Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Intelligent

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Aug 7, 2013
922
2
Hey I'm confused about a rule, it says no bumping.
What if i made a thread and got no answers should i bump or make a new thread?

Thanks, Intelligent.
 

MacDawg

Moderator emeritus
Mar 20, 2004
19,824
4,518
"Between the Hedges"
Here is some more information about bumping that you might find helpful...

From the MacRumors Forum Rules

Bumps. Posts that bring a thread to the top of the New Posts list but add no content to the thread (bumps) are not permitted. This applies not only to posts that say "bump" but to those with the intent to bump, e.g. posts saying "anyone?" or the equivalent.

A post from Doctor Q on Why and how to avoid bumping

There are two reasons for the blanket prohibition on bump posts:

1. Calling attention to your own thread or post takes away from somebody else's thread or post, so it's not fair.
2. Posts with no new content are annoying to other users.

The downside is that you can never say "It's been 10 years and my Mac still won't boot!", i.e., some users might not get help that they might get if they could bump.

We haven't adopted a compromise rule that would allow some bumps after some amount of time because it would complicate rules that are already rather voluminous and be harder for the moderators to administer. Some people get confused over even simple rules, so simpler is definitely better.

Here are some practical suggestions for people who have asked for help and are hoping somebody will respond to their post:

1. Do something to get more information, or try another way to help yourself. If that doesn't solve the problem, add a post explaining the new information or telling what you tried. It's OK to post in your thread when you having something new to add, just not when you have nothing more to say than "anyone?".

2. Search for and read more threads. It's not always easy to find all of the relevant threads, and you may have searched at least once before, but give it another try with other words or phrases you can think of. You may find clues or answers you hadn't seen before.

3. Ask at another forum site. We don't want to drive our users away but when you have a problem forum "brand loyalty" should take a backseat. Post here, post at other forum sites, and even in Apple's discussion forums.

4. More and more of us live near Apple Stores. A trip to you closest store can be fun (new goodies to play with!) and salespeople or geniuses may be able to help with your Mac, iPod, iPhone, iPad, or other issue. Just don't ask them for help with jailbreaking!

5. If your lonely post was not a plea for help, just a discussion post, let it go. Sometimes what you think is interesting doesn't catch anyone else's fancy. I've had it happen myself.

For clarification, the rule about consecutive posts applies only when the posts are only a few minutes apart. If you have something new to say hours or days after a previous post, that's fine. Editing your previous post is fine too.
 

annk

Administrator
Staff member
Apr 18, 2004
15,010
8,638
Somewhere over the rainbow
Hey I'm confused about a rule, it says no bumping.
What if i made a thread and got no answers should i bump or make a new thread?

Thanks, Intelligent.

MacDawg's post gives you all the background on the rule, so I'll just give you a short answer: neither. We understand not getting answers is frustrating, but neither bumping nor creating a new thread on the same issue are allowed.
 

GewOne

macrumors newbie
Apr 16, 2020
8
1
Many people often get furious and talk about thread necromancy etc, but I think we need to look further into the thread context. If a thread is dated say a decade ago and addresses a particular issue which circumstances hasn't changed over the years, I find it better to "bump on" hence also keeping the database more compact with the final "topic florescent" less spread. However, I know people beg to differ on this.

Cheers!
 
Oct 17, 2021
120
80
However, I know people beg to differ on this.

I don’t beg. I just differ.

And I do not weaponize those cute reaction thingies because they’re potent, dominating, and devastating.

Systematically lock old threads. Otherwise if it’s open it’s fair game if a member has a relevant comment.
 

I7guy

macrumors Nehalem
Nov 30, 2013
32,771
21,841
Gotta be in it to win it
Many people often get furious and talk about thread necromancy etc, but I think we need to look further into the thread context. If a thread is dated say a decade ago and addresses a particular issue which circumstances hasn't changed over the years, I find it better to "bump on" hence also keeping the database more compact with the final "topic florescent" less spread. However, I know people beg to differ on this.

Cheers!
As was said above "bumping" isn't a thing on this site. But new, additional and relevant information is welcome.
 

TiggrToo

macrumors 601
Aug 24, 2017
4,205
8,834
Many people often get furious and talk about thread necromancy etc, but I think we need to look further into the thread context. If a thread is dated say a decade ago and addresses a particular issue which circumstances hasn't changed over the years, I find it better to "bump on" hence also keeping the database more compact with the final "topic florescent" less spread. However, I know people beg to differ on this.

Cheers!

Context is everything. The most egregious necrothreading is when someone replies to a thread from 10 years ago asking a user who’s not been logged on for 8 years “Did you ever get an answer to this?”

For me, that’s just being lazy and it serves no purpose.

Now when someone necrothreads with a “Hey I know this is an old thread, but I’ve some new information” then that’s a perfectly valid use. However at that point in time they could also create a new thread and reference the old.

So yeah, on the whole, I’m in favor of locking old threads myself. No reply after 5 years? Lock it.

But that’s just me…
 

Weaselboy

Moderator
Staff member
Jan 23, 2005
33,595
14,324
California
The most egregious necrothreading is when someone replies to a thread from 10 years ago asking a user who’s not been logged on for 8 years “Did you ever get an answer to this?”
I notice it is usually newbs that do this, and I don't think they do it on purpose. I suspect they arrive in the thread off a Google search and reply not realizing how old the thread is. Often I see more tenured members pop in and let them know the thread is old.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I7guy

I7guy

macrumors Nehalem
Nov 30, 2013
32,771
21,841
Gotta be in it to win it
Context is everything. The most egregious necrothreading is when someone replies to a thread from 10 years ago asking a user who’s not been logged on for 8 years “Did you ever get an answer to this?”

For me, that’s just being lazy and it serves no purpose.

Now when someone necrothreads with a “Hey I know this is an old thread, but I’ve some new information” then that’s a perfectly valid use. However at that point in time they could also create a new thread and reference the old.

So yeah, on the whole, I’m in favor of locking old threads myself. No reply after 5 years? Lock it.

But that’s just me…
Internet discussion boards aren't new. Doesn't the poster realize the last response in the thread was x years ago? (It's a rhetorical question lol)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.