When is it OK to bump an old thread?

[Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus]

Assuming it hasn’t been closed of course, and assuming that you’ve read through it and have something new to add to it? I’m talking about years-old threads.

[clayton_e]

Disclaimer: IANAM (I Am Not A Mod)

But I believe it’s acceptable to start a new thread with a title regarding the new information and post a link to the old thread inside the thread for very old thread responses.

ONLY MY OWN OPINION, I MAY BE WRONG.

[Arnold_Winkelried]

FAQ - guidelines for posting at the SDMB

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:
[list=A][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.[/list=A][/li]When you bump your thread, it is preferrable to include additional information relevant to the original post, which may help encourage posters to respond.

What if I want to continue / add to the discussion on a topic that was mentioned in an old thread?

Start a new thread with a link to the old thread. A general guideline for “old” would be a thread older than three months.

[SC_Wolf]

It’s no good on this message board, as we have no “delete post” option, but on other message boards that let you delete your own posts, you can perform what I like to call a “stealth bump”. Add your bump to the thread, then imediately delete the bump. Many message boards don’t move a post up or back when you edit/delete, so you get the effect of a bump, while keeping the signal to noise ratio in the thread low.

[SmackFu]

Like this truly ancient one?