Quit Bumping Old Threads!

[+Team GPSaxophone]

We see it from time to time, someone goes way back to the oldest threads in the forums and bumps a topic. People see the new reply and don't realize the date of the original post and start commenting as if the discussion never ended. This is especially foul when the thread ended just over a year (or two) ago.

 

BrianSnat noticed the last post date of Jun 9th and commented that the argument ended a few weeks ago. He didn't notice that it was Jun 9th 2002

 

I'd hate to propose a new rule (then someone would start another anti-rule thread), but how about instead of bumping an old thread that has run its course, we start a new thread and Markwell the old one?

[+Beta Test]

Bumps are everywhere these days, I see post after post mentioning them.

[+TeamK-9]

For a second I believed that this was an old thread that had been bumped. But really this is a new non-bumped thread that I just helped bump.

[+Team GPSaxophone]

For a second I believed that this was an old thread that had been bumped. But really this is a new non-bumped thread that I just helped bump.

Is that a hampster in your avatar?

[+CompuCash]

bump bump - in the night?

[+mrmnjewel]

Bumps are everywhere these days, I see post after post mentioning them.

I've got bumps all over me...but that is another story for another time...

[+Beta Test]

:D Edited July 13, 2004 by Beta Test

[+briansnat]

BrianSnat noticed the last post date of Jun 9th and commented that the argument ended a few weeks ago. He didn't notice that it was Jun 9th 2002

 

Actually, I knew it was an old thread, which is why I asked why he bumped it. I was referring to the same issue in another thread that was beaten to death a few weeks ago.

 

As far as the practice of bumpin old threads, I've done it from time to time when I'm in a silly mood, but sometimes its interesting to see how little the issues discussed here have changed over the years.

[+Milbank]

but how about instead of bumping an old thread that has run its course, we start a new thread and Markwell the old one?

 

ok,

Edited July 13, 2004 by Milbank

[+AuntieWeasel]

Hmph! And here I've seen several interesting topics quashed because "they'd been discussed before." I don't know if a Markwell is intended to be a conversation stopper, but that's how it seems to function.

 

Yes, I know on any forum it can be exasperating for the old hands to deal with the same topics over and over, but this forum doesn't seem high-traffic enough to make that a particular nuisance. What's a newbie to do?

[+tirediron]

Hmph! And here I've seen several interesting topics quashed because "they'd been discussed before." I don't know if a Markwell is intended to be a conversation stopper, but that's how it seems to function.

 

Yes, I know on any forum it can be exasperating for the old hands to deal with the same topics over and over, but this forum doesn't seem high-traffic enough to make that a particular nuisance. What's a newbie to do?

Speaking of bumps and Markwells.. how long do you have to be here before you become a verb?

[CoyoteRed]

... but how about instead of bumping an old thread that has run its course, we start a new thread and Markwell the old one?

But wouldn't it get shut down for being a duplicate thread?

[+Team GPSaxophone]

... but how about instead of bumping an old thread that has run its course, we start a new thread and Markwell the old one?

But wouldn't it get shut down for being a duplicate thread?

I wasn't referring to bumping a month old thread. That would be a duplicate topic.

 

If a thread's been idle for a year or more it's probably better to start a new thread if you want to discuss a similar issue.

[+Imajika]

If a thread's been idle for a year or more it's probably better to start a new thread if you want to discuss a similar issue.[/color]

Wow! I agree with the smurf!

 

Threads that are a year old (or older) should really just be left alone and fade away. I would agree with starting a new topic.

 

BUT, there is always going to be someone who says, "We discussed this back in 2002, see this thread."

[+Team DEMP]

I've used forum software that at least warns a poster that they are replying to an old thread. Don't know if this software supports that or not. They can still reply, but it alerts them that the thread is > 30 days old.

 

The threads you are referring to are likely being found through Searches. I guess they could limit the search to < 90 days and then at least posts older then that wouldn't be found (through an easy method).

