# Are we allowed to bump posts?



## vince

Hello everyone,

I was wondering whether we are allowed to bump posts. That is, if we submit a question about a language but no one has responded to it in two weeks, is one allowed to "bump" it up to try to garner new attention to it? If not, should I just create the exact same topic again?


----------



## GenJen54

You might wish to contact the mod of that forum who can review the question, then "bump" the thread - if necessary. It's possible someone just doesn't know the answer. Please note, this is not normal protocol, and members *should not* contact mods every time they want their threads bumped.

Bumping in general is wholly discouraged.


----------



## Bienvenidos

I recommend that you _not_ open a new thread. I've seen people "bump a thread up" by re-posting on it. It's better to elaborate on your original question than to post something like "c'mon answer already!!". The mods also have special powers that can raise the status of a "dead thread" to a "hot thread" (don't ask me how, they just can  )

*Bien*


----------



## Jana337

Bienvenidos is right - please never open a new, identical/similar thread if you did not receive as much attention as you had hoped. If you have more information (context) and believe that it could help people pin down a correct answer, feel free to post it. As GenJen said, mindless bumping should be discouraged. All threads are read by tens of helpful people who must have had a reason for not replying.

Jana


----------



## fenixpollo

Often, there are two Main reasons that a thread will get no replies:
1) The subject involves very specific knowledge and terminology that very few people are familiar with;
2) The question is poorly worded, is too long or lacks context.

In the case of (1), you can post more information to help people understand the topic better; in the case of (2), you can post another message to re-phrase and/or elaborate on your original question. 

In either case, the result is not an artificial "bump", but an honest attempt to be more clear.

If I do a dictionary search or a forum search for the word or phrase that you posted about, then I'll see your original thread with no replies, plus any additional threads that you post in an attempt to fish for answers. You can see how that would clutter up the place with lots of repeated threads.


----------



## LV4-26

I think bumping a question once is fair enough.

I never ever read any thread that is not on the first page of the thread list. I take it that most forer@s are like me (unless we've been through the search function and stumbled across an old thread).

A question may not immediately find its "appropriate answerers". Or may be asked at a time of the day when only a few forer@s are on line. Quite often, the problem is not that nobody will ever know the answer to a specific question but that the people who might know it are not here or have just not noticed it.

In that case, a thread can easily be "buried" very low in the thread list.This particular thread was started at 2:45 pm. At 5:30 pm, it was listed on page #3!* And I'm sure I know quite a few people, among our bilingual English natives, who know the answer. The thread just escaped them for some reasons. That's why I've just taken the liberty to "bump" it.
_____
This doesn't contradict the beginning of my post : I went to page #3 only for the purpose of making this point.
                                                                               __________________


----------



## TrentinaNE

LV4-26 said:


> I never ever read any thread that is not on the first page of the thread list.


The moderators do.  If we see a thread languishing with insufficient response (particularly ones with NO responses), we sometimes take the liberty of bumping them. In my case, I often revise the thread title as well to try to address the problems that fenixpollo mentioned.  

Elisabetta


----------



## fenixpollo

LV4-26 said:


> I never ever read any thread that is not on the first page of the thread list. I take it that most forer@s are like me ...


I agree that most forer@s are like you. That was my custom until recently.  Now, I sort the forum with threads with no replies on top.  That way, I'm helping the people that need it most .... which is often the newbies who need to learn how to ask a question with context!


----------



## LV4-26

TrentinaNE said:


> The moderators do.





fenixpollo said:


> Now, I sort the forum with threads with no replies on top.


Thanks TrentinaNE and fenixpollo. Looks like I still have a lot to learn about the work performed by the mods and using all the forums' features.


----------



## cuchuflete

For those who think bumping is ok, please consider that when a post is bumped, the post formerly at the bottom of the first page is pushed out of sight.  In short, the person doing the bumping has denied another thread the opportunity to get a reply from those who only look at the first page.

That strikes me as unfair.

When I see a badly worded, context-free thread that has been bumped, I ask for clarification and context, and restore it to its prior "pre-bump" position.  That gives the thread starter an opportunity to make the question more clear, and avoids either guessing games, or a continued lack of response.


