PDA

View Full Version : Locking Necro'ed Threads



EntropyBall
08-18-2013, 09:21 PM
Why are they being locked? I've never really understood this portion of online forum etiquette, but I couldn't find anything in the Hex forum rules against it. In fact, what I did find favored it:
"Creating Duplicate ThreadsForum violations include:


Creating threads about existing topics"

If you find an old thread about a topic, and want to add to the discussion, you are breaking this rule by posting a new one.

We are going to have new people coming in here after Gen Con, and wanting to add their 2 cents on some of the existing discussions, its not very welcoming to immediately shut them down. Also, NOTHING on these forums is truly an "old" post, since the forums have only existed for a few months.

Also, as a mod, throwing out your opinion on a topic and then immediately locking it is kind of lame. If it shouldn't be posted in, just lock it. Don't bump it by getting the final say in, and then lock it.

KiraForce
08-18-2013, 09:34 PM
I really have no say one way or the other on the first few points, but on the last one, it is the mod's job to say why they locked the thread, so that people know for future reference that doing a certain thing gets a thread locked.

nicosharp
08-18-2013, 09:38 PM
Yeah, I have a problem with this, and I messaged Stok3d privately to see what the hell is going on or what is truly in violation? (This is in regards to a thread I made a long time ago that people found useful, that I recently linked in a thread re-discussing it today.)
If we want these forums to be good and keep information flowing, the Mod bot program is going to have to be tweaked, or perhaps the interpretation of the CoC.

I also thoroughly read the CoC to double check. There is nothing there against thread Necro'ing. Perhaps it is a personal pet peeve of someone's but that is besides the point.

d00dz
08-18-2013, 09:50 PM
I guess you guys are referring to the Hex/Hearthstone/Solforge thread.

I think its because there's an existing newer thread discussing that exact same subject on the front page. It would be dumb to have two of the same thread which would just serve to confuse people.

Mr.Funsocks
08-18-2013, 09:54 PM
Necroing threads is bad because the previous discussion is usually out of date. Often it represents views that posters no longer have, based on facts that are completely out of date. It confuses the bejesus out of new entrants to the thread, as most won't look at the date. It makes the discussion in the thread really disjointed, as half of it was from months ago. It serves no purpose, as a new thread could easily be made that begins the discussion anew, with up to date information.

nicosharp
08-18-2013, 09:56 PM
I guess you guys are referring to the Hex/Hearthstone/Solforge thread.

I think its because there's an existing newer thread discussing that exact same subject on the front page. It would be dumb to have two of the same thread which would just serve to confuse people.
I think it would be dumb to have an older useful thread locked that is not at all the same as the thread created today, yet pertains useful information that can help people make comparisons in the newer thread. Why are people being herded by our moderators?

If the majority of you feel this way. I am fine with the action that was taken today. I just want to be clear that this is not stated in the Code of Conduct, and is just personal pet peeves of many forum goers. For a thread not even 2 months old, I hardly think of the situation at hand as a necro, nor is the information there out-of-date. The information is also not the same discussion as the thread that was created today.

Mr.Funsocks
08-18-2013, 10:07 PM
For a thread not even 2 months old, I hardly think of the situation at hand as a necro, nor is the information there out-of-date.

So, Solforge hasn't gone from on KS to an open Beta, we haven't learned any new details about Hex, and Hearthstone hasn't had any new information or gameplay videos since then?

Madican
08-18-2013, 10:11 PM
One instance is irrelevant to the whole. There are topics about the economy, about the tournaments, about strategy, about everything in Hex that are only a month or two old. People do not change their views that drastically in two months.

Hmdrake
08-18-2013, 10:22 PM
Oddly enough, I feel like when something changes, that is the best time to continue a discussion about it; having points of reference on which to continue said discussion is a positive aspect, not a detriment.

zadies
08-18-2013, 10:24 PM
They can.t have it both ways if you can't necro a thread and you aren't supposed to create a new one there is an issue, and if the topic is realavasnt and you are actually adding to the conversation instead of making an off hand comment i Son.t see how necroing is bad there is also a need for a timeframe, because a lot of topics aren't pertenant until new information is released but rehashing am entire discission due to one piece of information is a waste of time if it can be picked up where it was left.

