Thread "Necromancy" Rules?

[Sasha]

Is there a limit on the age of a post I can respond to? If so, how old does it have to be? Sorry for the inconvenience. I can't find any mention of such a rule, but many forums have it and I'm not sure if this one does as well.

[Tatume]

People often revive old threads. If you want to make a comment, make it.

[georgerkahn]

Is there a limit on the age of a post I can respond to? If so, how old does it have to be? Sorry for the inconvenience. I can't find any mention of such a rule, but many forums have it and I'm not sure if this one does as well.

Strangely, in doing Google searches I will regularly be directed to a post or two made on this site more than a decade back! GOOD info is "forever"! and this is a place to find it. I wouldn't hesitate in responding to an "old" post. One thing which "may?" come up is this forum has some pretty good rules to maintain its family-friendly and high levels, but these rules do (rarely?) get broken, with Moderators banning poster -- perhaps for a finite time... or forever. So, there MAY be a chance you come across a post from someone banned, and will not be able to respond... This has happened to me, once, with the word "banned" under user name.
Welcome to the forum!!!!
geo

[Sasha]

Thanks for the advice and words! :)

[GONRA]

NECROMANCY is WAAAAAAAY too big a verd for GONRA. (Just plain SCARY! !!)

[35 Rem]

I think it's a good idea to respond to old posts. If you have something to add to the original subject, it groups more relevant info together for future reference.

[Winger Ed.]

You're more than welcome to revive old threads.

[delftshooter]

as long as you arent doing what judges call "unusual acts with dead threads" its ok.

And necromancy is fun.. the Pet Semetary movies PROVED it was fun

[15meter]

I refer to it as an archeological find, and I personally like linking old data to new stuff as opposed to a whole bunch of disjointed little threads.

I know there are forums that discourage the continuity of old/new threads.

Silly to my way off thinking.

[Bazoo]

Howdy and welcome to cb.gl forum. I often am glad to see info in old threads. Things that I never would have learned if it weren't for someone reviving and older thread.

[Minerat]

The only way you get answers to questions is by asking. If during your perusing of the forum if you find you have a question(s) then by all means ask someone will answer and we all learn something new. Welcome aboard!

[Tripplebeards]

It makes me feel like my old posts were informative and educational when they are brought back to life.

[justindad]

I’ll never understand why some forums get bent out of shape over replies to old threads. Some people just want to be upset, I suppose. Reviving old threads keeps all the information in one place, which is good.

[mnewcomb59]

Haha right we have here on this site decades of questions and answers and some people get mad for responding to an old thread. Then the same people get snippy with new members for asking a question that has been answered before and tell them to use the search!

[Bazoo]

I loved reading all the old threads about the pioneers in powder coating... folks that are major PCers now asking questions. PCing started off this forum didn't it?

[MUSTANG]

I must CONFESS my sins. I just responded to a thread that was languishing for 2 years, someone else posted a comment on it before me though.

[Winger Ed.]

I've seen it a few times, someone would answer a OP's question without checking the dates,
then the next reply was something along the lines of,
"The thread is 13 years old, I hope he's figured it out by now".

[Hannibal]

The only time it bothers me is when a specific question was asked or it's obvious IF YOU READ THE ENTIRE THREAD that relevance has been lost.

I freely admit that I've been guilty of responding to a long-dead thread more than once. I try not to but I'm not always successful.

[Tall]

I think if a moderator decides your comment is inappropriate then they will delete it and maybe close the thread to further comments. I would say that if your post adds value to the original thread then why not go ahead and say it? As someone mentioned above, google often finds these threads based on relevancy, not age.

[justindad]

I've seen it a few times, someone would answer a OP's question without checking the dates,
then the next reply was something along the lines of,
"The thread is 13 years old, I hope he's figured it out by now".

Even if the OP solved it 13 years ago, someone else is eventually going to have the same problem. Recording answers for the next guy is helpful. I could be advocating for the wrong thing though, if the financial cost of saving & archiving so much data becomes unaffordable.

[Winger Ed.]

Even if the OP solved it 13 years ago, someone else is eventually going to have the same problem.

Very true. Especially as new members come along.
That's why bringing back old threads is received so well.

[jdgabbard]

Honestly, it doesn't doesn't bother me if a member revives an older thread. If nothing else, it gives us a chance to point out how a particular topic has developed over time - either becoming more prevalent, or irrelevant, to just down right outdated... Look at my link in the bottom of my signature "Jdgabbard's very own boolit boxes pattern!" which links to a thread called "Let's Talk Storage". That thread is 15 years old and it's still getting responses. That was back when I was still lubesizing my boolits. I've been PCing for at least several years now, and no long use that method any more. As a matter of fact, I've gotten away from the last method I was using (4x4x4 boxes). Now I just use ziplock bags taped up and labeled - since I PC everything now I don't have to worry about lube coming out of the grooves...

If you've got questions, or even something to add, post away. Who cares how old the thread is. The purpose of this forum is knowledge. And as knowledge changes we should correct that knowledge.

[Rickf1985]

Reviving old threads also has a purpose when the old threads reference powders that are no longer available and people have found replacements so the old thread is updated with new information. And the part about not reading the whole thread is one of my pet peeves, it happens all the time with new threads. People make comments that make no sense because it was covered 10 posts before theirs but they did not take the time to read the thread, they just red the first post and then skipped to the end and commented.

[jdgabbard]

Reviving old threads also has a purpose when the old threads reference powders that are no longer available and people have found replacements so the old thread is updated with new information. And the part about not reading the whole thread is one of my pet peeves, it happens all the time with new threads. People make comments that make no sense because it was covered 10 posts before theirs but they did not take the time to read the thread, they just red the first post and then skipped to the end and commented.

I make a firm exception for this rule when the thread is more than 10ish pages long. There are threads on this forum that number in the high double digits, maybe hundreds, long. Expecting someone to read all of that before chiming in is just laughable.

[Hannibal]

I make a firm exception for this rule when the thread is more than 10ish pages long. There are threads on this forum that number in the high double digits, maybe hundreds, long. Expecting someone to read all of that before chiming in is just laughable.

And sounding like a broken record is just as laughable.

[mnewcomb59]

I make a firm exception for this rule when the thread is more than 10ish pages long. There are threads on this forum that number in the high double digits, maybe hundreds, long. Expecting someone to read all of that before chiming in is just laughable.

You should go in your settings and set it to display more posts per page. I think the default is 10 per page, which is a holdover from dialup days. Even still, the homemade BP thread is better searched through google than reading through so many posts, but thats about the only post on here that is interesting and very long that I have found.

[Rickf1985]

I was talking about new threads with one or two pages max. I see it all the time.

[Hannibal]

I was talking about new threads with one or two pages max. I see it all the time.

Agreed.

[Lead Puller]

I would rather someone respond to an old thread than start a new one. That way I only have to read through one thread to gather information.

[GrizzLeeBear]

I think the correct term is "zombie" thread. LOL

It is funny when someone responds to a question like "should I buy XYZ or ZYX?" that the OP asked like 10 years ago. As someone said above the usual next response is "this thread is over 10 years old I think they have decided by now."

Zombie threads don't bother me, there are a lot of times when the old information is useful. I have had some thread I started over 10 years before that pop back up with new discussion. I think it's kind of cool when than happens.