Can you please automatically lock any thread that has lain untouched for a year or more? There seems to be a rash of posters who want to jump into a three year-old (probably out of date) discussion to throw their two cents in. I don't want to read someone's outdated argument especially if I had already read it back when it actually was relevant or, gods forbid, posted in it!
<pant, pant, pant>
Can you please help a distressed eeevil overlord to protect himself from rampaging necromancers? Please?
Changing your search function to consider date as well as term relevance might also help. Just a suggestion... Make a DC25 Will save to negate.
Evil Dave
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
You know what's interesting? If you literally ignore the date field, there's no difference between a necromantic thread and a pink & living thread.
I don't mean to make light of your plight but if the date wasn't shown you'd almost never know a thread had been "brought back". Just a thought.
You know what's interesting? If you literally ignore the date field, there's no difference between a necromantic thread and a pink & living thread.
I don't mean to make light of your plight but if the date wasn't shown you'd almost never know a thread had been "brought back". Just a thought.
Except when it's about things that changed years ago, and the new poster clearly doesn't know that.
I never understood the taboo against thread necromancy to start with.
Except when it's about things that changed years ago, and the new poster clearly doesn't know that.
With that obvious exception; but even then, it's possible that more than one person had the same misapprehension. There are more people that read these boards than post on them, after all.
I never understood the taboo against thread necromancy to start with.
Except when it's about things that changed years ago, and the new poster clearly doesn't know that.With that obvious exception; but even then, it's possible that more than one person had the same misapprehension. There are more people that read these boards than post on them, after all.
Agreed. I don't necessarily support the proposal--though it certainly does speak to my neurotic desire for tidy compartmentalization--but I think it's worth noting that thread necromancy is sometimes irritating.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey, do you guys know if I can use SLA's for prereqs? And can you Two Weapon fight with a Two Handed Weapon and armor spikes? What about the bastard sword? Is it one-handed or two-handed?
You might be surprised how much less annoying I would find that than my other pet peeve posts. Because (to an extent) I actually like helping people who are new to the game and helping people find the answers to their questions.
(But mercilessly mocking people - often young people - for having the audacity to ask a question about a game on that game's forum is a fine option, too)
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
The only time thread necromancy particularly annoys me is when it's a thread where someone had asked for advice on an intrapersonal matter whilst expressing a desire for retribution. Yet looong after the OP has already acknowledged that "being the bigger person" and "talking it out" are better solutions, someone on a high horse will make it no further than the first post before charging in to admonish the OP for their barbaric ways. When others then reply without checking the timestamps of the preceding posts the long dead flamewar is rekindled to no purpose.
|
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
Voting strongly against. There are a lot of legacy threads that very much do deserve to pop back up from time to time. There are also project threads taht can lie undisturbed for years before their posters pick them up again.
Along those same lines, there are threads that contain a lot of cool stuff that totally deserve to pop up to be seen by posters that would never get to see them otherwise.
It's not all arguments and potshots that are two years late. There's a lot of creativity and inspiration to be shared as well.
What about the bastard sword? Is it one-handed or two-handed?
Mmmph... w-whaaaa.... WHARG!! WHARARARARARAAAAGGH!!!
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGG!!!
And that's why thread necromancy is evil.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Completely agree with Mikaze. And taking the one minute to either realize the thread necro or even posting (sic!) in it telling the actual necromancer this is an outdated post helps keep these boards a frienly place and encourages the community to keep sharing.
Ruyan.
My biggest concern here is that often when I reach an old thread it's via Google, and everywhere else I've asked the question in said thread, everyone says "Google it."
A messageboard is for discussion. If someone obviously still wants to discuss a topic, why not let them? It's good for everybody.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Extremely against. I've found tons of interesting threads which otherwise would have never catched my eye (due to them being buried under hundreds of other threads) due to thread necromancy. And all which Mikaze said.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is why every thread necromancer should have the spell raise thread scribed in their spellbook.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*immediately houserules into Necromancy instead of the intolerable irritant that is Conjuration (healing)*
What if the thread were locked with a message auto-posted that says something like, "This thread is being locked due to inactivity. Anyone with followup questions is encouraged to start a new thread."
What if the thread were locked with a message auto-posted that says something like, "This thread is being locked due to inactivity. Anyone with followup questions is encouraged to start a new thread."
That is a very nice suggestion. This would provide an automatic, polite way to encourage the poster to start a new thread. Maybe even provide an automatic set of URL tags that link back to the old argument for background information. Polite and it saves us from zombie threads cluttering up the boards. Anyone with a legitimate question can start a new topic (as they should) and anyone who just wishes to spout off at the OP will have to find something else to do rather than pick at a two year old scab.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
What if the thread were locked with a message auto-posted that says something like, "This thread is being locked due to inactivity. Anyone with followup questions is encouraged to start a new thread."That is a very nice suggestion. This would provide an automatic, polite way to encourage the poster to start a new thread. Maybe even provide an automatic set of URL tags that link back to the old argument for background information. Polite and it saves us from zombie threads cluttering up the boards. Anyone with a legitimate question can start a new topic (as they should) and anyone who just wishes to spout off at the OP will have to find something else to do rather than pick at a two year old scab.
Still kills legacy and project threads.
Too much hassle for not enough payoff.
Still kills legacy and project threads.What if the thread were locked with a message auto-posted that says something like, "This thread is being locked due to inactivity. Anyone with followup questions is encouraged to start a new thread."That is a very nice suggestion. This would provide an automatic, polite way to encourage the poster to start a new thread. Maybe even provide an automatic set of URL tags that link back to the old argument for background information. Polite and it saves us from zombie threads cluttering up the boards. Anyone with a legitimate question can start a new topic (as they should) and anyone who just wishes to spout off at the OP will have to find something else to do rather than pick at a two year old scab.