HyenaNipples
08-18-2013, 10:33 PM
Don't forget the entertainment factor of rehashing the argument again. People like to type stuff, and they generally won't go reading through a 10 page thread to catch up on an old discussion. Thus, new threads dealing with older topics is much preferable to clogging up the front page with old stuff. The topic is old, but the writing is new, and a new collection of forum goers are going to see it and weigh in.

Just because one thread has already covered something doesn't mean everyone got a say- it just means the thing got so big and unwieldy that anyone not heavily invested in the conversation stopped looking at it.

nicosharp
08-18-2013, 10:37 PM
So, Solforge hasn't gone from on KS to an open Beta, we haven't learned any new details about Hex, and Hearthstone hasn't had any new information or gameplay videos since then?

... there is a lot of information there. Most of it is up-to-date. For the few things not up-to-date, they have little to do with the gameplay elements. Of course, the thread I am talking about is not the reason why this particular thread was created. Let's get back on topic...
Why is it okay to lock a thread that is not even two months old under the pretense that it was a necro, when said thread has useful information? More to the OP's point, if we were to follow the CoC, the thread created today should be locked and mine should remain open in the spirit of the CoC.


To the above. People naturally gravitate to newer posts. I wouldn't worry too much about an old conversation starting up again, even if it is about roughly the same thing. Pruning these threads is not the job of the Mod Bots. Not in violation of the CoC, and if they want action taken, they should write a love letter to a CZE employee and have them address this or change the CoC to put it back into their jurisdiction.

Until then, please unlock my thread, so I can update it and let people know it has been updated. As the value of the information there far proceeds the value of the new conversation threads taking place today that are somewhat unrelated but with similar comparison material.

zadies
08-18-2013, 10:48 PM
It might be fun to rehash an argument after 6months to a year but if someone wants to talk about something that was discussed a week a month two months ago it really just seems like trolling because you don't like the conclusion of the old thread.
If the topic is pertainant to what you want to discuss not necroing a 2 month old thread is really trying to discuss something where anyone new to the topic is missing half the history and background for it because the doc says don't repeat thread topics so why would you search beyond the thread at hand.

Mr.Funsocks
08-18-2013, 10:50 PM
You can still read locked, old threads. The point is that new people coming into a discussion not realizing it's a necro will read the first post or two, not read the date, not read the 10 existing pages of replies, and have both inaccurate information and no sense of what the discussion was about. It makes the entire discussion afterwords pretty bad, because people then constantly come in and interrupt it with "wait I thought the game was released already?" replies. If a thread gets too long, or too old, but has some interesting information, and you want to re-enliven the discussion, just link to it.

nicosharp
08-18-2013, 10:51 PM
You can still read locked, old threads. The point is that new people coming into a discussion not realizing it's a necro will read the first post or two, not read the date, not read the 10 existing pages of replies, and have both inaccurate information and no sense of what the discussion was about. It makes the entire discussion afterwords pretty bad, because people then constantly come in and interrupt it with "wait I thought the game was released already?" replies. If a thread gets too long, or too old, but has some interesting information, and you want to re-enliven the discussion, just link to it.

It is not your job to make that call. It is not the Mod Bots job to make that call.
Cross-linking to old threads, as Yoss has proved in old posts, are far more troubling to follow a conversation using it as a reference point, than it is posting in the thread itself.

Mr.Funsocks
08-18-2013, 11:02 PM
So, it's the job of neither the community nor the mods to make the call to keep conversation in the forum flowing smoothly and avoid massive confusion due to someone's inability to make a new thread? I'm confused as to what the heck that is supposed to mean.

nicosharp
08-18-2013, 11:17 PM
So, it's the job of neither the community nor the mods to make the call to keep conversation in the forum flowing smoothly and avoid massive confusion due to someone's inability to make a new thread? I'm confused as to what the heck that is supposed to mean.

