No-bumping rule is dumb on every website that has it.

Avatar image for tiggytog
#1 Edited by TiggyTog (312 posts) -

Why should it bother anyone, in any way, at any time, that I decided to bump a 10-year-old thread? Who is it hurting in any way?

1. It creates far less clutter.

2. From what I've seen, people like talking in long-running threads, if you were to give someone to post in 1 single thread, as opposed to new threads every other week, I can guarantee you they'd post in the old thread because they can continue their conversation.

3. Are there really people that wanna continue on from the exact convo of said users from 10 years ago? Why should it matter that there are people that wanna read every single post so they can keep up with the convo? To me its personally just weird to do so, just read the posts on that page and post, if you've never posted in there especially then you don't particularly need to know the convo, just the thread name.

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
#2 Posted by mrbojangles25 (43928 posts) -

If it were up to me any thread older than 2 days that had activity 1 or more days ago at the earliest would be locked, or at least archived or something.

Avatar image for Master_Live
#3 Posted by Master_Live (19468 posts) -

10 years is too much, but threads from like 6 months ago should be fair game to bring up. It is ridiculous that sometimes threads just weeks old get locked.

Avatar image for sealionact
#4 Posted by sealionact (3894 posts) -

Bump

Avatar image for thehig1
#5 Posted by thehig1 (7280 posts) -

@tiggytog: I mostly agree, 10 years a little extreme as a lot changes in a decade.

A couple of years I don't see the issue

Avatar image for davillain-
#6 Posted by DaVillain- (36479 posts) -

Their are very few sites that don't mind someone bumps a 10 year old thread which is pretty nice. I do admit, bumping old threads isn't a concern, I do like revisiting old threads as how things have change from conversations and the users who are still around and who isn't.

@Master_Live said:

10 years is too much, but threads from like 6 months ago should be fair game to bring up. It is ridiculous that sometimes threads just weeks old get locked.

I give it a 1 year later to be consider a thread is old and should be locked. Half the time, I don't like starting a new thread on the same subject not when that other thread has valid points from users.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
#7 Posted by uninspiredcup (33312 posts) -

@Master_Live said:

10 years is too much, but threads from like 6 months ago should be fair game to bring up. It is ridiculous that sometimes threads just weeks old get locked.

Yep, pretty much.

Avatar image for horgen
#8 Posted by Horgen (120410 posts) -

Bumping old threads is an effective way of drowning new discussions.

Avatar image for tiggytog
#9 Edited by TiggyTog (312 posts) -

@horgen: Making new threads is a good way to drown out existing and relevant ones.

Avatar image for pyro1245
#10 Posted by pyro1245 (4996 posts) -

I hate when I search Google and I find things from 10 years ago, or even a few years ago.

That stuff is usually not relevant anymore.

Anyway... It should just be decided by a mod on a thread-by-thread basis. If the info is still relevant than sure, leave it open.

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
#11 Posted by LJS9502_basic (166443 posts) -

Nope. What would stop someone from bumping a lot of old threads all at once?

Avatar image for Archangel3371
#12 Posted by Archangel3371 (27910 posts) -

I’m fine with the “No bumping old threads” rule myself. If it’s had no activity for a week or more I think it’s better just to make a new thread instead.

Avatar image for Byshop
#13 Edited by Byshop (19567 posts) -

@tiggytog said:

@horgen: Making new threads is a good way to drown out existing and relevant ones.

If it were relevant it wouldn't have gone un-replied for so long. The longer the threads get the less likely people are to actually read the thread before replying. Necro bumps just end up repeating the same content over and over because nobody wants to read through 20 pages of replies before they weigh in.

Also this is a common spammer behavior.

Avatar image for henrythefifth
#14 Posted by henrythefifth (2477 posts) -

Note that most of the moderating on Gamespot and other forums is automated.

So, you get automatically punished for bumping old threads on most forums. So, no point blaming mods.

Avatar image for ezekiel43
#15 Edited by Ezekiel43 (1477 posts) -

Yeah, it sucks. I haven't been on any forums as ridiculous about it as Gamespot. Are there any big ones worse than this?

Avatar image for sonicare
#16 Posted by sonicare (56686 posts) -

10 years from now. I am bumping this thread

Avatar image for foxhound_fox
#17 Posted by foxhound_fox (97891 posts) -

It's definitely a silly rule. Why create a new thread, when you can search, find a topic you are interested in discussing and then bumping it? That way all the relevant info is all contained in the same thread.