Suggestion: Warning if last post of thread is over 6mo. old...

[Cornucopia]

Reading through a few threads wherein I had posted at some time, I noticed a few were rehashes of old threads (aka "grave digging"), and I thought...

What if when doing a search on threads/topics/etc, the sorting (which I assume is already chronological) has a header break and warning subheader for all topics/threads where the last post is over 6 months old. Would this be wanted? Would it help cut down on grave digging? Would it be difficult to implement? (probably not)

Scott

[Supreme2k]

It's a nice idea, in theory. In reality, people will post wherever they want, and for some of the lamest reasons. Some grave-digging I've seen was to thank someone in an 8 month old thread. I've seen people ask if there was "newer" versions in a thread that was a year old.

[guns1inger]

And sometimes they just dig them up to start a flame war and be a-holes.

Generally, if I see something that is blatant grave-robbing - perhaps to spam a product or ask a very tenuously linked question - I just use the Report This Post feature and let a Mod make the call.

Hell, that's why they get paid the big money

[gadgetguy]

And sometimes they just dig them up to start a flame war and be a-holes.

Generally, if I see something that is blatant grave-robbing - perhaps to spam a product or ask a very tenuously linked question - I just use the Report This Post feature and let a Mod make the call.

Hell, that's why they get paid the big money

ditto. I seem to recall being told to do that at some point. And the "report this post" is so easy to use now, there's no reason not to (when appropriate).

[Cornucopia]

But you know, I've even been guilty of (accidentally) grave digging. It happens to the best of us...when you do a topic search, find something that seems relevant, and quickly post/reply--without checking to see when that previous last post was done.
A little section-separating/warning banner would have done just the trick to prevent me from making a fool of myself.

Scott

[SLK001]

Just because a post is old doesn't mean that the discussion is no longer relevant, or that the problem was solved, or that new information added would not add to the knowledge base.

I have often referred to posts I made six plus years ago to pass on information that was posted there (and still relevant).

And why would you want to "Report this Post" just because the original posting was "old"? That's not the reason for the "Report this Post" button.

[gadgetguy]

The "Report this Post" is to be used any time you think the poster has broken the rules, and the Mods will decide whether they have or not. I personally don't consider adding relevant information to an old post as gravedigging. So I wouldn't use "Report this Post", just because the OP is old. But resurrecting an old thread to agree with one side of an old argument, or to try to get the OP to provide more information (especially if it was a one post wonder), is just a nuisance and pisses me off that I wasted my time reading it.

I just did a quick review of the rules and there's nothing in there about gravedigging, so I guess it's just something that "the community" discourages. Perhaps our beloved Admin could chime in here and give some direction on this.

As for the original request, I think it would be a good idea so that the person replying to the old thread is fully aware of what they're doing and might give some thought as to whether it's relevant or not.

[Supreme2k]

I have often referred to posts I made six plus years ago to pass on information that was posted there (and still relevant).

On the other hand, you merely referenced it, but didn't post in it. Yes, the information contained therein can be relevant, but replying to a six-year-old post is not.

For instance, someone may post in an old thread about vcd vs. svcd, stating "Blu-ray is where it's at, idiots!"

[jman98]

Just because a post is old doesn't mean that the discussion is no longer relevant, or that the problem was solved, or that new information added would not add to the knowledge base.

I have often referred to posts I made six plus years ago to pass on information that was posted there (and still relevant).

I agree with this and I don't think all grave robbing is necessarily bad, but I also don't like it and think that most of the time it is useless. Here's a few examples of my personal thoughts on it.
1) The original post asked how to do something and nobody ever solved the problem. You have a solution. I think it's OK to post. For example if someone asks how to make the Acme DVD player model 0001A region free and you know the answer, it's OK to post it in the thread.
2) If somebody asked how to do something and nobody had an answer and you also don't know how to do it, adding your post to the old thread is highly unlikely to result in the solution. I don't like this, but I'm not sure it's necessarily wrong.
3) Posting a completely unrelated subject to an old thread is always wrong. For example using my Acme DVD player example in #1 above, posting something like "I have the Spamco DVD player model 1315X and I wanted to know if anyone had a hack for it" is dead wrong.
4) Adding nothing to an old thread except to say "I agree with earlier post Y" is wrong. Saying "I had the same experience as previous poster Z" is also wrong. If it adds nothing to the previous discussion, don't post. Like Supreme2k I also hate when people dig up old threads to say "thanks" as if we all couldn't live without knowing that.

If I catch grave robbing, I often comment on it. Newbies get a kinder treatment from me and encouragement not to do that again. Older members generally get a ruder comment from me. I'm not necessarily proud of that, but that's how it just seems to be. I wouldn't object to any sort of warning as proposed, but I suspect that many will ignore it.

I rarely use the search function, so I don't have the problem of digging up old threads. I only comment on recent threads and let the stuff in the past stay in the past. I'm not criticizing Cornucopia at all for admitting to accidentally grave digging, I'm just saying how I avoid such is by letting stuff in the past stay there.

[gll99]

I really don't see an issue. On some forums, the idea has been floating around that somehow it's always wrong to re-open old topics? Just as some of you have said, I say let each case stand on its own. If a new person reopens a topic and someone answers great and if not then what is lost? Suggesting to a new user that he could start a new topic with perhaps a more appropriate tag title is fine if the subject is really old or not quite on topic. That would be considered helpful but otherwise why post just to take exception and chastise the other person. Why not just ignore the post if you can't answer it? Why the need to comment? There is no reason to be rude with anyone when all it takes is to hit the report this post button and if the reviewing mod agrees he'll comment. Why potentially start a flame war over some personal interpretration of the rules.

I'm not disagreeing with the "reminder prompt" if that is easily done but only as an automatic "prompt" with a note suggesting the possible alternatives available to the poster.