Old threads - Suggestions - Forums : Best Ever Albums

GARY Profile

.

I'm not computer savvy so I will just come out and ask this and hopefully get an answer.

Why is it so wrong 2 post on an old thread. Is it just an uncool thing 2 do or what ?

Why bother even having threads from a year ago available 2 revive then ?

IMO interesting threads sometimes get quickly buried and forgotten.

But when I bring one back 2 page one people start complaining with, words 2 the effect, "who dug this old thread back up" ?

.
_________________
.
I owe $100,000 and wasted 4 years of my life.

And all I got was this silly hat

.

albummaster Janitor Site Admin Profile

I think reviving a thread that's a few months old is ok, but a thread that's four years old is not. The members that wrote a thread that's four years old, for the most part, probably won't be here any more. A thread that's a few months old and still topical, I've no problem with being revived (personally). Obviously, not everyone thinks the same so that's just my own view.

Facetious Profile
Location: Somewhere you've never been

Anybody can revive ANY kind of thread, be it four years old, or a month old.

Nobody should complain about digging old threads up, IMO.

So yeah, I think it's alright to dig any old thread up if you find it interesting.

Regardless of the members who created it and posted there.

Guest

albummaster wrote:

I think reviving a thread that's a few months old is ok, but a thread that's four years old is not. The members that wrote a thread that's four years old, for the most part, probably won't be here any more. A thread that's a few months old and still topical, I've no problem with being revived (personally). Obviously, not everyone thinks the same so that's just my own view.

That sounds to me like we might need an 'archive' sub-category as well... to park any threads that are over x months old. It means people can go back and read them but they aren't active to add comments to.

Wombi

^ that's a really great idea.

GARY Profile

Eggman/Walrus/Taxman wrote:

Anybody can revive ANY kind of thread, be it four years old, or a month old.

Nobody should complain about digging old threads up, IMO.

So yeah, I think it's alright to dig any old thread up if you find it interesting.

Regardless of the members who created it and posted there.

👏 👏 👏 👏 👏 👏

Can I adopt you Eggman 🤣

.
_________________
.
I owe $100,000 and wasted 4 years of my life.

And all I got was this silly hat

.

Facetious Profile
Location: Somewhere you've never been

mancsoulsister wrote:

albummaster wrote:

I think reviving a thread that's a few months old is ok, but a thread that's four years old is not. The members that wrote a thread that's four years old, for the most part, probably won't be here any more. A thread that's a few months old and still topical, I've no problem with being revived (personally). Obviously, not everyone thinks the same so that's just my own view.

That sounds to me like we might need an 'archive' sub-category as well... to park any threads that are over x months old. It means people can go back and read them but they aren't active to add comments to.

No comments to add to old threads? NO. 🤐

I like the archive idea though. 😁 Good one.

Guest

Eggman/Walrus/Taxman wrote:

mancsoulsister wrote:

albummaster wrote:

I think reviving a thread that's a few months old is ok, but a thread that's four years old is not. The members that wrote a thread that's four years old, for the most part, probably won't be here any more. A thread that's a few months old and still topical, I've no problem with being revived (personally). Obviously, not everyone thinks the same so that's just my own view.

That sounds to me like we might need an 'archive' sub-category as well... to park any threads that are over x months old. It means people can go back and read them but they aren't active to add comments to.

No comments to add to old threads? NO. 🤐

I like the archive idea though. 😁 Good one.

That kind of defeats the object of 'archive'....

albummaster Janitor Site Admin Profile

The archive thing is quite easy to do. I just need to flick a switch. Maybe if a thread hasn't been responded to for at least a year, it should be archived/closed?

Facetious Profile
Location: Somewhere you've never been

mancsoulsister wrote:

Eggman/Walrus/Taxman wrote:

mancsoulsister wrote:

albummaster wrote:

I think reviving a thread that's a few months old is ok, but a thread that's four years old is not. The members that wrote a thread that's four years old, for the most part, probably won't be here any more. A thread that's a few months old and still topical, I've no problem with being revived (personally). Obviously, not everyone thinks the same so that's just my own view.

That sounds to me like we might need an 'archive' sub-category as well... to park any threads that are over x months old. It means people can go back and read them but they aren't active to add comments to.

No comments to add to old threads? NO. 🤐

I like the archive idea though. 😁 Good one.

That kind of defeats the object of 'archive'....

🤣 Why do you think I even disliked the idea of no comments being added to old threads?............