Thread Bumping

[Alolan_Apples]

What is your opinion on bumping old threads? Do you think this is fine, or do you think it?s a problem? I know it?s only against the rules if the discussion is only relevant for the time it was discussed (like if a discussion is about a problem that hasn?t been solved back then but is now solved, or if it was related to an older site issue, or if it was about something in the news from the past (like the Casey Anthony trial or the 2012 Mayan Prophecies)), but what do you think of thread bumping when the discussion is a timeless discussion or a repeat discussion created because a similar discussion has been dead for months?

My take:

I believe that it has gotten out of hand. Just because the rules okay thread bumping doesn?t mean you can do it excessively or to threads last active in 2016 or earlier (especially in Brewster?s). When people aren?t following the discussions anymore, they?re done talking about it. Basement threads and threads like ?What?s the Last Movie you have seen? are fine, but others are not. I really think something has to be done about it. On the flip side, I don?t believe in warning or suspending members for bumping old threads (even if they are irrelevant), but I do believe threads should be locked if they?re bumped from over three years (or six months if it?s not the first old thread bumped by the same user within a limited time frame).

 

[Cress]

I'm mostly fine with bumping. The only time I'm annoyed by it is if the same person is bumping the thread every 4 or 6 hours to the point where all 10 posts on a page are just you saying bump. That's excessive. Anything other than that is okay.

 

[LambdaDelta]

tbh, I hate bumping for older threads I've already responded to. because 95% of the time I have nothing new to say

at least if they repost the same thread topic, I can just repost my thoughts without it looking silly

realtalk though: maybe just make brewster's and selective other discussion boards autolock all threads with no activity after a certain period. say 6 months to a year or so

 

[Fey]

I haven?t been on these forums for long, and my feelings on it are mixed:
On one hand I think some old threads are worth bringing up if the discussion is timeless?especially because newer users might?ve not participated in them originally and still have valid opinions to contribute. On the other hand though, it sometimes makes me sad to see new threads with fresh ideas buried behind pages of old, often shallow, content.

As with many things, I think finding the right measure is key. Reviving one or two threads with a significant response is fine?tacking on a few words to 10+ threads maybe not so much.

 

[Ossiran]

My stance for any forum I've been to is that thread bumping is fine as long as something meaningful is added to the conversation, such as new information or a user wanting advise on the topic, or a new piece of work if it's an art/story thread.

 

[AnimalCrossingPerson]

More often than not it just causes a fuss, especially if a spambot is the cause. I think the staff should set the website up to lock threads after a period of inactivity (maybe a month).

 

[Zura]

If it's irrelevant, it'll die again on its own. No need to complain about something so small and insignificant.

 

[AnimalCrossingPerson]

True, there is that. For really old threads there seems to always be a little surge of "wow, I was a baby when this thread was created" and a bit of a stir until it is either manually locked or just dies down on its own.

 

[Alolan_Apples]

More often than not it just causes a fuss, especially if a spambot is the cause. I think the staff should set the website up to lock threads after a period of inactivity (maybe a month).

I did suggest auto-locking threads inactive for a month like how GameFAQs does it. But the staff says that it’s arbitrary. If we had that implemented, a general gaming discussion like “Pok?mon Sun and Moon General Discussion” will get locked even if people still want to contribute to it.

Although some old threads are bumped by bots, most of them have been bumped by regular members (usually the same ones too) and in bumping sprees. What makes me just as mad is that other people are continuing to contribute to these discussions after they’re being bumped. That’s why I want these old threads locked. If they were dead for a while, leave it alone. And if they’ve been bumped, don’t try to keep it alive. When people are no longer following the discussions, they are done, as reviving them would push the discussions they’re following back a few pages. Sure that the staff will allow bumping threads if the topic can still be discussed, but if it’s done excessively (like 10 old threads from Brewster’s in one day or one old thread last active in 2014), that’s abuse of thread bumping. It’s also worth noting that threads that don’t reach 500 posts are very likely to have duplicate discussions in the future, so bumping would be unnecessary.

If there was a rule that finally addresses this, I would like it if the Basement and the Woods are exempt from the rule because of the type of threads they are. Trading threads being revived from the dead are fine as long as the thread creator is re-using old threads (which wouldn’t be a problem at all). It’s usually Brewster’s or the Animal Crossing discussions that I don’t like seeing old threads being bumped.

 

[ali.di.magix]

I couldn't really care less as long as it's still relevant and has some good discussion points. Half the time in Brewsters it's the same threads that I've already replied to and cant discuss further (or earn more tbr for that matter), so the people who bump older threads up that are of different topics are kinda keeping the discussion interesting and new to me. I feel like thread bumping is more of a pet peeve rather than an issue really.