----------



## fenixpollo

Let me reiterate...





cuchuflete said:


> When I see a badly worded, context-free thread that has been bumped, I ask for clarification and context, and restore it to its prior "pre-bump" position. That gives the thread starter an opportunity to make the question more clear, and avoids either guessing games, or a continued lack of response.


_I wish I could do that! :jealous:_

Or perhaps I should rephrase instead of reiterating........................ my post was deleted, either by the server or by a mod as off-topic, though I'm not sure by whom since I received no explanation.

I would like to be able to help in the same way as cuchu is describing in his last post. Perhaps it's impossible, or perhaps it's just a matter of permissions. But I think that if non-moderators were able to "un-bump" a post (only in the way cuchu describes above), we could more effectively address the problem of contextless queries.


----------



## Alxmrphi

Just do what I do sometimes, post again, and then delete it, so it's still only your post there and it's right at the top again


----------



## cuchuflete

Alex_Murphy said:


> Just do what I do sometimes, post again, and then delete it, so it's still only your post there and it's right at the top again



I assume that you, being a gentleman, send a PM to offer apologies to the person whose thread you have bumped onto the second page.


----------



## Alxmrphi

As long as that question was sufficiently answered! of course! *looks left* .... *looks right* ... yeah!


----------



## Josh_

cuchuflete said:


> For those who think bumping is ok, please consider that when a post is bumped, the post formerly at the bottom of the first page is pushed out of sight.  In short, the person doing the bumping has denied another thread the opportunity to get a reply from those who only look at the first page.


I don't know, that logic doesn't make sense to me.  After all, whenever someone starts a new thread or adds a post to an established thread on the 2nd, 3rd page, etc. a post gets knocked to page two.  And this probably happens between 5 and 10 times an hour in the more frequented forums (the forums in which threads being bumped is presumably more of a problem), and probably significantly more in the General Vocabulary forum.  From the little I've been there is seems that you can refresh your browser every five seconds and there is a new post or thread started.  Also, some people might have their "Number of Posts to Show Per Page" function set to fifty or one hundred, so who should the apology be offered to?  Yes, I realize that most people probably have there "Number of Posts to Show Per Page" function set at the default 20 -- which brings up an idea.  If this really is deemed a problem, why not talk to the administrator about setting the default to 50 (or whatever number deemed appropriate) posts per page instead of 20.  This might actually have a two-fold beneficial effect -- (1) it would increase the liklehood of a post being seen and responded to before it sinks to the netherworlds of the 2nd page, and (2) that in turn would decrease the likelihood that someone would feel the need to bump their thread.


----------



## Jana337

Frankly, I hardly ever see someone bumping a post that was on the second page or even lower (they are usually bumped by me or other moderators). Instead, I usually see (and mercilessly weed out) posts like "Anyone? " submitted 5 minutes after opening the thread!

Jana


----------



## timpeac

Bienvenidos said:


> I recommend that you _not_ open a new thread. I've seen people "bump a thread up" by re-posting on it. It's better to elaborate on your original question than to post something like "c'mon answer already!!". The mods also have special powers that can raise the status of a "dead thread" to a "hot thread" (don't ask me how, they just can  )
> 
> *Bien*


Great answer. Ok, I agree that on very very odd occasions a good question may be missed but...generally if a question receives no answers there is something wrong with the question. Questions in these forums generally receive incredibly quick and extensive replies. If yours hasn't then the chances are that there is something wrong with the question.

Bumping is rude, for the reason Cuchu gives. If a reasonable amount of time (arbitrary, but not less than a day, I'd say personally) has passed then elaborate - which has the "lucky" side-effect of bumping. Pure bumping without adding more information or context is likely to receive a swift debumping.


----------



## LV4-26

cuchuflete said:


> For those who think bumping is ok...


I don't think *any* kind of bumping is OK, 





> ....please consider that when a post is bumped, the post formerly at the bottom of the first page is pushed out of sight. In short, the person doing the bumping has denied another thread the opportunity to get a reply from those who only look at the first page.
> 
> That strikes me as unfair.


