resurrection vs. new thread

[gondorf]

just because recently when I resurrected an OLD thread( 2001) i got mixed emotions I decided to make a poll.
what do you think the age cut off for resurrection should be? or rather when do you think that we should make a new thread instead.

this way i know when to make a new thread.

[Morgan Gillespie]

2-5 months seems about right. Also to fix some facts, you resurrected 2 recently, the second just didn't get as much attention as the other.

Also it's not just how old the thread is, it depends on whether or not the information you post warrants a resurrection. Lets say 6 months ago (beyond what I think is worthy of resurrection) a topic about whether there are still Dodos around or not, (I don’t know) and you have irrefutable proof that they don’t and that thread is still unanswered, I think that warrants a resurrection.

[gondorf]

this poll is also so that I can get a clarification on when not to resurrect.

this is being done mainly because I actually got both good and bad reps (actually multiples of each) for resurrecting a chiefdelphi rocks thread and I would like to have everyones personal opinion on whether to resurrect or not

[Koko Ed]

People just like to whine no matter what you do. I say do what you feel is best and live with the consequences. It's only online. It's not life or death.

[Dan Richardson]

This is definitely interesting because people will pseudo flame you for resurrecting and also at the same time if you don't " Search before your post " your gonna get a hail storm of bad rep points as well. Their shouldn't really be a fine line you just should be careful about what your resurrecting, IE. a 2001 game post that has to do with not liking the field elements.

One of the easiest solution is to search before you post, but if the thread is old but discussing relevant newer technology a safe route ( if your concerned about rep ) is to post a new thread discussing the new technologies but link the old threads in your post.

To be honest people probably need to just calm down the the good rep bad rep thing there are only a few dozen people people that have actually warranted bad rep, and most have repented for their chiefdelphi sins, others went along their merry way. If someone makes a silly forum mistake there is neutral rep for a reason. I believe resurrecting an older thread is one of those silly mistakes.

[Bill_Hancoc]

Id generaly go with start a new thread since it seems to get more impact. I know i dont really read the newposts section that often and generaly only go with the new posts RSS feed. I have resurected a few times and didnt really get the same response as when i went and started a new thread so do what you think is best. I dont think age has anything to do with when a thread should be resurcted but try to resurect first and see if anybody respnnds

[Andy Baker]

Originally Posted by gondorf

this is being done mainly because I actually got both good and bad reps (actually multiples of each) for resurrecting a chiefdelphi rocks thread and I would like to have everyones personal opinion on whether to resurrect or not

My goodness... people are negative repping you for this? That's pretty sad, in my opinion. Those people need to be more tolerant.

I actually *like* when someone resurrects an old thread and put their opinion on it or adds to the discussion. It is interesting to see what opinions people have today compared to what was said a few years ago.

Andy B.

[J Flex 188]

Both Ed and Andy Baker make very good points. I loved the thread the other day about congratulating CD on making the move to a web based BBS system and I found it hilarious that before the rumour mill was actually a physical piece of board. No matter how light-hearted or how serious the thread brought back is, it is still a piece of FIRST history. Karthik's recently been talking about the historical side of FIRST and how many teams either lack in appreciation of it or are not fully aware of it. I am not saying that bringing back old threads is a means to an end of this awareness, but it is something that definitely deserves some merit and by no means deserves to have negative reputation attached to it.

No one is flooding the portal with resurrecting old threads and most of the time people who post in these old threads dont simply reply with a one word answer. In fact, shouldn't we be happy that people are spending the time and effort to deeply root and explore through CD in the hopes of picking up a wise answer or two? Even if people's appearances have changed in that time span

[KarenH]

Originally Posted by J Flex 188

No matter how light-hearted or how serious the thread brought back is, it is still a piece of FIRST history.

My vote was based on the idea that for housecleaning purposes, it's easier to remove something old if it is discontinuous with the present, because it's no longer needed or wanted. So, no resurrecting ancient stuff. But that is a good point about the history.

Even if you're going to save stuff for its historical value, eventually you will run out of usable space--first to view it or use it, then to store it. Admonitions to search before you post will be meaningless if the search resembles hunting a needle in a haystack. I think that eventually choices will have to be made about what to keep and what to throw out, but whoever makes those choices will need a bulletproof skin.

[orelinde]

i think it depends on the actual post being brought back into the light. I think that there are certain posts (letter to rookie teams being my favorite one) that should remain at the front of the line. and others that are less relevant to the back. personnally i am thankful to have read the letter to rookies as it completely reflected what i was feeling have just shipped our robot. (went home almost in tears to see it go away for a whole month) but there are other posts that maybe should not be resurrected so it really depends on the posts.

[Jon K.]

I feel that any thread with over a year of no postings should be locked so that it can't be resurected unless there is a good reason to do so in which case a mod or maybe just Brandon could reopen the thread. While I am not sure of the work load this would cause for Brandon, I feel that after a certain age some things should just be left dead, and that the similar threads feature has made this resurection debate more common in recent months.