Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Hello All,

So, the official rules read, in part:

Yakface wrote:Because of this, users are asked to refrain from posting in threads that have been dormant (haven't had any posts) for more than 3-4 weeks if the thread contains topical information at all. Topical information would include things like news, rumors, current events, and any discussion based on rules which are now obsolete (like outdated codices, for example). The only time it would be okay to post in one of these dormant threads would be to add vital new or missing information to the existing conversation.

What is the arbiter for that consists of? For example, we have a thread for when Hostess declared bankruptcy from November, with the last response being just under 90 days ago. Would an update that Wonder Bread has been bought be considered "vital new information"? What about hypothetically, Twinkies themselves?

Mind you, I'm not super concerned with either Twinkies (which I will not eat) or Wonder Bread (which I do not eat), but using these as an example because I've long wondered about the meaning of that last phrase there. Is the emphasis on non-painting threads always going to be on new thread creation vs appending?

Thanks!

It could go either way in this case.

It's a topical thread, so anyone seeing it for the first time is going to be reading about news from a while ago (which isn't optimal).

But this is new pertinent info, so saying: 'sorry for the necro, but there is a new development in this story...' would probably be fine.

Thanks a lot, I've always wondered about that!

On a related note as an OP is it ok to add to ones own thread - say from a hobbying/modelling POV - not a blog per se.

What about other threads? Does being the OP over-ride the necro rule?

 Ratius wrote:
On a related note as an OP is it ok to add to ones own thread - say from a hobbying/modelling POV - not a blog per se.

What about other threads? Does being the OP over-ride the necro rule?

Again the point of not allowing thread necromancy is because it confuses people when you update an old thread that contains information that is now out of date...such as bringing back a discussion about the Eldar Codex from several editions ago. Anyone new to the thread likely won't catch initially that the thread is so old, so will think the conversation is just bonkers.

Painting and Modeling threads tend to not contain topical information, so there is no issue with posting in them even if they've been dormant for months or even years...although just posting a question, for example, in a painting and modeling thread wouldn't be cool if the person hasn't posted in years.

But yeah, as the OP in a painting and modeling thread of yours...you can add a post no matter how long its been.


However, some users don't understand the concept behind the thread necromancy rules and they'll notify a moderator improperly and the moderators will sometimes just lock threads for necromancy that don't really deserve it. Feel free to PM me or the mod that locked the thread in those cases to explain why you think it should be an exception.

Thank you
Noted.

 yakface wrote:
[However, some users don't understand the concept behind the thread necromancy rules and they'll notify a moderator improperly and the moderators will sometimes just lock threads for necromancy that don't really deserve it. Feel free to PM me or the mod that locked the thread in those cases to explain why you think it should be an exception.

OK - I've got a follow up question on this topic on my calendar for March 2nd, 2018, so we'll talk about this some more then.