Did I miss something reading the forum rules? Since when has it been forbidden to post in an existing topic? I was under the impression that you're supposed to use the search feature to see if your discussion already exists rather than creating a new thread about something that's already being/been discussed!
Okay, so it has been several weeks since the last post on that topic, but is that a reason to start a new thread, since I haven't expressed my opinion/idea about the matter?
It depends... Sometimes a jackass bring back a 6 month thread only to say that he agrees... or worse to say something that is completely useless. A good undead thread would be one that as a reason to be raised, wich is rare.
it all depends on what input you put into the thread. saying spam and "i agree/disagree" isnt worth reviving a thread for.
But what about proving a point as to why to agree/disagree with something with the slight chance that people might think about it and it'd actually affect other people's opinions?
I guess thats something a mod can answer. ask lightning or donitz.
It still depends on the age of the thread, or the lenght of it. The longer the thread, the less we want it to return (because it means it has been discussed A LOT). For example, someone bringing back the election 2004 thread should be flamed to death, only because we are all tired to talk about this. Another example would be the Galactic Conquest - Forgotten Hope merging thread being brought back(for some reason I have a phobia about this possibility), even if the guy who raises the thread says a VERY good joke, he will probably get flamed just because its too old.
It's annoying to see an old thread reappear because its like the forums aren't progressing, kinda. I guess if a thread is older than 3 weeks, just post a new topic because that'd mean you have some new groundbreaking news.
Okay, basically, I think it's excellent people use the search function, but unfortunately, some people here can only get pleasure out of live by standing by every minute of the day, waiting for someone to raise a topic that's more than 3 weeks old and reply with "OMGWTF?!!? DUDE! This topic is old!!!1one". Usually (depending on how old the raised thread was) there will be 5 replies like that. Whenever there are 3 or less replies like that I delete them and hope no other people get in there thinking they're smart. But when it's 4 or more, I just delete all recent posts, close the thread and pretend nothing happened.
I don't mind about reviving old thread, as long as you have something important to say. I get deja vu feelings weekly from viewing the forums. A lot of things has been discussed in the past, no need to make new threads about those.
However, I'd prefer it if the threads weren't revived only to answer yes/no/I agree/I disagree.
Wanna go Double Dutch?
9th December 2003
If you have really something to add (new -important- date etc.) then go for it, silly remarks such as "I must disagree, the panzer IV wasn't that bad, go and check achtungpanzer.com" or even worse "yeah I agree/No i disagree" shouldn't be revived. Its good to do a search, but when you are about to post be sure your post really adds something.
Also it does depends on tha age of the thread a bit. Reviving a 1 year old thread no matter how good your post is is kinda dumb. After a certain vague amount of time it is better to just make a new thread. So when you can consider a thread 'ancient' (4-6 months and over ?) leave it be.