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

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.

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.

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.

Bump

@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

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.

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.

Yep, pretty much.

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

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

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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

10 years from now. I am bumping this thread

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.

@foxhound_fox: 100%.

@tiggytog: Just couldn't resist, could you?

That only puts you on the mods' radar, you know...