Topic: Waking up a dead or concluded discussion in a topic (Read 217 times)

Newbies should just mind or take thorough checking on their posts because creating a thread. We know how strict the space can be. These threads can only be active when there's massive accountable evidence to show proofs. The market is not for everyone, we have the traders that understand how to comprehend the market but we also have the ones that have failed woefully without the aides of his colleagues.

OP you brought a very interesting topic here because I have seen such happen to some of my threads I posted long time ago in my local board and the discussions there has already been finalized only to see some newbies just bump up the thread all of a sudden and the one that annoys me most is if the thread was about something that happened within the time the thread was created so bumping such a thread to make new posts are irrelevant because the discussions have come and gone however I know some persons may suggest locking up a thread if the information needed have been achieved or the answer needed have been answered but to me, threads that needs to be locked are threads that involves question and some users have already answered it to the satisfaction of the OP and again threads that have a specific purpose why it was created, those are majorly the type of threads that should be locked but for other discussions it can be left open so that any one with any new ideas that will be helpful to the topic can awaken the thread again and discussion continues.

Mostly newbies without much knowledge and experience do such things because they don't know how they can check the times of the threads started and the last posts were posted long back, so they write what they feel about the topic without realizing that they are waking up a dead thread from the past.

We don't need to blame anyone, but if we think that a thread has served its purpose and it should be locked but the OP isn't active anymore in the thread, we can report it to the moderators and if moderators think it deserves to be locked, they will lock it up, but if they think it should stay open, there is nothing wrong with people making new posts in it for the sake of continuing the discussion.

Old threads do not necessarily need to be locked. In some cases bringing an dead thread back to life makes sense. In other cases it is caused by mistake (usually because of newbies and signature spammers).

You don't need to use the Telegram bot, you can enable email notifications when someone replies to your own threads or to watched ones. Of course, your email address needs to be an active one.



If you have something really unique and new to contribute to an old thread, I would be fine to bump it with such a contribution. If you fear to necro-bump a thread, create a new one, give a link to the old thread or particular posts of it and be good.

I'm not such a fan of fragmentation of information about the same topic over various threads, though. It makes searching harder as you get more hits and have to decide where the really good details are buried.

But as always... YMMV!

I see a suggestion in the meta board about this, and many users are saying it is the OP's opinion on if the thread should be lucked or not, but some users said that, someone might have something to add or discuss about the thread.
The main question is, how do they go to some pages back and dig out these inactive threads?
Is it because they might lack what to post in other discussions or they are just willing to bump the threads for more clarification?
Sometimes we cannot blame the newbies because if they use the search bottom and find out a thread they are interested in, they make comment just for some information or more detail explanation instead of creating a fresh thread.

I think the best solution to this is that authors of the thread should be responsible enough to make a conclusion so that the thread will not be open anymore for new replies. However, this is also case to case basis, if the thread itself will still be useful for new posters, as it brings more awareness and relevant insights, then I don’t think that certain thread will not be open for more discussion, most especially if it gets more interesting with the new batch of replies from old and new posters.

This is actually good one @op because there are so many threads here and especially in gambling board that have been inactive for a long time but sometimes i will try and explore the forum and i will see some comments on that thread, meanwhile @op i will also love to ask you some questions concerning your post too because i will also like to learn more on this,

1. is there any specified duration for a particular post to last on the forum ?
if the answer is yes please kindly refer me to the guielines where i can read about it in the forum because i am new in the forum and i will not like to be  a victim of not obeying the rules and regulation of the forum. the forum is filled with so many users and also welcoming new users by the day, so how will the new users know that a particular topic has been inactive and how will they deal with the situation.

i also saw that there were many threads that had not been active for months, but there were still users who still replied to these threads, and most of these users were newbies. but maybe they don't understand or they think that it is a normal thing, but it is better for users to report it to the moderator so that these threads can be locked, especially when the discussion is actually over and no one else is replying. it's just not nice to see that there are still people who keep replying and even want to start the discussion again when the discussion is over.

If a person has an interesting contribution to make or still has a query, they may choose to go back and review an earlier topic. Let the thread be from years ago rather than just a month, even if it has to be locked.

If the discussion is still relevant to the topic then it’s not wrong to post on that inactive thread since it’s just 4 months rather than newbie creating same topic just to discuss same matter.

