# Resurrected Threads **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 2, 2003, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resurrected-threads/165956 "2003-04-02T14:32:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Mockingbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c68b51/32.png) [@Mockingbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mockingbird)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2003, 8:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resurrected-threads/165956/21 "2003-04-03T08:04:23Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Diane \* > \*\*Yeah, you guys are about as funny as chapped buttholes. 😉 \*\* No one could be as funny as _you_, Diane. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![DarrenS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/977dab/32.png) [@DarrenS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DarrenS)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2003, 8:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resurrected-threads/165956/22 "2003-04-03T08:30:29Z")
Someone resurrected one in GQ about critical masses and fission from **1999** 
sheesh, in those days our biggest worry was the Y2K problem, and when the dot-com bubble would burst. ---
**Author:** ![ultress](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/7c8e57/32.png) [@ultress](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ultress)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2003, 8:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resurrected-threads/165956/23 "2003-04-03T08:43:33Z")
The thing is, this is a Pit thread, and the ones resurrecting the old threads probably won’t come in the Pit. Which might not be a bad idea since we seem to already have an overload of “I just gotta post in the PIT to be somebody” posters who think they are really cute when in reality they come across as not too bright. _Sigh_ Pitizens on Patrol. ---
**Author:** ![iampunha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/74df32/32.png) [@iampunha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iampunha)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2003, 8:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resurrected-threads/165956/24 "2003-04-03T08:55:01Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by THespos \* > (At least until the noobs stop playing Reanimator, anyway
) That gave me the munchies
 ---
**Author:** ![Seamonkey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ba9def/32.png) [@Seamonkey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Seamonkey)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2003, 9:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resurrected-threads/165956/25 "2003-04-03T09:28:55Z")
Yeah, but you have to look at it from a newbie standpoint. I can’t tell you how many threads I open that are interesting to me and 3 posts down someone says, “Didn’t we already talk about this X months ago?” I’m almost afraid to start a post because I fear it’s already been done, and that seems almost like a crime around here! Why don’t they archive threads that are more than a month or two old? P.S. Be nice, I’m new and ignorant. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2003, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resurrected-threads/165956/26 "2003-04-03T14:00:38Z")
Chapped buttholes
heh heh heh
 Daniel ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2003, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resurrected-threads/165956/27 "2003-04-03T14:14:33Z")
I think maybe there should be an automatic thread-locking mechanism - 2 months of inactivity or summat. Then again, vBulletin might not be able to do this. ---
**Author:** ![Sock\_Munkey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Sock\_Munkey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sock_Munkey)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2003, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resurrected-threads/165956/28 "2003-04-03T16:39:21Z")
I have mixed feelings about thread resurrection, on the one hand it does simplify things in the sense that you have the previous posts right there as a reference and it’s one less new thread taking up space, but on the other hand
 Ah crap, why does thread resurrection suck so much aside from seeming really lame? ---
**Author:** ![Kantalooppi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/a5b964/32.png) [@Kantalooppi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kantalooppi)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2003, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resurrected-threads/165956/29 "2003-04-03T18:38:45Z")
I’ve never been particularily bothered by thread resurrection. I can usually figure a thread’s been resurrected soon enough, and it’s actually kind of nice to read an old thread once again. Of course, some threads would have better been left to die. Also, **Seamonkey** has a point. I imagine it’s rather frustrating to start a new thread and have some established poster tell you basically what boils down to “Foolish n00b!!! We discussed this [here](http://www.isthisafakelink?.yep), [here](http://www.isthisalsoafakelink?.yep) and [here](http://www.isthisafakelinktoo?.yep)! And [here!](http://www.isthisalsoafakelinktoo?.yep) And we’ve talked about everything else you can imagine, so stop bothering us!” ---
**Author:** ![Diane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/2acd7d/32.png) [@Diane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diane)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2003, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resurrected-threads/165956/30 "2003-04-03T19:57:15Z")
> [@](#): > > I imagine it’s rather frustrating to start a new thread and have some established poster tell you basically what boils down to “Foolish n00b!!! We discussed this here, here and here! And here! And we’ve talked about everything else you can imagine, so stop bothering us!” It usually isn’t difficult to look on the first two pages to see if a topic is currently being discussed and then add your the cents. If you do a search and find an ancient thread that has fallen off the page months or even years ago and feel a burning need to add your own comment or ask a question, why resurrect the entire thing? Wouldn’t it be just as easy to prevent the deja vu to just say _"A while back in **this thread** , someone posted . . . . Here are my thoughts on the subject . . . "_. The exception is a thread like NurseCarmen’s snowmobile thread where the OP came back to give an update. I see nothing wrong with that. It’s just all of the thread bumpings that are reopened with benign comments that is causing me to go freakin’ psycho. ---