If you get so easily confused, your idea of mass confusion and flowing smoothly mean nothing to me. Nor should you have a say in the matter.

d00dz
08-18-2013, 11:22 PM
Nicosharp, I must apologize but it does sound like you just want your thread reopened just because it is your thread.

I went to your the old thread and while there are certainly some information to be gleaned they are nothing monumental. It could be better served by just getting the relevant points and posting in the new thread. I really don't like seeing multiple threads on the same subject on the front page and I guess more than a few people echo my sentiments.

Mr.Funsocks
08-18-2013, 11:25 PM
If you get so easily confused, your idea of mass confusion and flowing smoothly mean nothing to me. Nor should you have a say in the matter.

I don't get confused, I know how to read timestamps/datestamps.

But if you're somehow insisting that 90% of all necro'ed posts don't end up being 2/3 responses by people who are confused from not reading it, then you're exhibiting a level of willful ignorance that surpasses even that of Creationists.

Also, congrats on turning to Ad Hom first in this discussion, it's rare that someone makes it there before me! <3

d00dz
08-18-2013, 11:29 PM
I don't get confused, I know how to read timestamps/datestamps.

But if you're somehow insisting that 90% of all necro'ed posts don't end up being 2/3 responses by people who are confused from not reading it, then you're exhibiting a level of willful ignorance that surpasses even that of Creationists.

Also, congrats on turning to Ad Hom first in this discussion, it's rare that someone makes it there before me! <3

I have to honestly agree with Mr. Funsocks here. A lot of posters would just LOOK at the thread title, read the last few posts, then proceed to post with no knowledge that it is an old thread.

Scenario.
1. Poster 1 sees old thread, proceeds to post
2. Poster 2 sees new thread, proceeds to post
3. Poster 3 sees whatever is on top, proceeds to post
4. A lot of people become confused with thoughts all over the place

Its gonna cause a heck of a lot of confusion. I really would prefer to discuss on a new thread if its several pages long already. On the other hand, if the new thread is only a page or two long, then it could be MERGED with the old thread.

Edit: Since I brought the subject of merging threads, I think its sometimes a good idea to merge if the discussions aren't spanning too many pages. If its going on too long, its gonna be a cesspool of outdated information and having a new thread is much better.

nicosharp
08-19-2013, 12:47 AM
Fair enough. I really don't have emotional attachment to the thread, but upon seeing it locked, I didn't get it.

keldrin
08-19-2013, 01:23 AM
Fair enough. I really don't have emotional attachment to the thread, but upon seeing it locked, I didn't get it.
I get what you're saying. I went to post some new information on a existing thread earlier today (or Sunday, what ever day it is). And right after I posted, looked and realized no one had posted in the thread in a full month. Turns out, there was a much more current thread I should have posted to. But a month old thread, doesn't seem that old. And, after this game has been around a year, people starting up the same thread every month or 2, will likely be what gets old, as everyone feels the need to put their same to cents in again. (think maybe I should save this post to make for the next thread about locking Necro'd Threads?)
The whole not bumping, reactivating, or whatever, the old threads seems to be partly because of our 60+ paged major threads. Spending 45 minutes reading it all, is a bit of a chore. I expect that problem to get worse after general release, and half the world decides they want to put their 2 cents in as well.
Yay! I made a decent sized post, that walked in a circle, and ended up saying nothing!

Maybe, if they really don't want the posts necro'd after being dormant a set amount of time, they should auto-lock. This would prevent accidental necroing, and makes it so the moderator doesn't come across as the bad guy for locking a old thread.
It would also circumvent the whole, not making new threads, since the old one, couldn't be reactivated, leaving the only option making a new thread.

Shadowelf
08-19-2013, 02:26 AM
It's not written in the coc, but it is written in the forum guidlines;

This forum is for the Hex community to discuss Hex-related topics that do not explicitly belong in one of the other sub-forums. Topics belonging in another sub-forum will be relocated. To best facilitate constructive community discussion, please use clear and concise thread titles and avoid posting multiple threads on the same topic. Please do not bump threads for visibility and do not raise long-dead threads from their graves.

