# Digging up the dead



## panjandrum

Several times recently I have seen threads listed in New Posts that someone has found (possibly by searching) and commented on, even though the previous most recent post was months ago.
In some cases, the finder has posted "I agree with X", causing the thread to be resurrected for no particular reason.

In other forums where I used to hang about (there is now no alternative to WR) mods would discourage this practice, sometimes by locking the old thread.

I looked through the Forum Rules here and found nothing about posting to old threads.

Would it be a good idea to include a rule that threads should be allowed to rest in peace if they have been inactive for - maybe six weeks?


----------



## lauranazario

No, we do not adhere to the practice of closing threads just because a conversation might have supposedly "ended". 

You see, new people are signing up in our forums every day and MANY take the time to browse through old threads in order to learn. We feel everyone (even the most-recent arrivals) should be able to add their contributions to any given thread --even if it had been dormant for a while. Sometimes seeing things through a fresh pair of eyes may open up a more in-depth (and perhaps more enriching) discussion. 

Saludos,
LN


----------



## Jana337

I concur with Laura - the harm done by pointless messages is low compared to the loss that could be incurred if we prevented newbies from sharing their knowledge. People who post nonsense in old threads are likely to do the same in new ones, and they are dealt with the way they deserve

Jana


----------



## fenixpollo

I agree with Jana and Laura.

One case in point is a member who recently went nuts asking the same questions about customs agents in three different threads in three different forums.  Two weeks after his thread disappeared from the first 5 pages in the forum, an actual customs agent joined the forum and was able to provide his expert opinion, to everyone's benefit.

Another point -- if there's already a thread on a certain topic and someone wants to ask or add a point of clarification, they shouldn't have to start a new thread.

Just my point of view.


----------



## Carolina Rocío

Hi!
Please correct me if I'm wrong... well, I see the language forums as a resource of KNOWLEDGE, not just opinions or chating.  In that case, the addition of new posts means more knowledge available to anyone with an interest or need in the topic under discussion.
On the other hand, I would suggest that the administrator/moderators to, if not encourage, clarify a little bit more about the good thing that adding new posts to "dormant" threads is to people, in view of the knowledge matter.
(sorry for my english...)
Saludos,
Carolina


----------



## panjandrum

Good points all - thanks.
I hadn't been thinking about new posts that added to the "knowledge pool."  I had been irritated (I know I shouldn't be) by a few of the "I agree" posts

Ah - this means that if I find an old thread relating to a topic that is close to my heart, and feel there is something I can add to it, then I should feel free to do so 

Still learning about the way these Forums work and think.....


----------



## cuchuflete

Carolina Rocío makes an excellent point. We constantly ask people to use the Search function, before opening a new thread. We are generally ignored. The idea is to have people tap into the existing knowledge base, and only then ask for or give further clarifications.

The intellectual capital of the 'old timers', those with a few months of forum experience, is of great value in remembering and citing previous threads. Venus and Philippa are especially good at remembering every thread ever created since the creation of the forums

I share Panj's frustration at the "I agree" posts. They belong somewhere, I suppose, but manners prevent me from offering a suggestion. Mike continues to build more and better links between the dictionaries and our repository of threaded knowledge and ignorance. That extends the value of older threads to the tens of thousands of people who use the dictionaries daily (when they should be looking at daylilies), but haven't ever participated in the forums.


Un saludo,
Cuchu

With thanks to Philippa's post below.


----------



## Philippa

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> Venus and Philippa are especially good at remembering every thread ever created since the creation of the forums
> da*i*ly


Cheers, Cuchu!
And a leetle 'spello'/typo for you. I think you spend too much time thinking about daililies!!  
P


----------



## mkellogg

If it is any consolation Panj, I was thinking the same thing as you were.  I was considering a modification that would automatically close threads after a couple of weeks...  I guess I can stop thinking about it now that I see the opposition!


----------



## LV4-26

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> I share Panj's frustration at the "I agree" posts.


Let me start by saying that I'm not referring to the "I agree" posts that come up months after the previous one was posted.

I've sometimes asked questions in the FR-EN and especially in the English Only Forum.
It often happens that the answers are controversial, that the foreros who reply do not have the same opinion. In this respect, I find those few "I agree" posts to be useful to me.Thus, I'm a bit less confused about the most commonly accepted opinion. Only two people agreeing already makes a difference.


----------



## cuchuflete

Thanks Jean-Michel,
You have clearly demonstrated the value of a "I disagree" post.

cheers,
cuchu


----------