What I consider unethical is answering those years old inactive thread with an answer that is already outdated for that specific time frame. There’s a lot of issue like this before that old question being answered now by newbie that doesn’t read the date. But if it’s a months old discussion then it’s fine as long as the thread doesn’t ask specific question that already answered 2 page or more.

What could possibly bring a dead thread up when it has nothing so relevant in the reply of the person that brought it up? OP cannot be blamed for not locking the thread because some replies that comes afterwards sometime contains a lot of useful information that will be useful to the forum users.

I have seen threads like that been brought back to life after some months, but checking the recent reply or the OP’s intent of creating the thread will only determine if I should comment there or not. For the case of newbies bringing up a dead thread, I don’t see it happening often like big members do bring them up.

Creating a new thread that is similar to the original thread is not that necessary to me though, but if it becomes a necessity to do that, it is better the new OP adds the link of the original thread for reference purposes. I won’t see that as spamming, but as a way to continue further discussion on the previous topic which is okay in my opinion.

Over the year, I have seen it happening multiple times and it most of those people waking inactive threads are newbies.
They just reply on that threads randomly without any valid reasoning.
This makes the thread active and then a whole lot other users keep replying on the thread making it longer.
One solution that I can think of would be to restrict newbies from posting on threads which are more than 4 months old.
This would decrease these occurrences a lot.

Depends on the question/s that is going to ask. If it requires much and detailed attention better to create a new thread.

Answering/replying an old topic/thread/post with detailed answers i guess will be fine but mods have different POV for that, once reported, highly likely it will be deleted.

If the latest reply is still relevant, that's fine and the mods will just leave it fine.

But if it seems a necropost/bump or reply, you can report the thread so that the mods will lock it.

There is no way that the OP will lock it if he has been inactive for so long or even if there is no new reply and you just happen to search it and you saw that thread, you may try to report it as well so it will be locked.

A random search can bring out outdated posts sometimes and if you don't pay attention to the date you won't notice it is an old thread. I have experience it before numerous times but there's no need to respond to such posts unless it's very necessary. By the way, the forum use to issue a warning note when you attempt to respond to old posts reminding you that there has been no reply on this thread for a couple of months now and whether you would like to continue or better still create a new thread. I assume that some people don't pay attention to notice the warning before posting on the very old thread.


I can't blame the Op or people who joined the thread lately. We normally come across old but useful thread that engaging in it might take it to someone else notice whom might benefit from it. I prefer to keep the thread moving as far as people are not derailing from point of discussion than seeing a new thread that looks similar and will get almost the same responses, ideas and opinions just like in the old thread. A close observation in this particular board is typical example of board with a repeated thread. Most questions or threads here can be a reply on a similar thread and someone will probably provide an answer to the question. There's no point in creating new thread if there is a thread it can fit in as a reply but almost everyone of us is guilty of this.

One thing I'm yet to understand is how threads are be programed to trend in the boards. So sometimes I think the moderators are the ones revalidation those old threads so that others can reach out to the thread and also contributes if there need be.
There could actually be some kinda threads that could be older enough to be skipped off but due to the contexts quality of the threads it wouldn't see Worth getting abandoned or look away because others could be in need of it with some vital contributions to the thread in future.

Although I can also understand the instincts of the Op just as you've said, if the contexts of the thread has a satisfactory feedbacks from other community members, then it doesn't require further contributes as time goes.
So it is recommended such post are locked. I'd suggest if the moderator can always write to the OP of such threads to find out if they're satisfied with the level of replies pertaining what they initially requested right on their previous thread for the moderators to t decide on the action.

No OP cannot be blamed and I think you need to check the reasons why it has been bumped after such a long inactivity because often I have seen old topics become relevant where someone might have predicted something which has come true after a year or months. Let's not focus our time just trying to blame others or finding fault in other people's work rather understand the root cause behind it and do something productive.

I doubt if users don't notice how old a thread is because when you try to make a reply in an old thread, a warning or rather notification pops up showing that the thread is an old one so there is no excuse for a user in this regard. It is very simple for newbies to find out post that was made long time ago by just just going to the last page of a particular board and find a topic they can comment on.

from what I know if the poster is adding something new and substantial to the dead thread, there is nothing wrong with waking it up.

why would the OP be blamed for not locking the thread? it is common and normal to keep a thread open just in case (as I mentioned) a new poster is adding something new and substantial to the thread.

if the discussion is substantial enough and directly correlates with the original post, I think it is fine to reactivate the thread, there is also nothing wrong with creating a new thread for it(at least in my view).