Malicus
08-19-2013, 02:42 AM
Generally speaking the issue with a necro or a bump is that you are rehashing content which has fallen away from community interest as things will and if the topic comes up again you should seek the current community feeling or information which will be more relevant than older threads, as others have mentioned if the goal is simply to convey information then linking as a reference should suffice.

The other benefit of new discussion rather than rehashing old is the reduction in barriers for new participants since unwieldy threads become very easy to overlook unless you are extremely passionate about a subject.

The time lapse at which a thread becomes a necro is very subjective but I would personally put things outside a month as a necro and could understand a post after say 2 weeks but personally would not.

I do think Keldrin has the right idea with an auto time lock, I had been reading through thinking the same and was slightly vexed to see someone else suggest it first.

Mathaw
08-19-2013, 03:15 AM
It's not written in the coc, but it is written in the forum guidlines;

This forum is for the Hex community to discuss Hex-related topics that do not explicitly belong in one of the other sub-forums. Topics belonging in another sub-forum will be relocated. To best facilitate constructive community discussion, please use clear and concise thread titles and avoid posting multiple threads on the same topic. Please do not bump threads for visibility and do not raise long-dead threads from their graves.

Heh, how are 'avoid posting multiple threads on the same topic' and 'do not raise long-dead threads from their graves' compatible? :p

So we're only ever allowed to talk about something once?

I have no particular vested interest in either argument (I'm just butting in), but do find this paradox interesting.

From a UX standpoint threads shouldn't really be locked, the forum platform should just be smarter. If a thread is 2 years old and someone posts something new to it, it should inform those involved but probably not bump to the top of the first page. Old posts should also be very clearly flagged so people know they're looking at 'archive' content. But if the user has a question or something to add to the conversation starting a new thread referencing an old thread isn't really any different to a necro thread, it's just disjointed.

ossuary
08-19-2013, 03:16 AM
Frankly I've always been a little surprised that certain forums I've visited in the past that were super strict didn't have this feature inherently... any thread that hadn't been posted to within a month would get auto-locked, just so it wouldn't suddenly rise up and start accosting people with its old news. :)

Shadowelf
08-19-2013, 03:33 AM
Heh, how are 'avoid posting multiple threads on the same topic' and 'do not raise long-dead threads from their graves' compatible? :p

So we're only ever allowed to talk about something once?


It most probably means duplicating threads at the first page...


Frankly I've always been a little surprised that certain forums I've visited in the past that were super strict didn't have this feature inherently... any thread that hadn't been posted to within a month would get auto-locked, just so it wouldn't suddenly rise up and start accosting people with its old news. :)

Yeap this will nicely take care of this issue; although it surprises me that we have to take measures against something that we are given proper guidlines;

Mathaw
08-19-2013, 03:35 AM
although it surprises me that we have to take measures against something that we are given proper guidlines

Nobody ever reads guidelines, so it shouldn't be that surprising.

Shadowelf
08-19-2013, 03:52 AM
Nobody ever reads guidelines, so it shouldn't be that surprising.

So true :)

Kami
08-19-2013, 03:58 AM
Okay guys, I think a bit of clarification and reasoning is in order. The official blurb on this is:


Welcome to the General Discussion forum! Please review our Forums Code of Conduct (http://www.cryptozoic.com/coc) before posting.

This forum is for the Hex community to discuss Hex-related topics that do not explicitly belong in one of the other sub-forums. Topics belonging in another sub-forum will be relocated. To best facilitate constructive community discussion, please use clear and concise thread titles and avoid posting multiple threads on the same topic. Please do not bump threads for visibility and do not raise long-dead threads from their graves.

Any issues or questions requiring an official Cryptozoic response should be directed to cryptozoic.com/contact (http://www.cryptozoic.com/contact).

1. The thread was inactive for over a month. In most forums, a thread that is inactive for over two weeks is considered old.

