Please be cautious about resurrecting old threads (that is, posting to a thread where the prior post was many months or years ago.) These are called “zombie” threads, and we are uncomfortable about them for a number of reasons, including(but not limited to) that such threads:[ul]
[li]Might open old wounds. If there were hard feelings and high emotions long ago, and they’ve been quieted down, why stir them up again?[/li][li]Revisit issues long dead (e.g., some rant by a poster who has since been banned or left)[/li][li]Can be unfair. The people who posted long ago may not be around to respond to your comments, or may have forgot that they even posted there.[/li][li]Can cause confusion (e.g., some public/newsworthy event that happened long ago but seeing an old thread title might imply it was new or recurring – a thread from Sept 2001 titled, “NYC attacked!” for instance.) [/li][li]Really old threads don’t show the names of posters. They got dropped when we migrated to VB, we didn’t know why then and we still don’t, but it’s pretty much irrelevant now.[/li][/ul]
So, rather than post to an old thread, you might want to start a new thread with a link to the prior discussion, and some comments in your opening post explaining what that old thread was about.
Now, with that as overview, there is a difference in approach in the different forums.
-
In Comments on Cecil’s Columns, Comments on Staff Reports, Games Room, General Questions, and Straight Dope Chicago: We’re less concerned about resurrected threads. The reasons we dislike zombie threads don’t usually apply. We’ll generally leave such threads open, unless there is some compelling reason for taking moderator action,
-
In the other forums, and especially the Pit: moderators may choose to leave the thread open or to close it. Frankly, if it’s a long thread and the mod doesn’t want to read all the way through to see if whether there are problems, the mod will probably think it’s better to err on the side of closing.
(Note that “thank you for answering my question” is just plain good manners, and acceptable. However, reviving an old thread just to say “I agree” is considered bad form. If you’re going to resurrect an old discussion, at least add some value.)
Bumping your own thread
If you start a thread, and after a while think you would like more comments on it, you may be tempted to “bump” the thread by adding a post to make the thread reappear back at the top of the forum list. We strongly discourage this practice, but since the boards are so busy sometimes a single “bump” will bring about good results.
Our guidelines:[ul]
[li]Wait until a suitable time has elapsed (at least, until your thread is no longer visible on the first page of the forum)[/li][li]Bump your thread only once[/li][li]Do not make a habit of always bumping each of your threads[/li][li]When you bump your own thread, it is preferrable to include additional information relevant to the original post, which may encourage others to respond[/li][li]Posting a thank you to those who responded to your question is not considered a “bump”[/li][/ul] Generally, we prefer you start a new thread with a link to the old thread. Often, an old thread includes statements from posters who are no longer members, and so cannot reply. It’s therefore “unfair” to re-open old discussions; such practice is usually called a “zombie thread.” (A general guideline for “old” would be a thread older than three months.) However, the rules on reviving old threads are different for the different forums. In General Questions, Comments on Cecil’s Columns, Comments on Staff Reports, and Cafe Society, it is acceptable to revive an old thread if you have some substantive comment to add.