Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
posting to old threads
#11
I think that reopening the old thread is also a valid option. Personally, I don't care how old a thread is as long as the info is relevant and that new relevant info can still be added. On that case, IMO the thread shouldn't get closed.

If, however, some old useful thread gets a new post which doesn't add anything useful, then personally I'd prefer to move the new post to a new thread instead of closing the old and useful thread due to one clueless post.
[i7-3630qm/gt650m-2G/Win-7] [i7-4500u/R.HD8850m/Win-8.1] [2010-MBA/OSX-10.9.x]. Scroll smoothly with SmoothWheel for Firefox.
Reply

Sponsored links

#12
In fact, I think it would have been best if when posting to an old thread, one would get a message, something like: "Note: This is an old thread. If you have new info which is relevant to this thread, go ahead, else, please open a new thread. Thank you."
[i7-3630qm/gt650m-2G/Win-7] [i7-4500u/R.HD8850m/Win-8.1] [2010-MBA/OSX-10.9.x]. Scroll smoothly with SmoothWheel for Firefox.
Reply
#13
Game xyz does not play correctly on PCSX2 0.98: follows "Note: This is an old thread. If you have new info which is relevant to this thread, go ahead, else, please open a new thread. Thank you."

Then follows pages and pages of suggestions which may not make any sense in newer versions. Users should not be encouraged to read only a thread's last page.

Of course that's a caricature, most of times the underlying problem of referring to old threads is subtler and not be in the thread's title, of course.

Edit: is understandable that's situational and judgmental. One may have good reasons to revive an old thread... the harder part is judging so, then may be better to avoid necroing threads from start.
Imagination is where we are truly real
Reply
#14
The point is to have a rule and/or notice that a new post to an old thread must be relevant and useful*, or else it'll be removed from that thread.

There are and always will be subtleties and nuances which make some cases not fit the rules 100%, but we shouldn't let those prevent us from laying the ground rules.

Like with any kind of rule - the rules are few and the real-world cases are many. But the rules provide the guidelines which help us interpret how each real-world case should be handled.

* relevant and useful: means posting new helpful information, and not saying "me too" or "this is still broken, help me", etc.

At the case of the OP, this fits perfectly into adding it to the old thread IMO.
[i7-3630qm/gt650m-2G/Win-7] [i7-4500u/R.HD8850m/Win-8.1] [2010-MBA/OSX-10.9.x]. Scroll smoothly with SmoothWheel for Firefox.
Reply
#15
(05-18-2014, 04:53 PM)avih Wrote: The point is to have a rule and/or notice that a new post to an old thread must be relevant, or else it'll be removed from that thread.

There are and always will be subtleties and nuances which make some cases not fit the rules 100%, but we shouldn't let those prevent us from laying the ground rules.

Like with any kind of rule - the rules are few and the real-world cases are many. But the rules provide the guidelines which help us interpret how each real-world case should be handled.
I understand that you have a point, just I think you are putting too much faith in user's discerning capacity when many show unable to read even the rules when joining a forum.

Of course all older users have that discernment (coff, coff...) Smile

Anyway, that's like creating new administrative problems and opening breaches for loopholes...

Besides, your point is yet applied. One can revive an old thread once is shown he had that good reason to do so. how it is now, necroing becomes the exception, not the rule.

Edit: That rule is not arbitrary, it was created because the many cases of issues necroing old threads can bring. One classic example is yet that from above, just the subtler one:

There is a thread reporting an issue with game XYZ. And then there are many recommendations to deal with the problem which are not valid anymore and actually could be harmful. Even so the current emulator's version is not even mentioned in the whole thread.
Imagination is where we are truly real
Reply
#16
(05-18-2014, 05:06 PM)nosisab Ken Keleh Wrote: Edit: That rule is not arbitrary, it was created because the many cases of issues necroing old threads can bring.

It's not a rule. It's a practice which I agree with what it tries to achieve, but I don't think is correct to use by default - as is done now.

I think a thread should only get closed when no further posts could be useful. Like a solved problem, or an irrelevant issue.

I'm not sure what your opinion on this is though.

Are you suggesting that the current practice should be kept in place? Or do you agree that with my suggestion (with or without the note when posting to such thread)?
[i7-3630qm/gt650m-2G/Win-7] [i7-4500u/R.HD8850m/Win-8.1] [2010-MBA/OSX-10.9.x]. Scroll smoothly with SmoothWheel for Firefox.
Reply
#17
Yeah I am personally not the type to be super anti necro posting. However, the thread was already cluttered enough and closed, which is why I thought it was better to make a new one at that point.

The type of necropost that bothers me is the "I have the same problem too, help!" Since even if it's the same problem, many other variables will be different like the hardware, OS, PCSX2 version, etc.

I agree with avih about the message notifying you about it being an old thread.
[Image: vwah44]
Gaming: Intel i7 3770k @ 4.2Ghz | R9 290 | 16GB RAM | 480GB(240GB+240GB RAID0) SSD | 3 TB HDD | 1 TB HDD | 500GB HDD
Server: AMD FX 6300 @ 4.4Ghz | GTX 670 | 16GB RAM | 240GB SSD | 320GB HDD
PCSX2 General Troubleshooting FAQ
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)