do apologize if any warnings have come across in that way.

[Coderis]

I just wonder why rekindling a good post with your input is a problem that triggers warnings equal to bad behavior.

I guess I'll just stop replying to posts.. I never check their dates.

[Tacos]

We don't want this to be something that entices you to stop participating in the community. Most of it comes from the fact that the thread generally is dead, and outdated information that is no longer relevant shouldn't be brought back to page 1 where more relevant and recent threads and topics should be.

[Kagamine]

I do agree with both sides. If it's a post about information from an older episode, odds are it's changed a bit, such as with how some of the event pokemon and the like have changed. However, in a general topic, I believe necroing should be alright. Sometimes a topic is just shoved pages behind, and if it's revived it'll be active again (aside from the reviving post)

Actually, from my forum experience (on all of the forums I've been on), the staff was very good with the upkeep. I know a forum that locked threads when they hit the 30 day mark, and then within a week or two the thread was gone (probably moved to some cache or something, I'm not sure if you can delete threads)

Another forum was extremely organized, and moved threads that were inactive or just old news into this archive section, actually many of the sections had an archive.

Also, some people don't have good attention spans or are impulsive (especially those with learning disabilities, neurodevelopmental disabilities, or psychiatric illnesses) and tend to not notice things such as a post date, I could delve further into this topic but I feel it would be a digression.

I think locking would be the best preventative measure, and an archive or something would also be a good idea.

[Rosesong]

I do agree with both sides. If it's a post about information from an older episode, odds are it's changed a bit, such as with how some of the event pokemon and the like have changed. However, in a general topic, I believe necroing should be alright. Sometimes a topic is just shoved pages behind, and if it's revived it'll be active again (aside from the reviving post)

Actually, from my forum experience (on all of the forums I've been on), the staff was very good with the upkeep. I know a forum that locked threads when they hit the 30 day mark, and then within a week or two the thread was gone (probably moved to some cache or something, I'm not sure if you can delete threads)

Another forum was extremely organized, and moved threads that were inactive or just old news into this archive section, actually many of the sections had an archive.

Also, some people don't have good attention spans or are impulsive (especially those with learning disabilities, neurodevelopmental disabilities, or psychiatric illnesses) and tend to not notice things such as a post date, I could delve further into this topic but I feel it would be a digression.

I think locking would be the best preventative measure, and an archive or something would also be a good idea.

Alright Nin, follow me because I'm going to hit on all of these points and work to clarify as best as I can.

1) I believe necroing should be alright. Sometimes a topic is just shoved pages behind, and if it's revived it'll be active again (aside from the reviving post) -- For the record, Pokemon Reborn operates under the believe that posting in a thread that has had no activity in over two months is what counts as necroposting. Many threads will have run the topic of discussion by this point, or the information presented within them will have become outdated and replaced with something new that has its own thread. There are certain exceptions to this, and they are detailed in both "Good" Thread Revival Vs. Necroposting and The Way of the Bump & How to Do So. The tl;dr is that should you be entering a thread with new knowledge that hasn't previously been stated before in there, it's ok to revive the thread with that information; otherwise, should you just be looking for help, it's in your best interest to create a new thread.

2) I know a forum that locked threads when they hit the 30 day mark, and then within a week or two the thread was gone (probably moved to some cache or something, I'm not sure if you can delete threads) -- Many times when a thread officially crosses the threshhold for necroposting, it's already several pages back as is. Coupling this with the well known fact that the moderators are managing their real lives in addition to managing active threads, it's asking quite a bit of them to actively search for threads that have had no activity for two months and lock them in addition to everything else that they do. While an autolock system is an interesting idea, there are the exception threads listed in the answer to number 1 that would suffer from this as well. In addition, many of the subforums here have a "directory", in which a list of threads that are useful to the viewer are listed, as well as threads that you will not be warned for necroposting in.

3) Another forum was extremely organized, and moved threads that were inactive or just old news into this archive section, actually many of the sections had an archive. -- While this could be applicable, the answer to number 2 is still an issue here, as moderators that are already monitoring active threads would have to sift through other threads to find specifically which threads need to be moved. From there, you get into the numerous discussion that would occur amongst the entire auth team, debating the merits of various threads and whether or not said thread should be moved or not. Currently, the page system that we have works as a type of archive as is. Anything on the first page of a subforum is almost certainly safe to post on. The second page is typically where a user should begin to be cautious of what they want to respond to. From the third page onward is typically where you enter the point where responding is almost certainly necroposting. Of course there are exceptions to this, but that's a very general idea as to how this system works.

4) I think locking would be the best preventative measure, and an archive or something would also be a good idea. -- I've kind of addressed this in my previous answers. However, I will bring this up in our next staff meeting for good measure to make sure the other auth are aware of this as a viable idea to help improve forum experience for users in the future, should we find ourselves able to implement such a system.

[Arkhi]

As much as I'd love access to an "Old Thread" tab that has all necroposting-applicable threads available to me, I don't. Staff don't, Global Mods don't, and Administrators don't either, so we rely upon users' reports and our own exploration of threads and examination of post times/dates in order to determine if a Necropost warning is worth giving. If a necropost is unnecessary, then it ought to be warned. That said, there are such things as justifiable necroposts that contribute to a thread's initial purpose, though in nearly all cases, it's best to create a whole new discussion so that users replying to the newly necro'd thread don't feel pressured by a potential necroposting warning.