[+briansnat]

Yes, I know on any forum it can be exasperating for the old hands to deal with the same topics over and over, but this forum doesn't seem high-traffic enough to make that a particular nuisance. What's a newbie to do?

 

I don't think anybody has a problem with newbs rehashing old issues, unless its about GPS use on airlines.

 

Speaking of bumps and Markwells.. how long do you have to be here before you become a verb?

 

I was here about a year before Briansnat became a verb. To briansnat a topic means to post something so incredibly intelligent, cogent and pithy that all further debate effectively ends and anybody who disagrees is a putz.

Edited July 13, 2004 by briansnat

[+BlueDeuce]

2 month inactive auto-lock?

[+Renegade Knight]

Every now and then I run across an old thread that is interesting. Somtimes it's an old debate that still isn't resolved. Sometimes it's something from an angle that has never been discussed again.

 

Signed. Thread Bumper.

 

P.S. AS is an old thread now. Careful what you wish for...

[+Team GPSaxophone]

BUT, there is always going to be someone who says, "We discussed this back in 2002, see this thread."

True, sometimes all that needs to be said was said some time back. This sort of Markwelling is extremely helpful for newbies.

 

Sometimes, however, something has changed since the last time the topic was brought up and a new thread could highlight the changes.

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Every now and then I run across an old thread that is interesting. Somtimes it's an old debate that still isn't resolved. Sometimes it's something from an angle that has never been discussed again.

 

Signed. Thread Bumper.

 

P.S. AS is an old thread now. Careful what you wish for...

The AS thread might have started a year ago, but it hasn't been inactive for any significant amount of time.

[+briansnat]

BUT, there is always going to be someone who says, "We discussed this back in 2002, see this thread."

True, sometimes all that needs to be said was said some time back. This sort of Markwelling is extremely helpful for newbies.

 

Sometimes, however, something has changed since the last time the topic was brought up and a new thread could highlight the changes.

Often, a markwell serves a good purpose. If a topic has already been discussed to death, there rarely is a need to start again. A simple markwell will usually provide all the information the OP needs.

[+Sparky-Watts]

 

Speaking of bumps and Markwells.. how long do you have to be here before you become a verb?

 

I was here about a year before Briansnat became a verb. To briansnat a topic means to post something so incredibly intelligent, cogent and pithy that all further debate effectively ends and anybody who disagrees is a putz.

Oh, so by the same definition, to pull a Sparky would be to post inane drivel in every forum on the board, including those that are in a language other than English?

 

I'll have to add "Briansnat" to my list of coined phrases now!

 

EDIT: But where should I put it? Between Subigo and Ringbone? Or between Markwell and Webfoot?

Edited July 13, 2004 by Sparky-Watts

[+rusty_tlc]

I have also seen markwells used to reference another, related, topic without having to re-hash it. Seems like a good way to add content without bogging down the discussion or taking it off on a tangent.

[+Markwell]

The best use of the markwell - IMNSHO - is to use it as a reference. Not to stifle the topic, but just as a point of reference that this has indeed been discussed in the past.

 

The best newbie posters are the ones that start off by saying "I found this old topic on virtual caches, but I still have some questions..."

 

Interesting side note: in that thread this post from over 3 years ago was something of a hot topic.

 

So, a virtual cache is not really a "cache" in the strictest sense

Edited July 13, 2004 by Markwell

[thorin]

If an old thread is applicable to your question or topic there's no reason not to reuse it. That's why we have a Search button.

[+sbell111]

As much as I agree with you that it is best not to dredge up old threads, but to reference them instead, how exactly is this thread going to change that behavior? Of course, sometimes it makes me feel better just to get something off my chest. Where is that old 'Things I hate' thread?

Edited July 13, 2004 by sbell111

[+joefrog]

True, sometimes all that needs to be said was said some time back.

I find it hard to believe that you could stop yourself from posting on ANYTHING, old thread or not!

[+Sparky-Watts]

True, sometimes all that needs to be said was said some time back.

I find it hard to believe that you could stop yourself from posting on ANYTHING, old thread or not!

Bwaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Yeah, and just wait a few months, because he'll bump and thump* it!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Bump and Thump= Bump his own thread and thump his chest at how many threads he's started.....'cause ya know, it's all about the numbers for the little blue guy!

[+AmishHacker]

I am a BUMPER!!! And proud of it. Since the game is growing all the time I use bumping to move some popular threads of mine so newbies can see them. Most all of my threads have a long shelf life...Pictures and such....not just talking about one thing over and over and over and over and over and ov...well you get my point. I have bumped Stuck Vehicles Thread a few times. Some people do not know its there. It can be a good thing to bump.

[+RichardMoore]

If you don't want your old thread bumped you can just close it. That way it can still be markwelled, but not bumped.

[Pto]

To be the Devils Advocate-

 

Maybe Stop trying to tell everyone what to do in a public forum ?

 

So, you dont like bumping - we get it. Maybe others do see it differently (see posts)

Its not your sandbox - let everyone play as the will play.....

[+Team DEMP]

If the system can't control bumping (posting to an older thread) then there's nothing to discuss! You have zero change of controlling what others do.

[+Sparky-Watts]

To be the Devils Advocate-

 

Maybe Stop trying to tell everyone what to do in a public forum ?

 

So, you dont like bumping - we get it. Maybe others do see it differently (see posts)

Its not your sandbox - let everyone play as the will play.....

WOOOOOOO HOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

So, as devil's advocate, you don't wanna see another thread pop up asking for rules against bumping threads? I'm with ya there, PTO!!!

[+PandyBat]

"No More Rules!"

 

[dampeoples]

There's nothing wrong with bumping an old topic, especially if the information is relevant, it also serves as kind of a history, if things have changed. Just about everything has been discussed before, whaddya we going to do, reduce the forums to about 10 topics?

[+Team GPSaxophone]

If you don't want your old thread bumped you can just close it. That way it can still be markwelled, but not bumped.

No, I don't believe in closing threads unless absolutely necessary.

[+Geo Ho]

Creepy . . . I just got goosebumps!

 

Happy caching and stuff! After all, isn't that what it's all about?

[+TotemLake]

I practice what I preach. I search for any relevant threads before posting something I think might be new. I will bump an old thread when what I have to post is relevant to that thread. Does it really matter the thread started 3 years ago? Not to me. You need to ask yourself why does it matter so much to leave the old threads alone. To me, it is appropriate netiquette to minimize the number of threads of the same topic.

[+El Diablo]

Old threads are history. Sometimes valuable, sometimes not. I see no reason not to bump an old thread if it's relevant. It's great to get a fresh perspective on an old issues. I personally hate to see someone post and be cut off by a "Markwell" Just because it's been discussed before. Just because it's been discussed before dosen't mean all aspects have been covered and not worthy of a re-visit.

 

If old topics aren't worth reading and learning from, why don't we toss all the history books...and the bible as well?

 

El Diablo

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Old threads are history. Sometimes valuable, sometimes not. I see no reason not to bump an old thread if it's relevant. It's great to get a fresh perspective on an old issues. I personally hate to see someone post and be cut off by a "Markwell" Just because it's been discussed before. Just because it's been discussed before dosen't mean all aspects have been covered and not worthy of a re-visit.

 

If old topics aren't worth reading and learning from, why don't we toss all the history books...and the bible as well?

 

El Diablo

Hmmm...the Bible hasn't been added to in centuries. Seems to work just fine that way. Sure, there are lots of books about the Bible that have been printed since then, but they don't change the original.

[+El Diablo]

Old threads are history. Sometimes valuable, sometimes not. I see no reason not to bump an old thread if it's relevant. It's great to get a fresh perspective on an old issues. I personally hate to see someone post and be cut off by a "Markwell" Just because it's been discussed before. Just because it's been discussed before dosen't mean all aspects have been covered and not worthy of a re-visit.

 

If old topics aren't worth reading and learning from, why don't we toss all the history books...and the bible as well?