What if the post at the bottom of the first page has already received 29 answers? Does it really harm? (as from post #10 a question has generally been answered. Posts #11+ consist in a controversy between the answerers, most of the time  ).
Even though I think the principle you're setting up is fair and I approve of it, I'm sure you don't always make it a matter of principle.
I think we can all agree that it should be a case-by-case matter. Let the mods (and the forer@s?*) decide which bumping is appropriate and which is not. Some cases of bumping are obviously inappropriate and I agree that those must be discouraged. So far, each time I've seen a mod object to a particular case of bumping (such as the kind mentionned by Jana337 - _Anyone?_ -), I thought (s)he was right.
____
* I mean when they consider bumping somebody else's question...or their own after an appropriate delay.


----------



## Alxmrphi

But the majority of people will only check the first and maybe second page for answers, if it is a busy day and a question can be answered, but it was moved to page 3 after a few hours and barely anyone checked it, and if it was bumped up to the top, the question would be answered within 10 mins, I don't see any problem with that.


----------



## maxiogee

Alex_Murphy said:


> But the majority of people will only check the first and maybe second page for answers, if it is a busy day and a question can be answered, but it was moved to page 3 after a few hours and barely anyone checked it, and if it was bumped up to the top, the question would be answered within 10 mins, I don't see any problem with that.



I don't _subscribe_ to posts.
Each time I visit I open all threads in the three fora I frequent which have had a new post added to them since my last visit.
Am I "unusual" in doing this?

I do tend to make a point of _not_ answering the questions of posters of bumps. Particularly when there is less than 24 hours between the question and the bump.


----------



## Alxmrphi

A time limit? So if they've waited 24 hours for an answer, they can wait more, but after they've waited N amount of hours then a question can be answered?


----------



## maxiogee

Alex_Murphy said:


> A time limit? So if they've waited 24 hours for an answer, they can wait more, but after they've waited N amount of hours then a question can be answered?



Not a time limit on them —> a limit to the time at which I tend to be more accepting of a bump. Sometimes I don't answer a question as I don't feel fully sure of my answer. I leave it to others. When I see a bump occur after 40 minutes it really irritates me. I get less irritated by a poster who bumps a day-old chick which has not found a buyer.

I've said it before, and I'll probably say it again after this, I am amazed at the way some posters here seem to expect instant answers, and indeed can complain that they "don't like" an answer they have received. Anyone would think that they were paying for the service.


----------



## Alxmrphi

lol~! That's true! (like paying for service) but it's just a habit, a lot of people are answered quite quickly, it's amazing actually, but it's the norm for us all now and if something takes an hour it's a bit weird (in the busy forums) I don't think a question goes unanswered for 2 mins in the Spanish forums, there are always at least 700 people viewing it.

Things get brushed back so many pages on those forums, I think bumping might be sensible, if a question disappears among so many other questions.


----------



## cuchuflete

Random thoughts---

If a thread is bumped, all threads on the first page, including those with lots of answers, and those with none or just one, get pushed down, and with the addition of new threads, and possibly other bumping, the ones that have had fewer responses, as well as those with many,  leave the first page sooner.   There may be valid reasons for bumping, but if it is just to get to the front of the queue, it is discourteous to other foreros.  If the starter of a neglected thread adds information, to help facilitate an answer, and that has the incidental effect of bumping, I don't see that as a problem.  

The same effect would result from starting a new thread, with a better phrased question, more context, some context, any context....  I am a context freak, and believe that context-free threads should be ignored!  They often elicit useless or misleading guesses, and waste the time of the responders.  

Back to bumping--  Changing the default page display to a larger number of posts will slow page load time.  While this may not be of any significance to DSL or cable modem users, it can be pretty painful for our colleagues with dial-up modems.  

Finally, this all may be a tempest in a teapot.  Bumping is not very common.  If done by a newbie, it is usually corrected, with a public or PM advisory explaining that this is not an interactive chat board, and requesting patience and context.
If it is done by an experienced forero, it is probably done for a considered reason, or, if not, the thread has a good chance of being restored  to its prior position.

