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.

Shout-out to the Moderator who locked the Proper Pronunciation thread.

It was dangerously close to veering out of control in the two days it was bumped and open for polite discussion and obviously the correct and proper thing to do was to wade in and lock it up on a technicality, thereby necessitating doing the whole thread all over again the next time someones asks.

Hip-hip.

Yeah, I kinda agree, although you're not really going about getting it changed in any constructive way with your snark.

It's not really a time sensitive subject and more stupid names are being invented on a weekly basis by GW. As long as we're not covering the same ground over and over with the thread it could probably have stayed open.

While it's true you catch more flies with honey than vinegar, the thread is not going to be reopened regardless and nothing will change.

The mods investigate and clear themselves.

Dakka Forum Rules:

Posts in a topical thread that has been dormant for several weeks ("thread necromancy") will result in the thread being closed.

The thread in question was five years old.

 Excommunicatus wrote:
While it's true you catch more flies with honey than vinegar, the thread is not going to be reopened regardless and nothing will change.

The mods investigate and clear themselves.

There is nothing for the mods to 'clear themselves' of here. This isn't some new, draconian rule that we've pulled out of the ether to enforce our fascist rule. It's been standard board policy for the last 30 years.


If you wanted to start a discussion on whether or not that policy should be reviewed, that would be another matter entirely.... but your OP here would be a perfect example of how not to go about doing that. All you do by being obnoxious about it is increase the chances of your 'nothing will change' claim being a self-fulfilling prophecy. We do change board policy where there is a genuine case presented for doing so and we decide that it would be warranted.

"I don't want to have to repeat something I said five years ago!" is probably not the strongest case you could make in this particular instance, however, since the obvious response would be "Er... then don't?"

 Ghaz wrote:
Dakka Forum Rules:

Posts in a topical thread that has been dormant for several weeks ("thread necromancy") will result in the thread being closed.

The thread in question was five years old.

I've wondered how this relates to P&M Blogs. I have several, and some of them have been dormant for months to years, but if I continue a particular blog, is that thread necromancy, or my right to continue a blog? I guess it depends on the definition of 'topical'?

 Ghaz wrote:
Dakka Forum Rules:

Posts in a topical thread that has been dormant for several weeks ("thread necromancy") will result in the thread being closed.

The thread in question was five years old.

While I get that’s the policy, some threads don’t really go out of fashion and sometimes it makes more sense to dig up an old one rather than starting a new one. In the past I’ve seen painting and modelling threads get locked because someone dug up an old topic even though the information in the thread was just as relevant as ever.

Sometimes it’s better to use discretion rather than follow the rules to the letter, hence why the OP decided to call this thread “Technically Correct; The Best Kind of Correct”, when you’re correct even though it might not actually make the most sense.

Like if it's your progress blog, it's sort of yours. You can continue it or start a new one. All else is up to the mod determining if the question/discussion is still relevant or if the initial poster would likely respond.

If what you want to do is get into an online fight (and really, looking at your past stuff, that's what you are aiming for), yeah they are going to close it.

Huh, how many politics threads could be reopened and closed within an hour? How many angels...

 John Prins wrote:

I've wondered how this relates to P&M Blogs. I have several, and some of them have been dormant for months to years, but if I continue a particular blog, is that thread necromancy, or my right to continue a blog? I guess it depends on the definition of 'topical'?

Yes, it's perfectly acceptable to dig up your old blog. For other P&M threads... We tend to be a little more relaxed about it in the P&M section in general, but it depends on the situation. If you're digging up a five year old thread from a poster who isn't even around any more to ask a question about a color scheme, it's likely to be locked.

The problem with anti-necromancy policies is when moderators lose sight of the fact that banning necromancy is a means to an end, not something to be enforced just for the sake of enforcing a rule. Posting in old threads is a problem when it happens in threads that are no longer relevant (answering a minor rule question from 10 years ago, bumping a news post from an old release, etc) and those threads displace relevant content from the front page. But if the content is still relevant then why does it matter if there's a gap between posts? It seems like far too often a moderator jumps in to shut down discussion because some of the earlier posts are old, even though the topic is still relevant and producing active conversation. And it becomes even more absurd when the moderator posts "no necromancy" as they lock it, often with a suggestion to post a new thread on the topic. So now the locked thread remains on the front page, with a fresh post to bump it all the way to the top and delay its natural exit, and there's potentially a second copy of the thread once someone resumes the conversation. And when enforcement of a rule is so directly opposed to the original goal of the rule it starts to feel like certain moderators just enjoy locking threads and showing off their power.

If necromancy is so awful that it must be stopped at all costs then why not just have threads auto-lock after 30/60/whatever days? Make an exception for the OP to be able to unlock their own thread and the problem is solved. No more bumping, no more flawed moderation keeping dead threads on the front page.

 insaniak wrote:
"I don't want to have to repeat something I said five years ago!" is probably not the strongest case you could make in this particular instance, however, since the obvious response would be "Er... then don't?"