 

El Diablo

Hmmm...the Bible hasn't been added to in centuries. Seems to work just fine that way. Sure, there are lots of books about the Bible that have been printed since then, but they don't change the original.

I think you miss my point. Even though it may not have been added to...dosen't mean it's not worthy of reading or discussing.

 

El Diablo

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Old threads are history. Sometimes valuable, sometimes not. I see no reason not to bump an old thread if it's relevant. It's great to get a fresh perspective on an old issues. I personally hate to see someone post and be cut off by a "Markwell" Just because it's been discussed before. Just because it's been discussed before dosen't mean all aspects have been covered and not worthy of a re-visit.

 

If old topics aren't worth reading and learning from, why don't we toss all the history books...and the bible as well?

 

El Diablo

Hmmm...the Bible hasn't been added to in centuries. Seems to work just fine that way. Sure, there are lots of books about the Bible that have been printed since then, but they don't change the original.

I think you miss my point. Even though it may not have been added to...dosen't mean it's not worthy of reading or discussing.

 

El Diablo

And you missed mine: Leave the original topic alone for others to read and start a new thread to discuss the impact it has on today.

 

This is funny, discussing the Bible with the Devil

[+El Diablo]

Old threads are history. Sometimes valuable, sometimes not. I see no reason not to bump an old thread if it's relevant. It's great to get a fresh perspective on an old issues. I personally hate to see someone post and be cut off by a "Markwell" Just because it's been discussed before. Just because it's been discussed before dosen't mean all aspects have been covered and not worthy of a re-visit.

 

If old topics aren't worth reading and learning from, why don't we toss all the history books...and the bible as well?

 

El Diablo

Hmmm...the Bible hasn't been added to in centuries. Seems to work just fine that way. Sure, there are lots of books about the Bible that have been printed since then, but they don't change the original.

I think you miss my point. Even though it may not have been added to...dosen't mean it's not worthy of reading or discussing.

 

El Diablo

And you missed mine: Leave the original topic alone for others to read and start a new thread to discuss the impact it has on today.

 

This is funny, discussing the Bible with the Devil

May come as a suprise to you, but I'm not the devil. I'm just El Diablo in the Geocaching sense.

 

The point is that old history is still worth reading to gleam knowledge. When we forget history, we tend to repeat the same mistakes.

 

El Diablo

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Old threads are history. Sometimes valuable, sometimes not. I see no reason not to bump an old thread if it's relevant. It's great to get a fresh perspective on an old issues. I personally hate to see someone post and be cut off by a "Markwell" Just because it's been discussed before. Just because it's been discussed before dosen't mean all aspects have been covered and not worthy of a re-visit.

 

If old topics aren't worth reading and learning from, why don't we toss all the history books...and the bible as well?

 

El Diablo

Hmmm...the Bible hasn't been added to in centuries. Seems to work just fine that way. Sure, there are lots of books about the Bible that have been printed since then, but they don't change the original.

I think you miss my point. Even though it may not have been added to...dosen't mean it's not worthy of reading or discussing.

 

El Diablo

And you missed mine: Leave the original topic alone for others to read and start a new thread to discuss the impact it has on today.

 

This is funny, discussing the Bible with the Devil

May come as a suprise to you, but I'm not the devil. I'm just El Diablo in the Geocaching sense.

 

The point is that old history is still worth reading to gleam knowledge. When we forget history, we tend to repeat the same mistakes.

 

El Diablo

Yes, old history is often valuable. However, we shouldn't attempt to change it. If there's something new that comes to light, we should start a new chapter rather than edit what's been recorded.

[+El Diablo]

Old threads are history. Sometimes valuable, sometimes not. I see no reason not to bump an old thread if it's relevant. It's great to get a fresh perspective on an old issues. I personally hate to see someone post and be cut off by a "Markwell" Just because it's been discussed before. Just because it's been discussed before dosen't mean all aspects have been covered and not worthy of a re-visit.

