wolfstu asks a question based on an old thread he reads. In that very thread, because it seems to him the place to ask his question. He wants to know about “the books”. Someone answers his question. That’s about it. I know, hardly a paperback thriller.
Why do some people think we have rules about how old a thread may be to still be resurrected legally?
The answer is: we don’t. If a newbie is smart enough to use the search engine, and finds a thread that is related to what he wishes to know, but does not answer his question, then what is the problem in asking it then and there?
I’m all for good searching. If wolfstu had started a new thread without doing his homework, I’m sure someone would have come in with a link to an older thread - maybe even this one (in other words: no matter how you do it, there’s always someone to disagree, right?). At least in this case, wolfstu is showing us he put some effort in this.
Where did this come from, exactly?
There are no strict guidelines for this. If a resurrection post adds fuel to the discussion, it’s valid. No matter how old the thread is.