but the blue post here says that necro’ing is not against the code of conduct - according to the blue post, it is only against the CoC if the post in question (the post that necro’d the thread) is against the CoC by itself.
here’s an example for you to help you understand:
You’re creating a false equivalence. “Necroposting” is raising the thread itself that was old and unused. Referencing the post in question at least allows a newly created thread to have relevant context. Referencing in a new post is not by definition a necro.
While I agree that active and inactive could be a thing… are they a thing? is there an official label as to wether the thread is active or inactive?
was responding to this line. Necroing a thread could be considered as trolling I suppose if the necro is pointless and done for no reason other than putting an irrelevant topic back on top of the list.
where do we find this appropriate amount of time? is there an official number or do we just go by gut feeling?
but referencing an old thread (in a new thread) has the same result as a necro post - it raises the thread from being dead and leads people to view it.
Oh come on. Its not jarring or anything close.
it really isn’t that big of a deal honestly
You are willfully misunderstanding. A “necropost” is direct action to bring an old post back to the current list of actively posted-in threads. Referencing leads to views, which do not “bump” a post inherently.
I think it’s time to ask: Are you here to be an active contrarian?
I’m going by the EU forum time frame and the EU time frame is 30 days.
I get confused when it happens and when reading stuff, it’s quite jarring.
Keep it on point please.
It appears the topic isn’t new either I found this thread
but why are you against people bumping an old thread? the only result of bumping an old thread is that it enters the view of people and urges people to comment on the topic of the thread.
what does a new thread do if it contains a reference to the old thread? yes it also puts the old topic into the vision of people and urges them to discuss the topic of that old thread.
same result, why is one ok but the other is not?
Go and bump a few old threads then. See how it goes.
i have commented on old threads to add a new suggestion to an older problem and haven’t had any issues with it.
also i have read old threads that have been posted in again and it didn’t bother me at all.
also there is currently an open thread on this subject already:
my opinion is that making a new thread on the same subject is not as effective as simply posting in the old thread on the same subject.
Dead as of September 2023. You’re… telling us to necropost?
The thread is inactive. it has been dead for well and truly over half a year. People have been actioned even for bumping a thread that died after as long as a month.
the thread is still open
You are being actively pedantic. The topic is “dead” (as in has not been actively discussed) since 9/27/2023. To use that same one would necro a post over six months old as of last post.
Don’t forget Vrakthris’ other part of that same quote, which you didn’t highlight: “it may fall under the category of “Trolling”, which is.”
is the topic really dead, though?
we are discussing the exact same topic here in this thread, right?
yes and the most important part of that statement is it may
it is not inherently against the code of conduct to necro a thread.
Then treat it as it’s meant to be - a guideline as it is - and maybe don’t tell us to necro a thread that’s over 6 months from its last post?
The forums cant change policies for a confused few.
Necroing is often reasonable.