 

[Lemonsky]

My opinion on bumping threads probably depends on the topic. It feels okay to do if the topic itself is timeless, like animals or clothes or something else that's doesn't exactly have a time limit. But if it's an old trade thread or something similar to that, it seems weird.

Either way I hope auto-locking threads won't become a thing. It'd be annoying to come across an interesting topic only to discover it's locked, not because of there being something wrong with it, but just because it's old. Bringing back older threads can bring more variety to the selection of threads too, for example for the people who weren't around while those threads were new. And of course people might suddenly feel like talking about a certain subject, so why not reply to a thread that already exists instead of always making a new one?

 

[Antonio]

If it's irrelevant, it'll die again on its own. No need to complain about something so small and insignificant.

This but less creepy (like wtf). Someone bumping a thread shouldn't bother you. Ignore it and let it die on it's own.

 

[Alolan_Apples]

My opinion on bumping threads probably depends on the topic. It feels okay to do if the topic itself is timeless, like animals or clothes or something else that's doesn't exactly have a time limit. But if it's an old trade thread or something similar to that, it seems weird.

Either way I hope auto-locking threads won't become a thing. It'd be annoying to come across an interesting topic only to discover it's locked, not because of there being something wrong with it, but just because it's old. Bringing back older threads can bring more variety to the selection of threads too, for example for the people who weren't around while those threads were new. And of course people might suddenly feel like talking about a certain subject, so why not reply to a thread that already exists instead of always making a new one?

I’m actually okay if people make duplicate threads if the first thread has been dead for quite a while. In fact, I would encourage them to do so. If a thread is dead for a long time or has been locked, it’s best to make a new one (unless if the older thread has 1,000 posts or more). If it’s not popular enough before it dies, it’s really not that popular, so a new thread would be best.

And yes, I have the right and reason to be bothered by others bumping old threads excessively.

 

[Antonio]

And yes, I have the right and reason to be bothered by others bumping old threads excessively.

Yes, and I have the right and the reasons to state my opinions on the matter. A majority of people (according to the poll) are okay with people bumping.

Now, I don't think someone would make a thread about people abusing the bumping thread rule unless there was a reason for that person to make the thread. So tell me, who caused you to make this thread? I don't think there's a problem with people bumping threads "being out of hand" unless you are referring to someone particularly.

Basically, the forums is mainly dead. Why does it matter if people bump a thread or not?

 

[Zura]

This but less creepy (like wtf)

I'm sorry but I don't follow. What was creepy about what I said?

 

[Alolan_Apples]

Yes, and I have the right and the reasons to state my opinions on the matter. A majority of people (according to the poll) are okay with people bumping.

Now, I don't think someone would make a thread about people abusing the bumping thread rule unless there was a reason for that person to make the thread. So tell me, who caused you to make this thread? I don't think there's a problem with people bumping threads "being out of hand" unless you are referring to someone particularly.

Basically, the forums is mainly dead. Why does it matter if people bump a thread or not?

I’ve been complaining about it for months, and my message isn’t going through, so I eventually had to make a thread. But I only start complaining when a bumping spree happens (or if an old political thread or a thread from 2014 gets bumped). The staff aren’t going to lock threads if the topic can still be discussed, even if it was last active in 2015 or 2014. But on most sites, thread bumping isn’t allowed. If you can see why they don’t like it, you can see how I feel about bumping sprees.

And yes, I did make a poll, mainly to attract diversity of opinions. Even if the plurality doesn’t think it’s an issue or it should be left unresolved, those who are against should feel free to share their beliefs.

- - - Post Merge - - -

I'm sorry but I don't follow. What was creepy about what I said?

I didn’t think it was creepy either. But about the “irrelevant” threads, bumping them is already against the rules anyway. This thread is about the other threads (where the topic is timeless or relevant to today’s issues).

 

[Zura]

I guess I worded it wrong. I meant that if the thread is not used by lots of people it should die on its own.

 

[Fey]

It?s Apples vs. Pears everybody!

Just kidding, this isn?t something to fight about. No one member should be named/blamed for the bumping, and I think Alolan_Apples withheld from doing that for a (good) reason.

I wouldn?t say that the majority of people are fine with it on the poll; if anything the majority accepts it under certain circumstances and restrictions. Bumping old threads can be annoying, is definitely allowed per the rules, and ultimately lies in the hands of the staff. Let?s allow people to bump and vent about bumping, and it?s all fine.

 

[idiotdoomspiral]

I don't like it because it sometimes things that I've said a couple of years ago that I either don't agree with anymore or were a bit too personal get bumped up and it's really annoying. But other than that the threads that I've seen get bumped still have room for discussion.
You keep mentioning this though like it's a complete taboo of the website

 

[SherlockLina]

I think only the creator should bump... Then im ok with it