Jump to content
Server time: 2017-08-16, 13:23

  • 0
Sign in to follow this  
Ghost of Gijs

Necroing threads

Question

After reading this appeal, I have a question.

Where in the rules does it say necroing is not allowed?

I'm not trying to nitpick, but the GM himself wrote that necroing is "frowned upon". I think the fact he wrote that and not "against the rules" proves the point I'm about to make.

Personally I don't see the trouble with necroing in any situation, but I've had that discussion before and apparently there's some (to me) inexplicable hatred against necroing threads. I'll have to live with that.

However, you can't expect people to understand necroing is "bad" in the sense that it deserves warning points. Sure, it's not always useful. But jokes aren't useful either. In fact, a lot of posts aren't useful.

My point is that it is either against the rules, or it isn't. "Frowned upon" is too vague. And if you're gonna make it against the rules, make it clear what defines a necro. A month old thread? Two months old? What if I want to revive an old discussion? Surely I should be able to do that? Or do I have to open a whole new thread? Might as well use the old one if it still has relevant points.

What if The Reverend had revived that very same thread with the words "I remember this video, it was so great and I'm bumping this because I think more people should see it"? Would it have been alright then? I hope so, because otherwise it means we are forced to forget some great content because no one is allowed to necro it.

Do you see the problem? I can live with necroing being against the rules even though I don't agree and could make some compelling arguments, but if it's gonna be against the rules, it should be clearly defined and not entirely open to interpretation as it is now. You can't expect people to magically know why it is wrong.

Let me ask why specifically The Reverend's necro was bad. Was it the date of the last post? If so, refer to points made earlier in this thread. Was it the fact his post was useless in the sense it didn't really add anything to the discussion? If so, refer to the point I made earlier about jokes and a whole lot of other posts also being useless. Then what exactly was the problem, and how could The Reverend have known he shouldn't have done it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

44 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
Clammy    0

For me, I'm glad he found that video. That video is pretty well created! But +1, I agree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Muntz    3

My personal opinion on this is that necroing threads doesn't cause much harm. I am happy to close a random and irrelevant necro without anything further. However, if someone does it obviously without reason more than once, then I will give a warning.

It is pretty obvious when a necro serves no purpose. Such as necroing a thread that has not been commented on in a year with some inane post.

I'm not overly bothered on 'punishing' necro's. I think closing what we interpret as pointless is sufficient. With small warning points given to people doing it repeatedly. On the grounds that it clutters our forums.

Promoting a piece of work such as a video (or song :D) is perfectly acceptable i think. #staffbias

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Mush    2

Very much with Muntz on this one. I have no major issues with it unless people continue to do it, at that stage it gets annoying, especially when it's irrelevant posting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Agreed.

To some extent it looks based on the staff member's impression of a thread be it the content, date in between posts, level of activity or even the attitude of others inside it.

Punishing necros seems a bit overkill when it can be based entirely on one's impressions of a thread. Especially when it is not designed to be harmful or have other ulterior motives. It starts to border on a form of censorship and promotes insignificant bumping and re-posting.

Promoting a piece of work such as a video (or song :D) is perfectly acceptable i think. #Artistbias

Fixed for you ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

My personal opinion on this is that necroing threads don't cause much harm. I am happy to close a random and irrelevant necro without anything further. However, if someone does it obviously without reason more than once, then I will give a warning.

It is pretty obvious when a necro serves no purpose. Such as necroing a thread that has not been commented on in a year with some inane post.

I'm not overly bothered on necro's. I think closing what we interpret as 'pointless' is sufficient. With small warning points given to people doing it repeatedly. On the grounds that it clutters our forums.

But even if the thread The Reverend necro'd had only been closed, it might have caused problems. What if later, I wanted to bump the thread because I thought the video was amazing and I wanted people to see it, as I suggested in the example in the OP?

In fact, that is exactly what happened today. Who is going to warn DeadAntelope and close the thread? If this thread can stay open, somebody should re-open the thread The Reverend necro'd.

