Necromancy

[Ghost]

Thread Necromancy

Alright, this may be incredibly stupid and/or the wrong subforum. The problem is that I've never understood the etiquette behind multiple threads on the same topic vs. resurrecting old ones.

When is reviving an old thread discouraged? Sometimes during a search I'll find a thread I'd like to add my 2 cents to, but the last post was in 2011.

I've seen threads locked because a topic was too similar to another thread, yet other duplicate topics (like the "what music do you like?" threads) don't get locked/merged. How is that decided?

I don't want to make redundant threads, but I also don't want to offend people by necromancing year-old threads. What to do?

 

[Caged Maiden]

I'd start a new one if you have something new to say. People here change every day and someone new might benefit from your words.

 

[Hans]

In this forum there are areas where thing's don't really get old. Like in research some topic could be interesting even in five years from now. So if you have to add something to the topic of a thread like this add it there.
Take some common sense if the discussion is still relevant.

 

[Caged Maiden]

That's true, research is great when rehashed. I've put a lot of time into the posts I have made in the research categories. Would be a shame to lose all that.

 

[Devor]

I think it depends a little on whether the year-old thread was any good. Some posts generate great discussions and others get overlooked. If a few posts are on the same topic, it makes sense to bump the great discussion instead of starting new threads.

There's some topics, like prologues and POV, which come up again every few weeks. I used to post in them, but now I ignore those threads. I would just be repeating myself, even though any comments I might have made are buried. But the Writing Questions forum moves too quickly, I think, to moderate heavily.

 

[Black Dragon]

On some forums people flip out if you resurrect an old thread.

That's not the case here. Most of what we discuss are perennial topics which have been around for ages, and will be around for ages to come. If you have something of value to add to a thread which has been inactive for a year or more, by all means - feel free to add to it.

 

[Elder the Dwarf]

Honestly, if anyone cares for another opinion, I would rather have an old thread be revived in most cases as it prevents dozens of threads being about the same thing. Still, if you are asking a question about your specific story, I would start a new thread.

One thing I would recommend (and it really doesn't need to be said here because everyone is usually so nice) is to be nice when you are telling someone that a thread has already been discussed. They probably just weren't aware of the old thread, so just link it and be polite.

 

[Kelise]

I'd say it's generally best to use the old threads. New threads only when the topic is quite a bit different from the original intent.

I don't really understand why some forums flip out over using old threads - this way it keeps all the information in the one place, and keeps people who've already commented on it from having to come back to say the same thing all over again.

New threads may be easier for new members, but it's a bit of a pain for those who've been here for a while.

 

[Ghost]

I've been to places where they frown on both, leaving new posters stuck in the middle. You have to be around for the original conversation or you can't talk about it ever! I never understood flipping out over old threads unless the new poster tried to have a conversation or start an argument with the old posters. I don't plan on doing either.

Mythic Scribes is full of nice people and ale, so I feel more comfortable asking here than I did at other forums. Thanks, guys.