Of course it's a strong case. There are plenty of cases where a person can want their point of view represented in a conversation but that view hasn't changed in a while. Not wanting to have to repost it to the newest instance of the thread because a modeartor needlessly locked the previous one does not necessarily mean that they're apathetic and just want to walk away without having their voice heard. So instead of having a duplicate thread where everyone needs to repost what they said last time the subject came up just keep it all in one thread.

 Peregrine wrote:

If necromancy is so awful that it must be stopped at all costs then why not just have threads auto-lock after 30/60/whatever days?

If necromancy was so awful that it must be stopped at all costs, then we would likely have something like that in place. It's not. You're trying to turn a very minor issue into a big deal again.


There are situations where resurrecting old threads is perfectly acceptable, and for the sake of those it's not worth reprogramming the site for the bare handful of old threads that get bumped and subsequently locked.

Of course it's a strong case. There are plenty of cases where a person can want their point of view represented in a conversation but that view hasn't changed in a while. Not wanting to have to repost it to the newest instance of the thread because a modeartor needlessly locked the previous one does not necessarily mean that they're apathetic and just want to walk away without having their voice heard. So instead of having a duplicate thread where everyone needs to repost what they said last time the subject came up just keep it all in one thread.

Being invested enough in a topic to feel that your opinion absolutely must be heard in every single discussion related to it, while simultaneously being apathetic enough to not want to post that opinion in said discussion sounds exhausting.

 insaniak wrote:
If necromancy was so awful that it must be stopped at all costs, then we would likely have something like that in place. It's not. You're trying to turn a very minor issue into a big deal again.

There are situations where resurrecting old threads is perfectly acceptable, and for the sake of those it's not worth reprogramming the site for the bare handful of old threads that get bumped and subsequently locked.

Then you and I clearly disagree on how often it happens. I routinely see threads that should not be locked get locked for "necromancy", as with the example in the OP. And if it's not worth adding a new feature to the site you could at least change moderation policy to just delete the post reviving the thread and lock it without a "no necromancy" post so that it goes back to the forgotten depths of the site where it belongs.

Being invested enough in a topic to feel that your opinion absolutely must be heard in every single discussion related to it, while simultaneously being apathetic enough to not want to post that opinion in said discussion sounds exhausting.

Again, there is a difference between "I'm too apathetic to post" and "dammit, why do I have to copy/paste my post over from the perfectly good thread that was needlessly locked". Even if you care enough to post it's still absurd to have to do the extra work just because a moderator doesn't understand the concept of discretion and moderating for a purpose rather than mindless rule following.

I have to ask - do you actually expect that constantly insulting the moderators is sooner or later going to result in us suddenly realising that you were right all along?

Or are you just complaining for the sake of it, by this point?

Seriously, this is a perfectly worthwhile issue to discuss, but it's hard to take your opinion seriously when it's so consistently backed up by your insistence that we have no idea what we are doing. We'll likely get a lot further here if you can bring yourself to attempt being civil for a change.

I guess the OP forgot that the vast majority of mods here are an exaggerated reflection of this community that they maintain and grow. So what you have is a bunch of bitter, twisted and petty middle aged men that get very little enjoyment from life apart from the brief show of power they sometimes get to exert on others on this forum, whether through closing threads for nothing, editing users posts or banning users. They are always quick to point out their own infallible state, as we have seen here already ("There is nothing for the mods to 'clear themselves' of here") whenever anyone questions their responses or actions. They are very quick to defend the actions of their fellow mods, regardless of whether they have any real knowledge or context of those actions, because like any good boys club they understand that mutual support is key to the retaining of their position. Finally and most hilariously to me, they are hypocrites. They don't even follow their own rules that they are supposed to be moderating. I have seen mods break the first and foremost of this boards' rules countless times, sometimes so severe that I didn't believe them to be moderators.

Of course this post will be deleted and I will get a ban for daring to speak against the dakka establishment. The problem is I couldn't care less. The actions of the mods are so biased, thoughtless and often petty that I don't see any value in discussing anything on this board anymore. When so many things are censored or removed, a discussion board starts losing purpose. When mods repeatedly act in ways that engender toxic and negative behaviour, the board will continue to be full of toxic and negative behaviour. This forum is almost a celebration of toxicity at times and the mods do nothing to correct it.

If you don't enjoy the rulings of this board, don't participate in it. There are other, better moderated boards discussing 40k, AOS and other wargames where the discussion is largely civil if not pleasant and the moderation is clear cut and defined.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
If you don't enjoy the rulings of this board, don't participate in it.

Why are you here then?

Peregrine wrote:Again, there is a difference between "I'm too apathetic to post" and "dammit, why do I have to copy/paste my post over from the perfectly good thread that was needlessly locked". Even if you care enough to post it's still absurd to have to do the extra work just because a moderator doesn't understand the concept of discretion and moderating for a purpose rather than mindless rule following.

It's just copy and paste. That's far easier to do than having to write in a whole new system into Dakka's code to auto-lock threads, because someone can't be bothered to copy and paste their comment into a new thread.

