Those are extreme cases. Rampant posts can be treated as unreasonable.It's only the odd random newbie that runs rampant reviving threads from 10 years ago.
I find, sometimes, intentions to devalue – to force ignorance of – user content that is sometimesWhy should threads stay in the past?
Consider the possibility that some or all of the similar topics are old because traditional moderation has encouraged or forced the ageing; because moderation has discouraged or removed, from those topics, more recent replies that were relevant.… Similar Threads list as configured is a waste of space …
The goodness of search results is partly dependent upon opening posters using good, focused, self-explanatory subject lines (titles).The similar threads section does save people searching. It's all good
It's pretty funny when it happens though.It's only the odd random newbie that runs rampant reviving threads from 10 years ago. The similar threads section does save people searching. It's all good
The negative attitudes, towards age of content, were amongst the things that drove me away from MacRumors Forums.I am new to these forums and contributing to forums in general although I have been viewing these and others for years.
My question is, why is it so horrible for people to reply to an old thread? I have seen a couple recently where someone did it (likely by mistake) and the poster always gets completely mocked for it. Why is this such a horrible thing - especially if we are encouraged to find existing threads before starting a new one?
Honest question here. Hoping someone in the community can shed some light on the subject for me.