The general guidance I would give to anyone whose threads has languished for hours or days would be: Please be sure you have given all available context and background.  Provide a complete sample sentence. Say something about the intent of the word or phrase you are questioning.  If that doesn't help, please contact a moderator for help.


----------



## fenixpollo

cuchuflete said:


> I am a context freak, and believe that context-free threads should be ignored! They often elicit useless or misleading guesses, and waste the time of the responders.


 The person who provides no context is ignorant of the fact that their post is unclear. (example) How are they going to find out that they need more context? Should we ignore them until they hopefully, finally figure it out on their own? Or should we take 30 seconds to ask them for more context?


> The general guidance I would give to anyone whose threads has languished for hours or days would be: Please be sure you have given all available context and background. Provide a complete sample sentence. Say something about the intent of the word or phrase you are questioning. If that doesn't help, please contact a moderator for help


Sage advice that, tragically, will never be seen by those who need it most.


----------



## ElaineG

Agree that there's not much of an issue here.

Every morning and evening when I go through the posts on the Italian forums, I look carefully for not only questions that have received no replies, but questions that have received incomplete or confusing replies.
I consider it part of my role as moderator to either simply bump those posts (if that's all that's needed) or to try to clarify by posting myself, either providing information or asking the poster to reshape their question.  I know that the other Italian mods do the same.  

On the other hand, I'm not very sympathetic to the "anyone?" school, as Jana said.  Usually it's newbies, often ones who haven't grasped the whole time-difference thing, which means that a love letter posted in the evening American time may not find a native Italian translator until the Italians wake up several hours later.


----------



## geve

cuchuflete said:


> For those who think bumping is ok, please consider that when a post is bumped, the post formerly at the bottom of the first page is pushed out of sight. In short, the person doing the bumping has denied another thread the opportunity to get a reply from those who only look at the first page.
> 
> That strikes me as unfair.





timpeac said:


> Great answer. Ok, I agree that on very very odd occasions a good question may be missed but...generally if a question receives no answers there is something wrong with the question. Questions in these forums generally receive incredibly quick and extensive replies. If yours hasn't then the chances are that there is something wrong with the question.


There are some "serial posters" on the French-English forum sometimes (I can give names!!), when they come here they post 15 threads in a row in less than one hour. If you go to page 2 on such a night there are good chances that you'll find many unanswered threads that are not poorly written or too technical to find an answer... They were just bumped out of page 1. How fair is that to the poor member who posted one single question at the same time?


fenixpollo said:


> The person who provides no context is ignorant of the fact that their post is unclear. (example) How are they going to find out that they need more context? Should we ignore them until they hopefully, finally figure it out on their own? Or should we take 30 seconds to ask them for more context?


I am one of those who sometimes browse pages 2, 3 etc. to check what's been posted in the day, and I'll click on threads when the title raises my interest, or when it's got 0 or 1 reply, to see if the question was fully answered. 
And sometimes I post in a thread that didn't get any answer (especially if it was posted by a new member) to ask for clarification or more details. In a way it is thread bumping, but I think it's only fair to tell the poster what he did wrong, otherwise (s)he might never understand why the discussion forum didn't meet his/her expectations.

So, either we can display more threads per page without slowing down page load time and allow LV to answer these neglected threads , or we count on moderators and other forum freaks like fenixpollo and me


----------



## timpeac

geve said:


> There are some "serial posters" on the French-English forum sometimes (I can give names!!), when they come here they post 15 threads in a row in less than one hour. If you go to page 2 on such a night there are good chances that you'll find many unanswered threads that are not poorly written or too technical to find an answer... They were just bumped out of page 1. How fair is that to the poor member who posted one single question at the same time?


Fair question. I am a moderator in EO, as you know, so I can speak more confidently about that forum. In EO I am not aware this is a problem. I usually log on to WR in the morning and am usually logged in at some point in the evening (fitting a wide-ranging healthy list of socially well-adjusted activities in the mean-time). I will look through the list of posts in EO from when I last logged on and no answer threads are very rare. I am not aware of post "swamping" (shall we say?) in EO. I can't say I've noticed it in the French forum, although I relax there as any forero and so am not looking out for problems. These posts that get pushed back - do they not end up getting answered and fairly quickly anyway? 