Closing the thread should almost never happen because it punishes more than just the necroer (if he should be punished at all).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Stagsview    581

Also, I have a different opinion to muntz about Necro's. I do not mind someone bringing up threads from a month ago or two, As long as they have an intention to bring something productive or give a comment to provide possibility to bring a healthy discussion.

But when I see stuff such as *Extreme case* A hello thread from a banned user or from a user a year ago. I do not personally see the humor in those And I would issue points to that. Why? Clutter and I have to put my time into closing the thread and telling people not to do it. But then people continue doing it. Empty warnings mean nothing without Action.

I believe if you let someone get away with that then they might all just bring up posts from ages ago for no point what so ever.

Yet, I respect other peoples Views in the situation. Let's have a healthy discussion about this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest   
Guest

Why do you care if someone necroes a thread? It's the internet. Why would this bother anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest   
Guest

Why do you care if someone necroes a thread? It's the internet. Why would this bother anyone?

Sometimes it a bother.

My welcome thread got closed :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

But when I see stuff such as *Extreme case* A hello thread from a banned user or from a user a year ago. I do not personally see the humor in those And I would issue points to that. Why? Clutter and I have to put my time into closing the thread and telling people not to do it. But then people continue doing it. Empty warnings mean nothing without Action.

That's a fallacy, staggs. Basically you're saying "because I don't like necro's, when people necro I have to close the thread and warn the person". But why? Who says you have to do these things? It is your decision not to like necro's, and you don't have an argument why you don't like them except that it costs you work to close the thread and warn the person, an argument which would be moot if you wouldn't have a problem with necroing.

Simplest solution is not to have a problem with necroing. That way you don't have to close the thread nor warn the person.

Something should be punishable in itself. KoSing is punishable because it ruins the gameplay of others, NOT because it costs staff work to ban people for it.

Why do you care if someone necroes a thread? It's the internet. Why would this bother anyone?

Exactly my thoughts, but eh. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Muntz    3

My personal opinion on this is that necroing threads don't cause much harm. I am happy to close a random and irrelevant necro without anything further. However, if someone does it obviously without reason more than once, then I will give a warning.

It is pretty obvious when a necro serves no purpose. Such as necroing a thread that has not been commented on in a year with some inane post.

I'm not overly bothered on necro's. I think closing what we interpret as 'pointless' is sufficient. With small warning points given to people doing it repeatedly. On the grounds that it clutters our forums.

But even if the thread The Reverend necro'd had only been closed, it might have caused problems. What if later, I wanted to bump the thread because I thought the video was amazing and I wanted people to see it, as I suggested in the example in the OP?

In fact, that is exactly what happened today. Who is going to warn DeadAntelope and close the thread? If this thread can stay open, somebody should re-open the thread The Reverend necro'd.

Closing the thread should almost never happen because it punishes more than just the necroer (if he should be punished at all).

I agree. To be honest, there was more context in the referenced appeal than a simple necro. but I agree with your points. At the moment it is most definitely a subjective decision that changes depending on the staff member. That is not a good thing, although often unavoidable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Rolle    2440

If the necro post does not provide any new facts or relevant information, or if we see the intention of the poster is malevolent then the post is considered spam and therefore the user is warned. We do not warn people who bump old threads with useful comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Stagsview    581

But when I see stuff such as *Extreme case* A hello thread from a banned user or from a user a year ago. I do not personally see the humor in those And I would issue points to that. Why? Clutter and I have to put my time into closing the thread and telling people not to do it. But then people continue doing it. Empty warnings mean nothing without Action.

That's a fallacy, staggs. Basically you're saying "because I don't like necro's, when people necro I have to close the thread and warn the person". But why? Who says you have to do these things? It is your decision not to like necro's, and you don't have an argument why you don't like them except that it costs you work to close the thread and warn the person, an argument which would be moot if you wouldn't have a problem with necroing.

Simplest solution is not to have a problem with necroing. That way you don't have to close the thread nor warn the person.