**Author:** ![Skeezix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/839c29/32.png) [@Skeezix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skeezix)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2003, 7:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resurrected-threads/165956/31 "2003-04-04T07:23:30Z")
Not too terribly long ago, one Mod or another (I can’t find the bloody thread, and I think this subject, thread resurrection, was a hijacking of the OP, anyway) suggested a “no post” period of six months. Meaning, if the thread’s been inactive for six months or more, it’s preferred that you do just what **Diane** suggested, a new thread with a link to the old one. [sub]I may have the time period wrong, but six months is sticking in my head for some reason.[/sub] ---
**Author:** ![istara](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e79b87/32.png) [@istara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/istara)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2003, 7:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resurrected-threads/165956/32 "2003-04-04T07:34:20Z")
It would make sense if old threads were auto-locked. In my experience most of the thread bumping I’ve seen (and the one or two I may have bumped) has been done accidentally, by someone following a link to that thread in a another thread, getting caught up reading it, and not noticing the date. I know it should be really, really obvious to “check the date!” but I think as the majority of stuff we read here is the current threads, a lot of people probably get out of the habit of noticing the date, if they were ever in the habit. I am all in favour of the suggestion in the OP, I just don’t think that people _aren’t_ doing that, so much as bumping by accident. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2003, 7:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resurrected-threads/165956/33 "2003-04-04T07:34:44Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by jjimm \* > \*\*I think maybe there should be an automatic thread-locking mechanism - 2 months of inactivity or summat. Then again, vBulletin might not be able to do this. \*\* I suppose it could be done by hand (they’d need to temporarily deputize some Junior Mods to handle all umpteen thousand existing threads stuff, of course), but does locking a thread, even without comment, automatically bump it? What a nightmare that would be. ---
**Author:** ![Zenster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/cdc98d/32.png) [@Zenster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zenster)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2003, 7:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resurrected-threads/165956/34 "2003-04-04T07:55:02Z")
Count me as one poster who opposes auto-locking of threads. The Ultimate Recipe Thread is a fine example of why. Such compendiums take a long time to assemble and scattering so much information throughout several threads would be more than inconvenient. I know that this represents an exception to most of the cases being cited but I feel it is important. Other than that, I just wanted to say how **NurseCarmen** ’s post cracked me right up. ---
**Author:** ![brianmelendez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/65b543/32.png) [@brianmelendez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brianmelendez)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2003, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resurrected-threads/165956/35 "2003-04-12T21:01:47Z")
The glut of resurrected threads in GQ today has inspired me into resurrecting this one. Today is like the day of the living dead threads: Thread: [Is it true that nothing is random?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=167344) Last Post Before Today: 03-05-2003 Resurrected by: **cletus** Okay, five weeks and change. Hardly worth mentioning. How about ten months?: Thread: [Stuart Claimants to the UK throne](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=118589) Last Post Before Today: 06-07-2002 Resurrected by: **BrainGlutton** Or _years_?: Thread: [What causes that “Wet Dog” smell?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=100744) Last Post Before Today: 11-24-2001 Resurrected by: **Jinx** Thread: [Origins of current catchphrases](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=74418) Last Post Before Today: 06-24-2001 Resurrected by: **Jomo Mojo** (OP) Thread: [Royal Pretenders](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=40080) Last Post Before Today: 09-29-2000 Resurrected by: **BrainGlutton** WTH? ---
**Author:** ![Ice\_Wolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/dfb087/32.png) [@Ice\_Wolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ice_Wolf)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2003, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resurrected-threads/165956/36 "2003-04-12T21:16:46Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Skeezix \* > \*\*Not too terribly long ago, one Mod or another (I can’t find the bloody thread, and I think this subject, thread resurrection, was a hijacking of the OP, anyway) suggested a “no post” period of six months. > > Meaning, if the thread’s been inactive for six months or more, it’s preferred that you do just what **Diane** suggested, a new thread with a link to the old one. > > [sub]I may have the time period wrong, but six months is sticking in my head for some reason.[/sub] \*\* According to the [guidelines in ATMB:](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=106617) > [@](#): > > Start a new thread with a link to the old thread. A general guideline for “old” would be a thread older than three months. Are the FAQs that easy to read? Okay, veterans know to go there and consult – or, as I just did, bring up a quoted passage to counter a statement. But are they user-friendly as far as new members are concerned? And yes, resurrections are annoying. The occasional one due to error – hey, mistakes happen. But serial resurrections 
 _shudder_ ---