2. I would actually prefer a new thread as opposed to necroing such an old thread. Even if it is a duplicate topic, as long as it is not duplicating an active thread, I don't mind. There is nothing wrong with referring to information from an older thread in a new thread either.

3. The main reasons people tend to necro is because they don't feel that if a new thread is created, they would have enough content to make it worthwhile (indicative of a topic that's been discussed to death); or they just flat out didn't pay attention to the age of the thread and its inactivity.

Anyway, I hope that gives you a clearer idea of why we discourage necroing of old threads.

If you have any other comments/suggestions, feel free to let us know.

Gorgol
08-19-2013, 05:17 AM
Okay guys, I think a bit of clarification and reasoning is in order. The official blurb on this is:



1. The thread was inactive for over a month. In most forums, a thread that is inactive for over two weeks is considered old.

2. I would actually prefer a new thread as opposed to necroing such an old thread. Even if it is a duplicate topic, as long as it is not duplicating an active thread, I don't mind. There is nothing wrong with referring to information from an older thread in a new thread either.

3. The main reasons people tend to necro is because they don't feel that if a new thread is created, they would have enough content to make it worthwhile (indicative of a topic that's been discussed to death); or they just flat out didn't pay attention to the age of the thread and its inactivity.

Anyway, I hope that gives you a clearer idea of why we discourage necroing of old threads.

If you have any other comments/suggestions, feel free to let us know.
This makes sense, thank you for the clarification!

Stok3d
08-19-2013, 05:25 AM
Yeah, I have a problem with this, and I messaged Stok3d privately to see what the hell is going on or what is truly in violation? (This is in regards to a thread I made a long time ago that people found useful, that I recently linked in a thread re-discussing it today.)
If we want these forums to be good and keep information flowing, the Mod bot program is going to have to be tweaked, or perhaps the interpretation of the CoC.

I also thoroughly read the CoC to double check. There is nothing there against thread Necro'ing. Perhaps it is a personal pet peeve of someone's but that is besides the point.

As replied before I left for work via pm, there were 4 or 5 similar topics on Hearthstone last night on the first page alone. I merged one and the topic I closed of yours wasn't last msg'd in since June. It was quite confusing and was looking through them all to figure out what I could lock or combine.

In the end, I merged one that had just a couple posts into a similar topic and yours was an obvious choice for closure. As for CoC, it's not in there. It is supported on not to necro threads per Sanik though as seen below:


Welcome to the General Discussion forum! Please review our Forums Code of Conduct (http://www.cryptozoic.com/coc) before posting.

This forum is for the Hex community to discuss Hex-related topics that do not explicitly belong in one of the other sub-forums. Topics belonging in another sub-forum will be relocated. To best facilitate constructive community discussion, please use clear and concise thread titles and avoid posting multiple threads on the same topic. Please do not bump threads for visibility and do not raise long-dead threads from their graves.

Any issues or questions requiring an official Cryptozoic response should be directed to cryptozoic.com/contact (http://www.cryptozoic.com/contact).

zadies
08-19-2013, 07:03 AM
I think there are different opinions on what constitutes long dead given the thread was not bumped for his ability and accrual had bearings on topics currently at hand.

keroko
08-19-2013, 07:14 AM
I agree with those that have said - it's likely the policy is largely to prevent the 'he said that she said back way when he said..." coming from static content being re-read and then discussed as invalid with changes that have occurred over time.

Plus, its good from the perception standpoint, you don't "want" threads that are from 12 months ago being in the top page. You want new titles on threads on that front page as often as possible and regular churn. There's probably a technical reason or two associated with vbulletin and search/serve of very long threads? Performance is good from the system from the end web user perspective, but the server(s) it runs on might not be the most beastly in the world. So policy decisions that can affect performance may be a thing.

Who knows? It's quite typical though for such a policy to exist. What are the thresholds? I do not know. Should they be strictly defined? Is it worth the bother to comply to self imposed standards that the end user community can assault you with in the future?

Its a loose business, there's no manual for vbulletin that says - here's how to properly operate your community site based on our software. So they'll go on consensus best practice or their subjective ones argued / melded up into a corporate policy on the matter.

