next »

[Don Morris]

My rant today is against Internet marketers who reply to months-old topics, keeping them at the top of the display, when they should be left to wither and die (the topics, not the marketers).

Just saying.

[Tony Blake]

Don...

Most topics remain alive and viable for discussion unless they are about a specific event or something attached to an expiration date... bringing up old topics that people want to discuss also helps in board clutter rather than people starting new topics for stuff that has been previously discussed... no sense having 2, 3, 10 discussions on the same topic when adding to an older discussion helps in reducing the clutter plus brings around "background" info that has been previously talked about...

Hope this helps somehow... 

Success!!!

Tony Blake
The Money-Getting Maven™
Õ¿Õ¬

[seoservicesdataentry]

Do not forget that you are doing the same.. 

[amki]

Most forums (fora, if you like) ask you to search for an answer to your question before starting a new thread.  That makes sense up to a point.  If you are really in need of an answer and the thread is four pages long and four months old, though, you're probably out of luck.  In that case, I think it should be acceptable to start a new thread, particularly if you acknowledge that you saw the other one but thought a fresh start was preferable.

The same holds true when you search and get 150 returns and few or no relevant subject lines.

OTOH, if you have something meaningful to add to an old topic, it's likely that the original participants will still be interested.  In that case, objective tolerance instead of subjective criticism might be a better choice.   

The REALLY BIG GRIPE to me is when people post to a long thread without reading all of it and post something repetitive.  That rates a in my book.

[Joreymay]

The REALLY BIG GRIPE to me is when people post to a long thread without reading all of it and post something repetitive.  That rates a in my book.

Even worse is when someone (re)posts a claim that has been thoroughly debunked in the thread.

Jorey
.

[vft8w]

It's amazing to me how there can be so few topics here. I figured a lot more people would want to rant about Internet marketing, I know at some forums i'm in, the users can't stop ranting. lol.

Some topics are worthy of continuing though and they deserve to keep their place on page 1 for a few months.

[kindsvater]

This is interesting, seeing this thread.   I was about to post in another thread and a warning popped-up that the last reply was more than 120 days ago I should consider opening a new thread.   

After some hesitation, I decided not to post at all, as the notice seemed to suggest old threads should not be posted on.

But to suggest creating a new thread?  Then there would be 2 threads on the topic.   Without a large number of new threads moving the first down a few pages, there wouldn't be a good purpose in doing that.

While opinions can differ about a post, the fact someone was reading the thread and was compelled to post suggests that at least for that person it was worth reviving the thread.

[Lisa Preston]

I know what you mean, kindsvater... but occasionally someone revives a very old post with a lame reply of "Hey, liked your post." So better that we notify you, and if you choose to open a new thread, that's great. If it needs to me "melded" with the old one, the moderators can do that, too. It's just a good way to keep the board clear of duplicate posts, spammers and people posting only to increase their post count or publish their signature links.

[kindsvater]

'Hey, liked your post' on an old thread.   Only spammers do that.

I was going to add before, but will now - sometimes on discussion forums it can be frustrating to see the same post/threads over and over, and you wonder why the person just didn't do a search.   But, it is a discussion forum, and not a wiki, so at least it keeps people engaged and coming back.