Immediately after the bump, I identified it as such, but continued to answer the very reasonable question asked. There were several more posts, all discussing the issue raised.
The title of the thread was just as applicable to the bump as the original context.
So why lock it?
Uh…because it’s my job?
I could continue to let people revive three and a half year old threads, letting them off with a warning, but after a while people just ignore the warning and post a “Oops, sorry! I promise not to do it anymore. Really!”
This way, people might just remember NOT to do it in the first place.
Yeah. Right. :rolleyes:
In that case, why not lock all old threads?
‘Remembering’ not to do it in the first place isn’t always the problem - there’s no indication of the date when individual posts are made. All that is available when people search for a specific item (which a search for “free browser” suggests may have been the case here), the only indication that it’s an antique thread is the date-of-last-post on the results page. Once you’re reading the thread, there’s no telling. I’ve nearly made that mistake several times.
I’ve obviously missed something in the short time I’ve been around here, maybe someone could quickly tell me:
Not trying to be smart or anything, just genuinely curious.
thanks
Hm… when I look at a thread, I get the date and time stamp for every post in the thread. In the upper-left side of each post.
Not for me. Strange. I’m on Mozilla on Linux at the minute, with some custom font settings, but that shouldn’t be the issue. 
And looking back, the guy even titled his thread to acknowledge the bump.
So when is this “do not bump” cut-off, Czarcasm? One year? One month? One week?
I get the time stamp, too. However (mea cupla!) I neglected to actually read it…
As I (who am not a mod) understand it:
You shouldn’t post to threads that have been dead for about three months. This is so the mods don’t have to waste time re-reading a thread that they either don’t recognize or didn’t read the first time around, though I’m sure there are other reasons. It’s recommended to continue an older conversation to start a new OP, with a link to the previous thread.
They’ve been lenient in some instances, usually in threads that are meant to last a while and are labeled as such. The first 24 thread of the season comes to mind, we usually add to it without any problem, since the title usually reflects that it was OPed at the beginning of the current season.
3 months, according to the FAQs.
What they said.
OK, fair enough.
“The message board with an FAQ that actually answers questions”
I got it right? Sweet!
Hey, uh, can I borrow the mod hat? I mean, just for a sec, just to try. You can even put it on me if you don’t trust me. I won’t ake it or anyth-
Ow! Fuc- ow! OK, I’m sorry Mr. slyt- ow! Czarcasm! Mr. Czarcasm!
The hat means nothing to me. This Mad Mod wears Moderator Underoos. 
Couldn’t the Admins or Jerry the Tech Guy run some sort of script that closes all threads over 3 months old? Then nobody could post to them.
Set it to run nightly and this problem will go away forever.
That is soooo hot.
blushes, swoons, hits the floor
Is it strange I now find myself missing my 6-year-old-self’s Wonder Woman Underoos?
Photo, please.
Old threads are acceptable if they’re still active.
I understand there is a general disinclination to tinker with the architecture of the bulletin board. I believe that this principle underlies a basic policy of minimizing the number of scripts that are added, unless they are absolutely necessary.
The do-it-yourself Returned Materials application page where I work, BTW, doesn’t allow completion with any browser except IE, and I’ve heard Conqueror for Linux users.