Actually, in the French forum, I glance through the list and answer those threads with least replies first - not to be fair but because I usually find they have the most interesting questions, and also I don't believe in answering a thread if you have nothing new to add, so if someone asking for a translation has had 25 replies I know I am unlikely to have much to add.


----------



## cuchuflete

What?! Me sarcastic?! said:
			
		

> There are some "serial posters"...



We had such a person in EO not too long ago.  There were ten or more questions posted at a time, all context-free. PMs were sent.  PMs were ignored.  Threads were closed.

The ashes were scattered in cyberspace, without full military honors.  

It happened in another forum, and was spotted when all the mods from that space were eating or sleeping or doing some of the other things that mods have been rumored to do in their real world lives...  A curious thing happened.  Many of the 15 or more threads by a single forero somehow or other--I'm not technical enough to explain such phenomena--moved from page one to page two.   It's just one of those WR mysteries, I guess.

If this is a consistent issue in FR/EN, just PM the mod crew for that forum.  I'm sure they will find a creative way to manage it.  Of course, and you must promise not to tell anyone about this secret, if good regular members answer lots of questions from pages two and three..........


----------



## geve

timpeac said:


> ...so if someone asking for a translation has had 25 replies I know I am unlikely to have much to add.


Au contraire ! I think every thread could use a timpeac's perspective! 


timpeac said:


> These posts that get pushed back - do they not end up getting answered and fairly quickly anyway?


Only thanks to my hard work!  You're right, they do get answered, because there will be mods and members who will go look for them. Still, thread swamping is not prohibited (and there's no reason why it should, if the questions are valid ones) yet it is as "unfair" to other threads as bumping (in a civil manner, that is) unanswered threads.

-- No, Cuchu, I didn't mean to say that serial posters are necessarily "bad" posters. Simply, some members like to store their questions until they have enough to make a visit to WR beneficial.


----------



## Setwale_Charm

maxiogee said:


> Not a time limit on them —> a limit to the time at which I tend to be more accepting of a bump. Sometimes I don't answer a question as I don't feel fully sure of my answer. I leave it to others. When I see a bump occur after 40 minutes it really irritates me. I get less irritated by a poster who bumps a day-old chick which has not found a buyer.
> 
> I've said it before, and I'll probably say it again after this, I am amazed at the way some posters here seem to expect instant answers, and indeed can complain that they "don't like" an answer they have received. Anyone would think that they were paying for the service.


 
 I think it so happens because people often need to know the correct version For something. For example, they are writing a letter at work or need to answer a questionnaire, a test etc. They cannot post the question in advance and they need the reply urgently. I have had the cases when I would receive belated replies to my posts of long ago when I no longer needed them. I still try to thank people for their concern and willingness to help. This is what counts.


----------



## alisonp

fenixpollo said:


> Often, there are two Main reasons that a thread will get no replies:
> 1) The subject involves very specific knowledge and terminology that very few people are familiar with;
> 2) The question is poorly worded, is too long or lacks context.


There's frequently a third: this is an excellent and well-used site, but that's part of the trouble. There's so much traffic on here, especially in the FR>EN forum, which is the one I frequent, that questions may have moved so far down the list within a very short time that people who aren't on here all the time may miss them completely. Okay, it's possibly still relatively "early in the morning" as far as this site is concerned, and the bottom of page 3 (the furthest I usually go) is currently showing messages 8 hours old, but the bottom message on page 1 is only an hour old. So if people only look at the odd page, a lot of messages will get overlooked and therefore won't be answered. I'm at work when I access this site, and although a reasonable amount of "professional development" is tolerated, I can't be on here all day, so I'm bound to miss things.

That reminds me that the reason I came into this forum in the first place was to make a suggestion about having a specialised terminology section for French as well in order to reduce the traffic in the main forum a bit. I shall go and do that now ...

Edit: okay, I've just read the sticky that implies that you should contact the Mods direct rather than start threads requesting things like that, so I shall do precisely that.


----------

