What is the Reason for the Necro Rule?

BabaORiley - Dreamweaver

What is the reason for the rule against b:shocked necro b:shocked posting?

"Necromancy: Any thread over one month (30 days) old is considered to be a dead thread. Posting in a dead (necro) thread will cause it to be locked. Repeated posting of dead threads can result in a ban from forums/game. Instead of necro-ing a thread, please make a new thread."

This is the first time I have seen such a rule, and really don't see how it serves any purpose other than to inflate the post count because it requires you to start a new thread, plus the extra effort of quoting the old post etc, if you want to build on what transpired previously.

I just want to understand the logic behind it.
Thanks,
b:thanks

Waterfal - Sanctuary

Most likely people who necro threads that aren't relevant anymore...
People sometimes google for stuff and randomly ask a question in that thread or make a comment.
Per example people in veno forums going like
"the golems north of etherblade aren't the best tanks anymore! DX the crystaline magmite is! DX "

And well.. a lot of info is outdated by now ._. it'll cause confusion ._."

Boogiepanda - Raging Tide

Bookmarked for necroing in 29 days

LenieClarke - Heavens Tear

Waterfal - Sanctuary wrote: »

Most likely people who necro threads that aren't relevant anymore...

except that the rule is not enforced in a manner that would support this proposed purpose. it's enforced blanket-wise without regard to the thread's content, or context, or the relevancy of the necroing post's question or remark.

the game does change over time, of course, and that does introduce a risk of old threads becoming not only irrelevant but outright misleading. however, to judge by just how the necro rule is actually enforced, my best guess is that it's just an arbitrary social convention we're supposed to abide by as a way of showing our belonging in this mini-society; it's a taboo, in other words.

Waterfal - Sanctuary

Boogiepanda - Raging Tide wrote: »

Bookmarked for necroing in 29 days

hehehe xD
anyone necro'd the thread in which was stated you should say necro if a thread is necro'd yet ?

wow.. I actually said necro 3 times in 1 sentence... >.>"

Kinir - Lost City

There were months where people would do nothing but necro really old threads because they were bored. So this was created.

Katzyn - Sanctuary

Yeah, it's to help prevent confusion.

FatherTed - Dreamweaver

Can't say as I've ever been a member of a forum that didn't have a necro thread. Enforced properly, it can be a very useful tool for keeping the forums neat and up to date.

I do have to agree to an extent with lennie though. The mods here seem to use it as a blanket - check post date, lock thread - without taking the 10 seconds to check and see if it's a valid post.

Drazomyst - Dreamweaver

Many people miss the previous post dates and assume the thread is new if they don't recognise or remember it. This can lead to false or out-dated information spreading, panics and confusion. Many players leave after several months or over a year, so sometimes you get players quoting and replying to players who have long since gone. Even if they still play and frequent the forums, opinions and knowledge etc can change a lot even in one month.

Would you want to be quoted and called a noob for asking an obvious question that you asked two years ago again? Or when you asked something which would make you sound crazy today, as things can change a lot?

I've even seen a couple of times where someone tried to resurrect some ancient closed-beta threads in attempt to make others think their characters and everything else will be wiped. b:surrender

Sarrafeline - Sanctuary

Drazomyst - Dreamweaver wrote: »

Many people miss the previous post dates and assume the thread is new if they don't recognise or remember it. This can lead to false or out-dated information spreading, panics and confusion. Many players leave after several months or over a year, so sometimes you get players quoting and replying to players who have long since gone. Even if they still play and frequent the forums, opinions and knowledge etc can change a lot even in one month.

Would you want to be quoted and called a noob for asking an obvious question that you asked two years ago again? Or when you asked something which would make you sound crazy today, as things can change a lot?

I've even seen a couple of times where someone tried to resurrect some ancient closed-beta threads in attempt to make others think their characters and everything else will be wiped. b:surrender

And those people looked like complete idiots, because it takes half a second to check the post date on the threads.

Drazomyst - Dreamweaver

Sarrafeline - Sanctuary wrote: »

And those people looked like complete idiots, because it takes half a second to check the post date on the threads.

Which brings up another point - when one replies to a necro'd thread without realising it has been necro'd, one looks or feels like an idiot, even if they realise and edit it in time before it gets closed or seen by many. It's embarrassing at best.

But for the necromancer, they deserve it. b:sin

_Aubree__ - Dreamweaver

Necro rule is purely for upping you post count. No not the person who necro'd but the 50 people who cry necro after before it gets closed.

Flickerfae - Sanctuary

Actually, I've never been on a forum that didn't have some sort of necro policy. It's rarely posted, but there's usually some sort of mutual understanding that after a certain amount of time, dead threads should stay that way. The amount of time, of course, varies according to the activity of the forum. It can also be a rule that's officially enforced by mods or just maintained by regular-poster ridicule.

My take on necro rules has always been that it's about keeping things organized and avoiding confusion. Oftentimes, the OPs of necroed threads are no longer active, and therefore wouldn't benefit from any responses. Other times, topics are out of date (as was pointed out, PWI in particular tends to change quite a bit between updates). Sometimes, the necromancer is dredging up a long-dead conversation between people who aren't here anymore just to say "I totally agree! /endpost"... which adds nothing to the conversation at all.

If a topic really does deserve to be revisited after a month or two, it really is easier to start a new thread, rather than clutter up the new conversation with old posts.