We're dealing with a small organization in the grand scale of things. With this in mind the moderators from the community become important supplement to community function. They don't get trained, they don't get paid and they try their best - and are definitely human.

Malicus
08-19-2013, 09:30 AM
and are definitely human.

Nuh-uh they is bots.

EntropyBall
08-19-2013, 09:53 AM
I really have no say one way or the other on the first few points, but on the last one, it is the mod's job to say why they locked the thread, so that people know for future reference that doing a certain thing gets a thread locked.

I totally get that. I'm saying, go ahead and lock the thread if its a violation, but if there is some discussion thread and you post your opinion, then say "and I'm also locking this thread because <reason>", it just ends up looking like a way to get the final say in.

Also, I apologize for starting this s**t-storm. I read the forum CoC twice trying to find a reference to thread necro'ing, and somehow missed the "do not necro threads" portion. It makes sense to me now, given that "existing topics" means "currently discussed topics", and not "topics that have ever existed on these forums".

keldrin
08-19-2013, 10:36 AM
Yeap this will nicely take care of this issue; although it surprises me that we have to take measures against something that we are given proper guidlines;

Well, one way it can happen accidentally, is if instead of browsing through the pages to find what you are looking for, you're doing a search. Either through the internet, or in site search. If you're browsing back several pages of threads, you become conscious of the fact the threads are older. But a quick search, to find it, and you really need to be paying attention to the last date of post. (not date thread was started, Since there are several still active older threads)

Punk
08-19-2013, 11:31 AM
First off, thank you to the OP for starting this thread as I almost made one earlier today.

I pointed this same thing out in a previous thread, but then Kami had sent me a PM with almost the same exact response that he put in this thread here. I said the same thing to him that I will say here: If someone who is new to the Hex community finds an interesting thread that is a month old, but still very relative, it really seems like there is two things for him to do to add to the conversation:

1.) Post a new thread -- When the new user does this, you will find lack of responses adding to the conversation because it has been discussed before and most people will just link them to the old thread. This is fine, I guess, but that leads us to #2...

2.) Post in the old thread -- When the new user would do this, the thread gets locked by a mod and they get asked to stop Necro'ing old threads.

Either route, this is not very welcoming in any regard. The only Necro'ing I have seen has been threads that are not too out dated (Personally speaking) and the content of the posts were very relative to the thread. If the thread really is that dead, then it will appear on the front page for less than a day before it goes away again. Big deal.

I think that the Mod Bots need to be re-calibrated and use better judgement when locking threads upon various other actions. I understand the point of having them around, but, for the most part, they are doing nothing but annoy me.

Mr.Funsocks
08-19-2013, 11:36 AM
First off, thank you to the OP for starting this thread as I almost made one earlier today.

I pointed this same thing out in a previous thread, but then Kami had sent me a PM with almost the same exact response that he put in this thread here. I said the same thing to him that I will say here: If someone who is new to the Hex community finds an interesting thread that is a month old, but still very relative, it really seems like there is two things for him to do to add to the conversation:

1.) Post a new thread -- When the new user does this, you will find lack of responses adding to the conversation because it has been discussed before and most people will just link them to the old thread. This is fine, I guess, but that leads us to #2...

2.) Post in the old thread -- When the new user would do this, the thread gets locked by a mod and they get asked to stop Necro'ing old threads.

Either route, this is not very welcoming in any regard. The only Necro'ing I have seen has been threads that are not too out dated (Personally speaking) and the content of the posts were very relative to the thread. If the thread really is that dead, then it will appear on the front page for less than a day before it goes away again. Big deal.

I think that the Mod Bots need to be re-calibrated and use better judgement when locking threads upon various other actions. I understand the point of having them around, but, for the most part, they are doing nothing but annoy me.

So you're saying if a new user wants to talk about something that no one else wants to talk about any more, they don't get to talk about it, and that's bad?

Punk
08-19-2013, 11:58 AM
So you're saying if a new user wants to talk about something that no one else wants to talk about any more, they don't get to talk about it, and that's bad?