Something should be punishable in itself. KoSing is punishable because it ruins the gameplay of others, NOT because it costs staff work to ban people for it.

Apologies, I must of worded it wrong.

Yes, I do not like people necroing and I will explain reason why.

If you allow people to do necroing you will have necroing going around all the places. Now, if per say Someone had a concept they wanted implemented such as a weapon they wanted. They search the forums and they see a thread on it and the user then posts a positive reaction to the thread itself and gives his reasons why. I have no problem with that. He is saying his opinion, saving space on the forums and using a thread that was already designed for that purpose.

Now, same case, same scenario. If this user decided to post instead "GG" on the thread itself. Why would you do that? What is the reason? What do you aim with that comment? It baffles me until now, I would go as far as calling it as trolling. But that's my personal view on the matter.

Hope I explained myself better this time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

My point about this thread still stands. Either someone should close it (I hope to god not), or the other thread should be reopened. It deserves to be open as much as Muntz' thread.

If the necro post does not provide any new facts or relevant information, or if we see the intention of the poster is malevolent then the post is considered spam and therefore the user is warned. We do not warn people who bump old threads with useful comments.

So useless comments aren't allowed? What about #CLF4lyfe and similar comments? Gifs (that aren't not inappropriate :P), what about those?

But when I see stuff such as *Extreme case* A hello thread from a banned user or from a user a year ago. I do not personally see the humor in those And I would issue points to that. Why? Clutter and I have to put my time into closing the thread and telling people not to do it. But then people continue doing it. Empty warnings mean nothing without Action.

That's a fallacy, staggs. Basically you're saying "because I don't like necro's, when people necro I have to close the thread and warn the person". But why? Who says you have to do these things? It is your decision not to like necro's, and you don't have an argument why you don't like them except that it costs you work to close the thread and warn the person, an argument which would be moot if you wouldn't have a problem with necroing.

Simplest solution is not to have a problem with necroing. That way you don't have to close the thread nor warn the person.

Something should be punishable in itself. KoSing is punishable because it ruins the gameplay of others, NOT because it costs staff work to ban people for it.

Apologies, I must of worded it wrong.

Yes, I do not like people necroing and I will explain reason why.

If you allow people to do necroing you will have necroing going around all the places.

Still a fallacy. If you don't think one necro is bad, multiple necro's can't be bad either. Thus the fear of multiple necro's can't be used as an argument.

Besides, in practice, I think that's an irrational fear. Like people would love nothing more than to necro every thread in existance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Rolle    2440

If the necro post does not provide any new facts or relevant information, or if we see the intention of the poster is malevolent then the post is considered spam and therefore the user is warned. We do not warn people who bump old threads with useful comments.

So useless comments aren't allowed? What about #CLF4lyfe and similar comments? Gifs (that aren't not inappropriate :P), what about those?

Perfect examples of useless necro bumps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Jamma    4

The thread came back into light because I linked it on SVR's thread when discussing the video with Misty. Why has it been closed, I see it as a part of DayZRP history and Lore. If someone wanted to reply with something constructive why shouldn't they be able to.

However, I think Reverend did deserve the points as his post was non-constructive and immature but at the same time, the thread should be re-opened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

If the necro post does not provide any new facts or relevant information, or if we see the intention of the poster is malevolent then the post is considered spam and therefore the user is warned. We do not warn people who bump old threads with useful comments.

So useless comments aren't allowed? What about #CLF4lyfe and similar comments? Gifs (that aren't not inappropriate :P), what about those?

Perfect examples of useless necro bumps.

I meant posts like that, not necessarily as a necro. In a clan thread, for example. Or a joining thread. Or whatever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Rolle    2440

So useless comments aren't allowed? What about #CLF4lyfe and similar comments? Gifs (that aren't not inappropriate :P), what about those?

Perfect examples of useless necro bumps.

I meant posts like that, not necessarily as a necro. In a clan thread, for example. Or a joining thread. Or whatever.

You know that these are frowned upon, why are you asking me? :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest   
Guest

Perfect examples of useless necro bumps.

