criterion-sm dice-lg ea-starwars-lg instagram lucasfilm-lg motive-lg twitch you-tube

I’m confused on why Necroposting is against the rules?

I mean if a post is already made shouldn’t that one be continued instead of creating a new thread every time? I never understood this personally.
"You Don't Know the Power of the Dark Side"
vader.gif

Replies

  • Sorry about the double thread I didn’t mean to do that
    "You Don't Know the Power of the Dark Side"
    vader.gif
  • Feelee16
    2231 posts Member
    I agree. Some are still relevant too
    ur9uulae4dqx.gif
  • What does that mean?
  • I mean if a post is already made shouldn’t that one be continued instead of creating a new thread every time? I never understood this personally.

    Posts that are still relevant can be necroed if done right. In the end it's the will of the moderators that dictate what can and cannot be necroed.

    Problems with necro most of the time are either too old of a topic gets brought back, and most of its info is outdated and thus false, or people start responding users that are long gone from the forums, expecting a conversation may take place. In these cases necroing is bad, for it's better to discuss info that's updated, and there's no advantage in talking to users long gone.

    But when the topic can be brought back without creating those 2 issues, and moderation understands it, then there's no problem bringing them back. Just be sure to talk to them first before they just close it.

    Ofr course there might be more about it, but all what I said has been verified around here. I'm one that constantly report necros of threads that deal with issues or info that's totally outdated, like trying to discuss a feature long gone, or a BUG long gone. Sometimes these happen.
    -----
    Tired of BUGs?

    Well, they'll still exist.
    But visit the Rogue Bros Channel, there we document many BUGs and possible workarounds for them. There's also gameplay and other videos related to EA's Star Wars Battlefront (I & II)
  • Not everything stays relevant.
    Do you know the difference between an error and a mistake? Anyone can make an error. But that error doesn't become a mistake until you refuse to correct it.

    72aob7b857pp.png
  • Piscettios wrote: »
    Other forums I’ve been a part of do the exact opposite. Mods lock new threads and demand people use the search function and bump the relevant threads.

    This is how it works on their BUG reporting forum. I agree relevant threads should be able to be necroed. But I think if most of the people that were in that discussion already left, then it might be better to just start a new one.
    -----
    Tired of BUGs?

    Well, they'll still exist.
    But visit the Rogue Bros Channel, there we document many BUGs and possible workarounds for them. There's also gameplay and other videos related to EA's Star Wars Battlefront (I & II)
  • Piscettios wrote: »
    It’s one of the stupidest rules here and never understood the reason for it since joining. If it’s still a relevant topic it should ALWAYS be allowed. Bumping an old but relevant thread allows new people to the topic to see more comments and discussion from past posts, possibly leaving them more informed on a topic.

    Other forums I’ve been a part of do the exact opposite. Mods lock new threads and demand people use the search function and bump the relevant threads.

    ^^^^ this is how it used to be. On some of my other forums i frequent (i prefer you all here don't worry), you will get LIT up if you don't search beforehand to see if your question has been answered beforehand. Particularly auto enthusiast forums behave this way
  • Alwe15
    2400 posts Member
    That's why there is 928 pages of threads...928!!
  • Agreed. A ban on necro makes this place look busier that it probably is.

    This is the only forum I’ve ever been in with this ridiculous - and slavishly implemented - rule.

    Search fiction > start new thread.
  • tankertoad
    6826 posts Member
    edited March 19
    It's always been lame.

    The only possible reasoning not to allow it is a heated thread that has calmed down and left. But a person with a brain could see the difference. I mean, just how many Ashoka threads did we need?

    Let's leave out the moderation discussion ~Rtas
    Post edited by EA_Rtas on
    41st.org Founder "Where the Game is Winnable."

    are-you-threatening-me-gif.gif
  • EA_Rtas
    2225 posts EA Moderator
    edited March 19
    So necro's aren't something I generally tend to action other than closing the necro'd thread. The reasoning behind this is twofold. One you're pulling up a conversation that hasn't been spoken in in quite a long time, people within that thread may no longer want the notifications they get from new posts.

    It also disrupts the flow of a conversation, people may end up starting arguments over comments that are years old. All in all it's just easier to have a new thread where people can discuss fresh.

    Considering this is discussing moderation I'll be closing this thread off here. If you have any further questions feel free to DM me and I'll be happy to explain or clarify further.

    I mean if a post is already made shouldn’t that one be continued instead of creating a new thread every time? I never understood this personally.

    Posts that are still relevant can be necroed if done right. In the end it's the will of the moderators that dictate what can and cannot be necroed.

    Problems with necro most of the time are either too old of a topic gets brought back, and most of its info is outdated and thus false, or people start responding users that are long gone from the forums, expecting a conversation may take place. In these cases necroing is bad, for it's better to discuss info that's updated, and there's no advantage in talking to users long gone.

    But when the topic can be brought back without creating those 2 issues, and moderation understands it, then there's no problem bringing them back. Just be sure to talk to them first before they just close it.

    Ofr course there might be more about it, but all what I said has been verified around here. I'm one that constantly report necros of threads that deal with issues or info that's totally outdated, like trying to discuss a feature long gone, or a BUG long gone. Sometimes these happen.



    For some additional context RogueZero is correct here. If you're adding new and relevant information then by all means go ahead and necro. But the thread itself needs to be relevant. If you're answering a question that doesn't need answering any more then that thread will be closed.
This discussion has been closed.