If someone wants to include their input on a subject, or to add their own point of view to a topic, they shouldn't be allowed to at all because a thread is 2-4 weeks old?

If someone who is going to be constructive and add to a conversation that is still relevant, then it should not matter when the date of the last post on that topic was.

Mr.Funsocks
08-19-2013, 12:24 PM
If someone wants to include their input on a subject, or to add their own point of view to a topic, they shouldn't be allowed to at all because a thread is 2-4 weeks old?

If someone who is going to be constructive and add to a conversation that is still relevant, then it should not matter when the date of the last post on that topic was.

They can give their input. They can make a new thread. Then watch it die because no one's interested any more. No one's stopping that.

Yoss
08-19-2013, 12:36 PM
This has needed clarification for some time. I had brought this up in the CoC thread back before I became a mod:

[Dated 7-17-2013]
Also, for the duplicate thread part, there's also a restriction on posting in old threads, so if there's an old topic someone wants to respond to what are they supposed to do? Do they create a new thread or do they "necro" the old one?

In addition to Kami and Stok3d's comments, please know that we are discussing Bumps, Duplicates, and Revivals privately and may be seeking guidance from CZE. We may also pursue a recommendation for CoC updates so that it's more clear how CZE wants the forums to function in this regard.

In the mean time, if you feel a moderator has acted in error, please use the PM system to contact us. (Remember that the PM system does allow multiple "To" people, in case you'd like all three of us to review.)

Stay tuned.

nicosharp
08-19-2013, 12:58 PM
I thought about this for a long time, and just to let you know. I still find this 'censorship', and it is censorship, unnecessary.

With that said, I am going to painstakingly find a new hobby to dump my time into until Hex comes out, because the trivial actions of the forum community here are in some odd way, very aggravating. (This is a generalization, not specific to this incident)

I will not neglect the people/contributors I promised packs to in the New Player forums, but consider this my sign-off.

Funny thing is, I would have been a mod, and would have been against you doing it from the same "position of authority" if I had chosen to respond to the same e-mail you guys got. This imo, is over management.

Mr.Funsocks
08-19-2013, 01:10 PM
I thought about this for a long time, and just to let you know. I still find this 'censorship', and it is censorship, unnecessary.

Oye, melodramatic boy, it's not censorship. It's asking you not to bump old threads. You can post new ones on the same topic, say whatever you like, link to old threads, quote them, just don't bump them. That isn't censorship, and you need to take a pill.

jimmywolf
08-19-2013, 05:53 PM
i agree, 1-3 months + old threads should not be necro'ed the simple solution which has been stated before, would be start new thread with the new/old topic you want talk about.

if the old thread was worth anything it would have been sticky, or kept up to date with people posting.

zadies
08-19-2013, 06:21 PM
It's hard to keep something up to date when all the information is in the thread that is general knowledge the thread was brought back because there was new interst in the topic with the release of one of the games that was discussed in it in this case hearthstone, which brought it back to relevance reposting all the information contained in said thread would have been a waste of time, and not reposting the information would really have been a travesty given what was actually being discussed at the time.

It could just as easily say that if the thread isn't on the front page is is over 2 hours old don't post on it... there is a difference between necroing a year old thread about how long it took to level in wow right when wraith of the lich king was released compared to necroing something that is actually pertenant to the current discussion. If people are blind to that I will make sure to forward you all further links so you can cut and paste comments in threads that should have been brought back to the forefront because it was actually useful for the topic at hand because it's really not worth the time to retype the information again.

Also this kind of thing is completely a waste it really just means they need to do a complete fourm wipe of the deck and stratagy section of the forums once alpha hits because people are going to want to "necro" all the theory crafting threads for the various decks on release.... of course given everything has been talked through but continuing a conversation about decks that were created in June is obviously against the coc... though those threads have been discussed as far as they can with the knowledge we have now, once there is more knowledge I'm sure the theory crafters would like to continue the discussions not have to restart from scratch... but the way the forum is being monitored all the threads should just be locked now so they understand not to post in them anymore. And if it is OK to conitinue those discussions as more cards are released the same idea should have held for the Hearthstone thread once more information was released for it.