_UnSin_ - Archosaur

So why not just add a simple code that closes all threads that hasn't been active in over a month? That should prevent people from accidentally posting in "dead threads".

Vixter - Harshlands

i dont really understand the rule against necroing either. i can understand if its a reply about something irrelevant or to say something stupid like ... someone posted a screenshot then 1 year later someone says "cool"

but if its a problem you are experiencing, and you search about it, i dont see anything wrong with bringing the topic back up if there was no solution to it, to ask about the problem once again.

reason i say this is because a lot of people say when you make a new topic about something thats probably already on the forum "USE SEARCH dont make new topics QQ everywherez" but if you did, and your not allow to necro, then why do people say dont make new topics either?

LenieClarke - Heavens Tear

if accidental posts in old threads is truly the problem, then that's not a problem with forum posters' behavior; that would be a bug in the forum skin. make the datestamp more clearly visible, and/or make it tell you that "you are composing a reply to an X (days,weeks,months) old thread" in a visible manner.

booker224

I've been a forum moderator and administrator on a few forums in my day.(over the past 12 years) I also use hundreds of different forums in a month doing research on topics from political, to solving problems with my computer system and I have never ever seen any kind of rule like this. Ban someone for posting to a "Necro" thread.

after a year and a half of playing PWI games, I still use PWI forums regularly researching various gaming stuff I am still learning about. This business of banning anyone for posting top a "necro" thread is absolutely ridicules.

If the moderators and administrators of any forum anywhere, are so concerned about "dead threads" coming back to life, then they need to do their jobs, not be lazy and lock them down, or archive them where no one can post, instead of coming out with any kind of rule about banning anyone for posting to it.

When one may have spent hours looking for answers to question by researching the forums, one does not check posting dates and to have possibility of getting ban for posting? That's 100% idiotic.

krisnda

Ban someone for posting to a "Necro" thread.

Actually, you "could" get banned for repeatedly necroing threads. I'm sure that just because a person didn't look at the date and necroed a thread once, they wouldn't get banned for it.

Jeremied - Sanctuary

I frequent 3 different forums and they all have some kind of necro policy. The reasoning behind posting NEW threads, in my opinion anyway, is that if someone has a problem, and they post in a dead thread with 60+ posts, the chances of their problem being resolved are nil to none, due to the spam of NECRO posts that come after it. <.< Posting in a NEW thread allows their problem to be brought up front to people can see it and help.

This shouldn't apply to QQ threads and troll threads though. XD

flamingahole

LenieClarke - Heavens Tear wrote: »

except that the rule is not enforced in a manner that would support this proposed purpose. it's enforced blanket-wise without regard to the thread's content, or context, or the relevancy of the necroing post's question or remark.

the game does change over time, of course, and that does introduce a risk of old threads becoming not only irrelevant but outright misleading. however, to judge by just how the necro rule is actually enforced, my best guess is that it's just an arbitrary social convention we're supposed to abide by as a way of showing our belonging in this mini-society; it's a taboo, in other words.

Eh, I see it as more of a keeping the grey area to a minimum. Saying 'Don't post in a thread that's over one month old.' is pretty clear. If, however, they said 'Don't post in a thread that's over one month old unless you have something relevant to the topic to add.' then it would create a bit of a hazy area which some people would 'exploit' just because they can.

Besides, how many 'good' necros have you seen? Most that I've seen fall into a few distinct categories:
1-The person who only reads the thread title/first post and responds to the questions which was answered four times on the first page.
2-The person who quotes someone on page 27 of a 96 page thread (who quit months ago) to tell them how much they fail.
3-The person who brings up a thread from years ago where the information was correct at the time but, due to recent updates, is now incorrect just to say the information is incorrect (gee, really?). Ironically, if the person had not necrod the thread then the, now incorrect, information would have never seen the light of day again leaving the 'new' correct information where new players can easily see and find. Unfortunately, because of their idiocy new players will see the two pieces of contradictory information and, if they don't check the post dates (which, let's be honest, not everyone does or else there wouldn't be necro posts), will become confused and either bring the previously necrod thread to life once again (if it wasn't closed) or create another thread.

As for the 'don't necro threads/use search' dilemma, it's not really a contradiction. Half the new threads that are made just ask a simple question that would be easily answered with a five minute search. Instead they choose to spend perhaps two minutes typing up and creating a new thread then another thirty minutes waiting for someone to reply. It'll probably take at least 10 more minutes for someone to say something other than 'use search' so their most common argument that creating a new thread would get and answer faster is wrong.

My favorite is when someone says "I'm too lazy to search" and expects a reply other than "I'm too lazy to answer your ****ing question".

jonjonz

I like the response that it's just how things are or have been set up by the powers that be and while I don't agree with it, I don't feel like trying to mount a spirited debate to change the rule. b:tired

People can throw out anecdotal examples that support their view all day on any side of the coin. In my experience I have found old posts that covered a topic that interested me, but left me with questions related to issues raised in the old post. From my point of view, it makes more sense to post that question to the old thread that covers many of the related issues than to start a new post and try to summarize the old posts.

I appreciate everyone's comments and input. I can see now why someone might want to start such a rule even though I don't agree with it.

I think I will just go with the flow and live with it. It's less effort to start a new thread and link to the old post than to try and lead a revolt. b:laugh

JohnnyTank - Sanctuary

Do not believe the lies. Its all about post count, an epeen metric