Necro-posting

[Shawn Gossman]

Necro-posting is simply replying to old topics that haven't had any replies in a long time.

How do you generally feel about members who necro-post on a forum you own?

I'm interested mainly in trying to understand that people who don't allow it, I'd love to know their logic for not wanting it?

 

[Deleted member 49125]

To me, if it's on my forum, it's fair game. Sometimes an older topic gets replied to & then several people respond after. If it's on another forum, I also consider it fair game unless I had read otherwise.
I've seen some forums lock older posts or even move them to Archives.

 

[Jay™]

For me, members are welcome to comment on any topic that is open, If it brings a topic back to life and creates good discussion I have no issue with it.

 

[AltairX]

I would say SH is not to the point of topics being old enough for people to necro post.
However, I would have no issue with it.
I necro post all the time on forums if there is a thread that i want to participate in.

 

[Page]

If something is worth talking about today, it's probably better off starting a new thread rather than bringing a year-old one back from the grave. This lets everyone fill it with updated information & doesn't require everyone to read through 40 pages of crap to figure out what you're talking about.

 

[Deleted member 4320]

I don't mind if people do that as long as it contribute to the discussion. However one thing that does bug me and it happens on here a lot is people posting in 1 or 2 year old threads for exchanges or marketplace sales that clearly the author isn't doing anymore. It's quite obviously spam.

 

[Ozzy47]

It’s fine as the replies are on topic and relevant.

 

[Carlos X]

It’s fine as the replies are on topic and relevant.

I couldn't like this enough.

The way I see necro posting is this: Bump the thread, go for it. But it has to be relevant.

If you do it for the sake of posting to bring your postcount up, its no-go. If you post just for pagerank, by linking your post... Its no-go. If the post is off topic, and I sense you're gonna try to add the link later? Its no-go.

If that is the case, I lock the thread. Sometimes I don't, but for the majority of old threads being bumped for the sake of pagerank, I lock it.

 

[KnownSyntax]

I have no issue, if the thread isn’t locked because it’s just completely out dated (ex; old announcement) I just display a banner above the reply posting that the thread may be out dated and to just makes a new thread (>365 days or older from thread creation time and last post time).

 

[Shawn Gossman]

Do you think it is better to automatically lock older posts that are no longer getting activity in an effort to encourage members to create new topics?

Are any of you practicing that method?

 

[zappaDPJ]

Do you think it is better to automatically lock older posts that are no longer getting activity in an effort to encourage members to create new topics?

Are any of you practicing that method?

I rarely lock threads on any of the forums I own and welcome necro-posting if it adds something of value to the conversation. If the post is a just an obvious flyby with no context the post is deleted and the thread remains open.

The forums I maintain as service forums for corporate entities display a notification for older threads if the editor is called to action which informs the member that the thread is old and that they might want to consider if they would be better served by starting a new thread. It doesn't stop them necro-posting though.

 

[Jay™]

display a notification for older threads if the editor is called to action which informs the member that the thread is old and that they might want to consider

I use something of the same on a few of my sites, on this one I have it set to 90 days.