Nicalapegus
08-19-2013, 09:16 PM
I messaged a mod and asked about this. They were very pleasant and explained their reasoning.

If you find something in error every mod so far has been very fair and has explained everything to me. I feel if you want to know, just ask! They'll help you out :)

Shadowelf
08-20-2013, 05:06 AM
I messaged a mod and asked about this. They were very pleasant and explained their reasoning.

If you find something in error every mod so far has been very fair and has explained everything to me. I feel if you want to know, just ask! They'll help you out :)

Second this as the best course of action; modbots are one of us with the purpose to keep the forums clean and tidy and help people out;so don't be too strict on them; as far as i am concerned they do a wonderful job. Their position also abides them to play by the rules, so if the rules state that necroing threads isn't allowed, then modbots aren't to blame for closing them down. Pm them to know their reasoning if you have questions or the ruling behind a partucular decision/action

zadies
08-20-2013, 06:55 AM
The actual coc doesn't state no necroing it was an amended comment with the presentation of the coc which should have a litmus test for realavancy. The way it is bring applied is basically makes the entire theory crafting section of the forums useless.

Punk
08-20-2013, 02:31 PM
After thinking about this over the last day or so, I realized that this actually doesn't matter one bit.

As of right now, there isn't that many new discussions going on because there isn't that much new information. Also, the community is still pretty limited to KickStarters and people who heard about Hex at Gen Con. New threads are taking well over a full day to fall off of the first page at this point. This is just causing Mods to micro manage and nit pick everything to hell, which is really what I found the most annoying. Don't get me wrong, I am all for a good Code of Conduct and Forum Rules, but you guys remind me of Cartman playing Hall Monitor (http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s10e10-miss-teacher-bangs-a-boy).

When this game launches, and much like any F2P modeled game, the forums will be flooded with new posts all the time. If you make a new thread on the Marvel Heroes forum right now, and it is not discussed, it will fall off of the first page within 10 minutes. Path of Exile and League of Legends forums are about 30 minutes from what I recall. None of these forums really care if an old thread gets Necro'ed or not, because it will either get discussed or within half an hour it will be gone.

fido_one
08-21-2013, 06:48 PM
Okay guys, I think a bit of clarification and reasoning is in order. The official blurb on this is:



1. The thread was inactive for over a month. In most forums, a thread that is inactive for over two weeks is considered old.

2. I would actually prefer a new thread as opposed to necroing such an old thread. Even if it is a duplicate topic, as long as it is not duplicating an active thread, I don't mind. There is nothing wrong with referring to information from an older thread in a new thread either.

3. The main reasons people tend to necro is because they don't feel that if a new thread is created, they would have enough content to make it worthwhile (indicative of a topic that's been discussed to death); or they just flat out didn't pay attention to the age of the thread and its inactivity.

Anyway, I hope that gives you a clearer idea of why we discourage necroing of old threads.

If you have any other comments/suggestions, feel free to let us know.

I see where you are coming from, and it makes sense. I think the thing to note that it isn't a universal opinion or that these points are still your [and CZE's] point of view. Let me make clear that as a mod, and CZE as CZE, that these points of view become the correct points of view by default.

...but a lot of us, myself included, aren't really aware of these points of view because we were operating on the other side of the equation. I'd necro threads out of respect of the people who originally brought the subject up and the people who posted on that thread, or because I think the framework of my point or inquiry was already established and my angle could be added. ...Or because many forums encourage the opposite of what is going on here, which is the necroing any thread on an established topic regardless of how old that topic is in favor of creating a new one.

Not to get all meta on people, but when the mods close a thread due to necroing, why not link to either this thread or a good post as to the reasons why they are not allowing the necro. When I first saw threads closing due to necro I had little idea why it was considered bad practice so I didn't know why or how egregious the fault was and became less sure of proper etiquette on this forum as a result.