**Author:** ![js\_africanus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/87869e/32.png) [@js\_africanus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/js_africanus)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2003, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resurrected-threads/165956/37 "2003-04-13T03:04:25Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Diane \* > \*\*Goddamn people, how many times to I have to open a thread and get a sense of deja vu only to see the OP was posted months ago? :dubious: \*\* If Jacques Barzun is right, you may want to use “_dĂ©jĂ  vu_” instead of “deja vu” to indicate the original French meaning of “tedious familiarity” as opposed to the Americanized meaning of “illusory feeling that the current situation (moment) has been experienced before”. Alternatively, you could use _dĂ©jĂ  lu_ which means “the feeling that one has already read the present passage, or one very similar, before”. Re: the point of this thread, is it okay if the thread in question is short? ---
**Author:** ![CanvasShoes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/74df32/32.png) [@CanvasShoes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CanvasShoes)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2003, 6:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resurrected-threads/165956/38 "2003-04-13T06:25:37Z")
Okay, I know a couple of reasons why newbies resurrect old threads. A.) Someone has posted a link to an old thread in a new thread and the newbie finds something interesting in the old thread he/she would like to post a response to, which he/she then does, spontaneously before checking the date. B.) Newbies have been bitched out so many times about “Why are you starting a NEW thread about this, SHEESH!!! Search the Archives, there are lots of OLD threads about this, add your comments to one of those!!” ---
**Author:** ![Skeezix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/839c29/32.png) [@Skeezix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skeezix)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2003, 7:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resurrected-threads/165956/39 "2003-04-13T07:26:44Z")
Okay, so it was five months ago. That’s _close_ to “not too terribly long ago,” isn’t it? Didn’t know it’d been added to the guidelines. [sub]I could have sworn it was more recent than that. This whole “passage of time accelerating with age” thing sucks, I wanna tellya.[/sub] **CanvasShoes** has two important points, there. **A** is generally an honest mistake, and it’s _gonna_ happen from time to time. **B** is fairly common, of late, or I’m just noticing it more often, recently. Couldn’t say how much of a factor it really is, though. **Ice Wolf** said: > [@](#): > > **Are the FAQs that easy to read? Okay, veterans know to go there and consult
** That’s the rub, right there. I lurked and read, on and off, for close to six months before I decided I had something to say, and had already read through the various FAQs and sticky threads because of the length of time involved. A fair few newer posters either don’t feel the need to lurk that long, or (this is usually a GD phenomenon) the post they want to respond to pushes their “hot button” and they rush through registration and get right to posting, without the time for a little recon of the boards. Other than the odd RTFM post, with appropriate links for their benefit, waddawe gonna do? (It crossed my mind to wonder about adding a three or four question form to the registration process, about relevant aspects of the SDMB, but somehow, I’m seeing “Excedrin Headache #73” writ large all over this.) ---
**Author:** ![brianmelendez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/65b543/32.png) [@brianmelendez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brianmelendez)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2003, 9:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resurrected-threads/165956/40 "2003-04-13T09:58:48Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Ice Wolf \* > \*\*And yes, resurrections are annoying. The occasional one due to error – hey, mistakes happen. But serial resurrections 
 _shudder_ \*\* Okay, this one is getting a little weird: Thread: [RIAA vs. KaZaa w/ Proxy](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3276096#post3276096) Last Post Before Resurrection: 01-23-2003 Resurrected by: **cletus** Thread: [Can fans save a cancelled TV show?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3274236#post3274236) Last Post Before Resurrection: 02-07-2003 Resurrected by: **cletus** Thread: [Debt collectors](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3275893#post3275893) Last Post Before Resurrection: 03-04-2003 Resurrected by: **cletus** Thread: [Peeing after sex](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3275847#post3275847) Last Post Before Resurrection: 03-04-2003 Resurrected by: **cletus** Thread: [Are black kids burning CD’s?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3270172#post3270172) Last Post Before Resurrection: 03-05-2003 Resurrected by: **cletus** Thread: [Is it true that nothing is random?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3272198#post3272198) Last Post Before Resurrection: 03-05-2003 Resurrected by: **cletus** Thread: [removing uninstalled programmes in XP](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3273842) Last Post Before Resurrection: 03-05-2003 Resurrected by: **cletus** Thread: [What do senators talk about during a filibuster?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3267360#post3267360) Last Post Before Resurrection: 03-06-2003 Resurrected by: **cletus** Thread: [Wow, too much bandwidth! What to do?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3267503#post3267503) Last Post Before Resurrection: 03-13-2003 Resurrected by: **cletus** Thread: [Cover songs that are better than the originals](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3267460#post3267460) Last Post Before Resurrection: 03-21-2003 Resurrected by: **cletus** All these resurrected threads were less than six months old, so no big deal. But **cletus** just joined last week, his post count is _20_, and practically half those posts are threads resurrected from a month or more before he joined. Nearly a third of his posts are resurrecting threads from the same three-day window in March. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resurrected-threads/165956.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resurrected-threads/165956.md?page=3)