ECG, is green font not allowed or can we take political jabs in GQ?

[Idle_Thoughts]

Speaking for myself, I will close zombie threads for a number of different reasons. Many differing factors wager in; stuff like how old the topic is. If someone bumps up a topic, say, from 1999-2005, chances are, I’m going to close it…whether it was a post that added new info or not. I will then leave it to anyone who wants to start a new topic to make one if they wish.

It also depends when I catch a new zombie bumped and what the discussion has been since then. If I catch it right after the first bump, I will probably close it…same if there has been many replies since then but most of them are on par of making zombie jokes.
Now if there has been many replies since the bump and they’ve actually been on topic, then I lean more toward maybe keeping it open.

It also depends on why and what the bump is about. If it is just a “heh, bumped a thread about zombies and made it into a zombie topic”, then I will probably close it… and while I did say above that I also have (and might) close topics even if new info is added (depending on if it’s more than 10 years old), sometimes I don’t have any problem keeping it open if it’s something the OP has really been looking for.

Yet another thing that wages in is the OP of the topic. Are they banned? Are they dead? Has the thing they asked about resolved (like, were they looking for a quick fix on a leak ten years ago? Because chances are they’ve found a solution by now)? Is it about a specific thing that was over long ago? All of these things being a “yes” makes me more apt to close it.

So, basically…yes, there may be inconsistencies when it comes to zombie closures. Although MY reasons for doing it have always been consistent, I don’t expect or think any other mod will close zombies based on my criteria, it’s something I’ve adapted myself, and I really don’t think it’s too much of an important matter that everyone needs to be on the exact same page, strict to the letter about.
I don’t think the reasons I sometimes close a thread for are too unreasonable, but if anyone ever has any issue with me closing a zombie thread, feel free to PM me or make a topic here and I may be persuaded to reopen it.

And as for putting any new rule in the registration agreement or making a new rule in a sticky for it, that’s definitely not needed, at least in my opinion. It’s not too hard to use one’s own judgement when closing zombie threads and most of the common sense the mods will have in doing it will be roughly the same, even if there are some threads that get closed and some that don’t.

[Joey_P]

I guess my issue is that I see you guys [the mods] telling new members to read the rules, but then you close threads for, admittedly, not breaking the rules.

Idle, I don’t see why we should have to persuade you to reopen a thread that was closed only because you saw it before anyone else did. That feels like an abuse of power to me.

Locking threads that people have added more information to, feels like it’s making it harder for more people to come here seeking help. Relevant XKCD.
If someone else comes to this board because their sweat it bleaching their clothes, do you think they’ll start a new thread or see that that one is locked and move on?

I was thrilled when we changed to “zombies are allowed”. It bothers me that so many of them are shut down. I really, truly don’t understand what the problem is with them. I can understand and appreciate the problems with bumping an old (for example) pit thread that many years ago was a heated argument between or about a a few members and all the drama is long gone. But nearly all the other ones, I just don’t see the problem.

[rowrrbazzle]

@Joey_P

We certainly don’t make this place welcoming for new posters. What do you think SisterSmile will think when she comes back to find her thread locked? It was a well thought out post, maybe she could have been a good poster, we might never know.

And she might’ve turned out to be like the Grapeist. We might never know.

If you want new members to join our board, don’t make them jump through hoops. Do you really think they’re going to go out of their way to link to an old thread and start a new one?

Why not? If they won’t just walk through that one small hoop, that’s their choice.

Do you think they’re going to stick around when they come back and find their thread closed?

Why not?

Imagine having a problem with something in your house. You find a message board for it, ask a question, come back a few hours later and see a mod locked the thread and told you that you had too many typos and you put it in the wrong forum. The mod advised you to start a new thread if you want to ask again and please make sure to read all the stickies. Do you…or do you just find another forum to ask on?

The poster got a gentle mod note pointing out exactly what the problems with the post were. She could either fix those problems or move on. Personally, I’d repost in accordance with the mod’s recommendations. What is the big deal here?

You have to admit, this board can be pretty hostile to new members.

No, I don’t have to.

I really don’t understand why you are trying to make a mountain out of a molehill here.

[Loach]

@Joey_P

I guess my issue is that I see you guys [the mods] telling new members to read the rules, but then you close threads for, admittedly, not breaking the rules.

It’s not a matter of breaking rules. There were no warnings given. Some of moderators duties are just housekeeping. In cases like this there is nothing punitive about closing the thread. It’s a judgement call when to close a zombie and when not to. Most of the time it is a self correcting problem and either the thread comes to live again or it drops away. Sometimes it’s better to close it. Yes we are allowed to use our judgement and not follow a rigid checklist of rules about every situation that comes up.

[Drunky_Smurf]

I love this whole, “It’s not against the rules but stop doing what you are doing.” and if the new poster were to do it again they get a warning for not following mod instructions.

[IvoryTowerDenizen]

@Drunky_Smurf

I love this whole, “It’s not against the rules but stop doing what you are doing.” and if the new poster were to do it again they get a warning for not following mod instructions.

There were no mod instructions, just some insight into what people usually do on this board and a suggestion to look around first before breaking what’s typical. Here is the mod note. Not instructions- just a suggestion to prevent any snarky comments by posters.

@engineer_comp_geek

Moderator Action

Welcome to the SDMB, SisterSmile.

The thread you have replied to dates back to 2001, and since the original participants of the thread are no longer active here (for over a decade), I am going to close this. If anyone has an interest in the topic, feel free to start a new thread.

We tend to refer to old threads that have been raised like this as zombies. While we do allow zombies here, we ask that you only raise old threads if you have something new or significant to contribute to the thread.

Also, most people on this board find the use of larger or alternative fonts to be rather annoying. There’s no rule against alternative fonts here, but until you get a feel for the culture here it is probably best to stick to the default font for posts.

Thread closed.

[Archeonomist]

You know, that note explicitly says that the new poster’s post had nothing new or significant to contribute to the thread. It’s not exactly a warm welcome is it?

[FXMastermind]

@Archeonomist

You know, that note explicitly says that the new poster’s post had nothing new or significant to contribute to the thread. It’s not exactly a warm welcome is it?

Compared to the welcome I got, after I asked a simple question, it seems like a group hug.

Hostility is the default response, and you figure it out pretty quick if you ever bother to log in a second time.

Which the vast majority never does.

YMMV of course

[DrDeth]

@Morgenstern

I would support a rule that required a new member to be here for a certain amount of time before being able to bump a zombie thread. 20 years seems about right.

It would cut down on the bump-and-run members.

Who the fuck cares about bumping Zombie threads? Only if they are arguing with someone long gone is it important.

I have no significant issue with either Mod note. meh.