So I was looking through some of the Forums (Off topic, media and ECC gamers) and some of the interesting threads where locked due to 'necro'. These forum sections aren't used as much as some others, and I think that The Necro rule should be altered within those sections mentioned above as they are rarely used (at least some of them) and some threads that I would like to ask questions in, if. I ask, it will be locked for necro. Thoughts?
Necro should be when someone posts on a] a thread which is not used anymore Or on a suggestion which is already implemented But users needs to lock their threads if they don't need it anymore I think any Thread which didn't get any reply from 3 months+ should be locked by mods in this way less necros will happen
I think the time for a normal post on the uncommonly used forum sections should have double the time to be considered a necro. But this needs to be somehow clarified when entering the forum area.
Generally speaking, It is a necro if: - People devolve to just posting "Neco!!11!" on the thread - Thread is no longer relevant. - There is a newer thread for the same purpose. It isn't a necro if - Thread is relevant - Discussion is still on point - It is the most up to date thread These obviously are just my summation and nothing official - the forum rules list as such: There is to be no "necroing" of threads, which includes the following criteria: Bumping a thread that has not been posted on in over 2 weeks, unless the content of the thread has become relevant to be opened for discussion again. Bumping a thread that has not been posted on in over a week in order to flame, troll, or cause a problem.
Hmm.. So say there was a Texture Pack someone had made, And I was asking a question about it. But the thread was 7 months old (ish) and the user who created it was still active. Would that count as a necro ? Or would that be staying on with the discussion.
You could just forum pm that user, or ask him as the OP of that thread to make his thread relevant again. For example I have had threads where I started and I do not want to see someone posting on them 6 months later out of the blue. If I let a thread die it is on purpose, if a user really has a question or a large group shows interests then I may think of re-making my thread active, but it would have to be me the OP first.
Generally, to avoid necroing old threads that are still relevant, I'll often see users create new threads on the same topic so as to spark new discussions and new ideas.
When I see wrongly necro lock'd threads, it normally is just one person going "Dat necro.. :/" on like Mayor only forum, and to have it locked there is ridiculous. Necroing rules should only apply to forums where it actually matters if people constantly spammed up random, old posts. For instance, general discussion.
I personally don't like old threads being locked just because someone didn't notice the date, and decided to post. That is ECC's history and to most people, it may not matter, but I know there are a lot of people who browse the threads from 2+ years ago and it'd be nice to leave them untouched. I could understand if a mod were to caution someone into not posting on irrelevant threads, but I just don't see the point in locking them.
Defiantly =/= Definitely They're two different words with two different meanings Just a pet peeve I guess
But... why shouldn't we lock a thread if we don't want people posting? The content is still there, able to be viewed regardless if the thread is locked - If we'd warn people not to post anyway, why leave the ability for that to happen.
If they happen to need to be, yes. I think the current system is, for the most part, fine. Going back and locking old threads doesn't seem needed if people actually do leave them alone.