 

If old topics aren't worth reading and learning from, why don't we toss all the history books...and the bible as well?

 

El Diablo

Hmmm...the Bible hasn't been added to in centuries. Seems to work just fine that way. Sure, there are lots of books about the Bible that have been printed since then, but they don't change the original.

I think you miss my point. Even though it may not have been added to...dosen't mean it's not worthy of reading or discussing.

 

El Diablo

And you missed mine: Leave the original topic alone for others to read and start a new thread to discuss the impact it has on today.

 

This is funny, discussing the Bible with the Devil

May come as a suprise to you, but I'm not the devil. I'm just El Diablo in the Geocaching sense.

 

The point is that old history is still worth reading to gleam knowledge. When we forget history, we tend to repeat the same mistakes.

 

El Diablo

Yes, old history is often valuable. However, we shouldn't attempt to change it. If there's something new that comes to light, we should start a new chapter rather than edit what's been recorded.

If you are going to add a new chapter to history, then it's only right that you be able to see the old history as well.

 

I've enjoyed the debate with you Saxman, but it's bedtime. I'll pick it back up in the morning in anticipation to your reply.

 

El Diablo

[+Team GPSaxophone]

If you are going to add a new chapter to history, then it's only right that you be able to see the old history as well.

 

I've enjoyed the debate with you Saxman, but it's bedtime. I'll pick it back up in the morning in anticipation to your reply.

 

El Diablo

I'm not saying you shouldn't see the history. I'm saying that the history should be preserved in it's original state. As far as the forums are concerned, it means start a new topic, explaining why it needs to be discussed again (what's changed) and Markwell the old discussion for reference.

[+sept1c_tank]

Why does it matter if someone bumps an old thread?

 

Is it any different from opening an old bottle of wine?

Sometimes it's good; sometimes it's not.

 

Edit: As far as history goes, nothing is changed when a thread is bumped.

Edited July 14, 2004 by sept1c_tank

[+El Diablo]

If you are going to add a new chapter to history, then it's only right that you be able to see the old history as well.

 

I've enjoyed the debate with you Saxman, but it's bedtime. I'll pick it back up in the morning in anticipation to your reply.

 

El Diablo

I'm not saying you shouldn't see the history. I'm saying that the history should be preserved in it's original state. As far as the forums are concerned, it means start a new topic, explaining why it needs to be discussed again (what's changed) and Markwell the old discussion for reference.

History is forever evolving. The same as with the fourms. The topics discussed 2 or 3 years ago also still evolve. I think it's interesting to watch that evolution.

 

Now stop responding...I'm going to bed.

 

El Diablo

[+Mudfrog]

Old threads are history. Sometimes valuable, sometimes not. I see no reason not to bump an old thread if it's relevant. It's great to get a fresh perspective on an old issues. I personally hate to see someone post and be cut off by a "Markwell" Just because it's been discussed before. Just because it's been discussed before dosen't mean all aspects have been covered and not worthy of a re-visit.

 

If old topics aren't worth reading and learning from, why don't we toss all the history books...and the bible as well?

 

El Diablo

 

Ditto!!!

 

Ive done the same thing as many of you and started reading only to find that things looked very familiar. Heck, ive even read down and found where i posted a reply. I dont see where it harmed or warped me in any way,,,,

 

You need to realize that there are new people coming to the forums every day. These old threads are old news to some of us but for many they arent. A new perspective on a particular subject could come out, they can be very helpful, and most of all, they can be very entertaining as well. I know this is really tough but if you do accidentally find yourself in an old thread, try not to panic. Calmly click the back button on your browser and things will be just fine!

[+clearpath]

I say it depends on the person whom owns the bumps. I for one enjoy to have my bumps handled. In fact, the more the merrier. However, there are some people who would rather not have their bumps touched at all ... these people are cold as ice. Hold on ... yes dear, I know its' time to let the dog out. Where was I ... yes, cold as ice. Anyway, I see nothing wrong with covering your bumps with thread just be sure to share your bumps with others...