I meant posts like that, not necessarily as a necro. In a clan thread, for example. Or a joining thread. Or whatever.

You know that these are frowned upon, why are you asking me? :D

hqdefault.jpg

Like these? :D

Plz rolle no warning points

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Perfect examples of useless necro bumps.

I meant posts like that, not necessarily as a necro. In a clan thread, for example. Or a joining thread. Or whatever.

You know that these are frowned upon, why are you asking me? :D

"Frowned upon"... But not against the rules? Or only in some cases? In which cases?

I can guess when it is and isn't "frowned upon" but that's only because I'm exceptionally smart (please don't take that seriously) and because I've been here a long time.

The point I'm trying to make is that it's entirely open to interpretation and you can't expect people to know what is and isn't "frowned upon", and when it is and isn't "frowned upon".

If the problem with necro's like The Reverend's is that they're spam, then why aren't posts with "CLF4lyfe" and similar things being warned?

And again: either this should be reopened, or this should be closed. Both have been necro'd and both have as much right to be open as the other. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Burgz    6

Some people just want to get banned/warning points and then moan about it...

On topic though, I don't see a problem with threads that are worthy of being necro'd and the comment is actually meaningful. If not they deserve the points, much alike accidentally posting in a formal report or ban appeal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Some people just want to get banned/warning points and then moan about it...

On topic though, I don't see a problem with threads that are worthy of being necro'd and the comment is actually meaningful. If not they deserve the points, much alike accidentally posting in a formal report or ban appeal.

So basically the formal report and ban appeal rule extends to all sections, meaning you can't post meaningless posts anywhere?

"Meaningfullness", or lack thereof, can't be the only reason necro's are bad, otherwise you should ban all meaningless posts. There are a lot of them. Jokes, gifs, you name it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Burgz    6

What? No. I was just simply referring to the excuse that may be given of 'I didn't see/realise' etc. Should be treated the same as a formal report or ban appeal. There is basically no way to decide what is a meaningless or meaningful post on the forums, as to why it is not in place everywhere.

If you were, for example, to post on a clan idea from last year that had magically been left, then it deserves points.

Necroing a suggestion thread would be fine. Just use your head basically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

What? No. I was just simply referring to the excuse that may be given of 'I didn't see/realise' etc. Should be treated the same as a formal report or ban appeal. There is basically no way to decide what is a meaningless or meaningful post on the forums, as to why it is not in place everywhere.

If you were, for example, to post on a clan idea from last year that had magically been left, then it deserves points.

Necroing a suggestion thread would be fine. Just use your head basically.

Sorry for playing stupid, but sometimes you have to, to make a point. I ask stupid questions hoping to get answers that can further prove the point I am trying to make.

In this case, I'm trying to get you to define when a necro is bad and when it isn't. "Use your head" is vague. The clan idea thread is a specific example, which is fine, but it doesn't really get us anywhere.

But the type of thread can't be the only factor, because two similar threads (the one The Reverend necro'd and Muntz' singing thread) have both been necro'd, yet only one has been closed and the person that necro'd it warned. Then why not DeadAntelope for the necro of Muntz' thread?

Because The Reverend's post was meaningless, you will say. Well, then why aren't other meaningless posts (not necessarily necro's) being warned? Gifs, hashtags, jokes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest Grumby   
Guest Grumby

Yet I've seen moderators close threads, linking one from > a year ago and saying that they should have posted there. Chances are if that was done it would have been filled with posts even more useless then the original necro may be ("omg dat necro doe" etc.).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Yet I've seen moderators close threads, linking one from > a year ago and saying that they should have posted there. Chances are if that was done it would have been filled with posts even more useless then the original necro may be ("omg dat necro doe" etc.).

So if I had said "omg dat necro doe" after DeadAntelope necro'd Muntz' thread here, should it have been closed? Doesn't sound very fair for Muntz (and those who like the video).

Similarly, it doesn't sound very fair for SVR that the directive 4.7 video thread has been closed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×