If they've been inactive for a year, why is that a problem?
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If they've been inactive for a year, why is that a problem?Still kills legacy and project threads.What if the thread were locked with a message auto-posted that says something like, "This thread is being locked due to inactivity. Anyone with followup questions is encouraged to start a new thread."That is a very nice suggestion. This would provide an automatic, polite way to encourage the poster to start a new thread. Maybe even provide an automatic set of URL tags that link back to the old argument for background information. Polite and it saves us from zombie threads cluttering up the boards. Anyone with a legitimate question can start a new topic (as they should) and anyone who just wishes to spout off at the OP will have to find something else to do rather than pick at a two year old scab.
Already covered upthread. These forums are partly about sharing creativity and inspiration. There are a ton of threads that are veritible mines of the stuff. Many people only get to see them because they do resurface from time to time.
There are also project threads that can go dormant for a long time before being picked up again. These threads can be HUGE. Reposting everything into a new thread wouldn't just be clunky, it further clutters up searches.
Personally, I've got probably around 10 threads I want to go back to and pick up again once I have time. Finding them locked and having to repost everything along with keeping posts appropriately credited and formatted would be far more of a headache than whatever cons thread necromancy presents now.
And I don't even have that much here.
The forums only lose if we wind up autolocking threads like "Set's stuff".
It's just not worth the trouble. We'd give up too much for too little gain.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I can think of one thread, the Overland Round thread, that had this stupid notion of a thread being locked if it's inactive after a year, would not have been brought to my attention.
Just because *you're* annoyed that an old thread is revived doesn't mean there should be barriers put into place to prevent those who aren't annoyed from participating. If you don't like it, ignore it.
I can think of one thread, the Overland Round thread, that had this stupid notion of a thread being locked if it's inactive after a year, would not have been brought to my attention.
Just because *you're* annoyed that an old thread is revived doesn't mean there should be barriers put into place to prevent those who aren't annoyed from participating. If you don't like it, ignore it.
So my notion is stupid because you found one thread by having it bumped to the top of the list instead of finding it via search? I know that there's more to your argument than just that, so please try and restate nicely.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Some times blankets are too.
To be fair, judging by avatars, many of the people in favor of allowing thread necromancy are themselves either actual necromancers, undead, or drooling madmen.
The Adventure Path sub-forums are full of years of GMs poking and prodding the APs.
This is also an excellent point.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I post twice as much, can I animate a bloody or burning thread?
Lots of well-reasoned posts about why the auto-lock isn't such a smoking hot idea, particularly from Mikaze. It looks like jumping on unhelpful necromancers and attempting redemption via public shaming is the way to go. I've enjoyed the many levity posts, as well.
Edit: in a forum where voice inflection is absent, I am very paranoid about sounding like a snarky ass. I am grateful to most everyone who contributed.
Edit: Just to be clear.
I also disagree with the auto-locking; frankly, I prefer less clutter and would be happy to see more thread mergings with old threads so that information is contained in one spot.
Voting strongly against. There are a lot of legacy threads that very much do deserve to pop back up from time to time. There are also project threads taht can lie undisturbed for years before their posters pick them up again.
Along those same lines, there are threads that contain a lot of cool stuff that totally deserve to pop up to be seen by posters that would never get to see them otherwise.
It's not all arguments and potshots that are two years late. There's a lot of creativity and inspiration to be shared as well.
+ a million. I've discovered many great threads due to necromancy.
I guess I should really say +4 or so, as RuyanVe, Nykidemus, magnuskn have +1ed it (and zylphryx, HangarFlying, pennywit, Sarcasmancer, and others could be interpreted as implying a +1 as well).
If you feel a thread shouldn't have been revived, ignore it.
Thread Necromancy is really suboptimal...
That one took me by surprise, and gave me a good chuckle.
Ignoring the flamewar case I mentioned above (which is just as easily handled by a mod locking the door behind them when they leave), I've used other boards where a notification advises the poster that they are about to respond to a thread that's been inactive for X-many days. Nothing invasive or draconian, nothing that prevents a thread from showing up in a search, just a simple heads-up.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Totally going to put a note in my address book to Necro this thread in one years time.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This thread will be an excellent one to necro a year from now.
Dammit...beat me by a minute.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm here to raise some dead.
|
|
So my notion is stupid because you found one thread by having it bumped to the top of the list instead of finding it via search? I know that there's more to your argument than just that, so please try and restate nicely.
First of all, I wasn't speaking to you directly, I was speaking to the group as a whole.
Secondly, it is a completely rediculous notion that I would have found the thread I mentioned by "searching for it" considering I wasn't looking for it when I found it. I stumbled across it. There have been dozens of threads over the years that I've found useful that I would never have found if they weren't necro'd.
Finally, yes, I do find the notion that you're annoyed by these necro'd threads (and that alone is the reason they should be shut down), when there are countless number of people here who have benefitted from these threads, to be stupid.
First of all, I wasn't speaking to you directly, I was speaking to the group as a whole.Secondly, it is a completely rediculous notion that I would have found the thread I mentioned by "searching for it" considering I wasn't looking for it when I found it. I stumbled across it. There have been dozens of threads over the years that I've found useful that I would never have found if they weren't necro'd.
Finally, yes, I do find the notion that you're annoyed by these necro'd threads (and that alone is the reason they should be shut down), when there are countless number of people here who have benefitted from these threads, to be stupid.
"Rediculous[sic]" and "stupid" are words that the other posters managed to avoid when discussing this. It's not like I am advocating banning rainbows and birthdays, so why the vitriol?
Edit: and if you notice, I even agreed with their points.