I think if thread necromancy was lifted, then you could end up with a situation that you actually seem to mention yourself - there'd be no need for a lot of threads, because they've already been discussed before, and new threads would be blocked because of irrelevancy - seeing as there's an older "perfectly good thread" that they should post in instead. If we're taking the optimal route of "as little clutter as possible", then either old threads should be locked and new threads created, or new threads should be locked if there's an older thread that discusses the same thing. Personally, I think keeping older threads dead, to avoid people responding to users who are no longer active, out of date information, and massive 100+page lengths, is better.

If you care that much about your opinion being seen and relevant, you'd copy and paste it.

An Actual Englishman wrote:If you don't enjoy the rulings of this board, don't participate in it. There are other, better moderated boards discussing 40k, AOS and other wargames where the discussion is largely civil if not pleasant and the moderation is clear cut and defined.

Cool. You're still here because...?

 insaniak wrote:

 John Prins wrote:

I've wondered how this relates to P&M Blogs. I have several, and some of them have been dormant for months to years, but if I continue a particular blog, is that thread necromancy, or my right to continue a blog? I guess it depends on the definition of 'topical'?

Yes, it's perfectly acceptable to dig up your old blog. For other P&M threads... We tend to be a little more relaxed about it in the P&M section in general, but it depends on the situation. If you're digging up a five year old thread from a poster who isn't even around any more to ask a question about a color scheme, it's likely to be locked.

I'm glad this got addressed, FWIW, because I too have wondered about resurrecting threads >1 month that weren't topical in nature. I know it's sometimes OK, but obviously 5 years is pretty lol. Anyway that is helpful guidance.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Of course this post will be deleted and I will get a ban for daring to speak against the dakka establishment.

I may have just choked on my tea at reading this.

Calm down, Nelson Mandela Jnr. You don't need to die for anyone's sins yet.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
I guess the OP forgot that the vast majority of mods here are an exaggerated reflection of this community that they maintain and grow. So what you have is a bunch of bitter, twisted and petty middle aged men that get very little enjoyment from life apart from the brief show of power they sometimes get to exert on others on this forum, whether through closing threads for nothing, editing users posts or banning users. They are always quick to point out their own infallible state, as we have seen here already ("There is nothing for the mods to 'clear themselves' of here") whenever anyone questions their responses or actions. They are very quick to defend the actions of their fellow mods, regardless of whether they have any real knowledge or context of those actions, because like any good boys club they understand that mutual support is key to the retaining of their position. Finally and most hilariously to me, they are hypocrites. They don't even follow their own rules that they are supposed to be moderating. I have seen mods break the first and foremost of this boards' rules countless times, sometimes so severe that I didn't believe them to be moderators.

Of course this post will be deleted and I will get a ban for daring to speak against the dakka establishment. The problem is I couldn't care less. The actions of the mods are so biased, thoughtless and often petty that I don't see any value in discussing anything on this board anymore. When so many things are censored or removed, a discussion board starts losing purpose. When mods repeatedly act in ways that engender toxic and negative behaviour, the board will continue to be full of toxic and negative behaviour. This forum is almost a celebration of toxicity at times and the mods do nothing to correct it.

If you don't enjoy the rulings of this board, don't participate in it. There are other, better moderated boards discussing 40k, AOS and other wargames where the discussion is largely civil if not pleasant and the moderation is clear cut and defined.

Something something, glass houses something something stones...

 insaniak wrote:
I have to ask - do you actually expect that constantly insulting the moderators is sooner or later going to result in us suddenly realising that you were right all along?

Or are you just complaining for the sake of it, by this point?

I realize I wasn't asked directly, but I do it because I am a naturally difficult person, have a knee-jerk reaction to illegitimate uses of power in all their forms and because it amuses me when you guys use your own pettiness as a justification to not do your jobs properly - or at all.

Thereby proving my point - and Peregrine's - every time the subject comes up. Your existence depends on the rules, but your conduct undercuts them, fatally, and nullifies your own argument for existence. "Justice must not just be done; it must be manifestly seen to be done".

But hey. You're technically correct. And as every Matt Groening fan knows, that is the best kind of correct. The exact letter of the law is what is important; not the spirit of the thing, or the non-existence of the mischief the rule is designed to obviate.

/Nelson Mandela Jr.

How is justice done by a continuous attack on the moderators? Axe-grinding is not justice (and I should know, considering how prone I am to axe-grinding!).

It isn't and I'm confused as to how you got the impression that's what I meant.

 Excommunicatus wrote:

I realize I wasn't asked directly, but I do it because I am a naturally difficult person, have a knee-jerk reaction to illegitimate uses of power in all their forms and because it amuses me when you guys use your own pettiness as a justification to not do your jobs properly - or at all.

Right. So this thread, to be clear, is you having a meltdown because somebody closed an old thread that had been bumped, something that has been done as a matter of course on a regular basis for the last 30 years, and that is, to you, a completely unacceptable abuse of power?

And we're the petty ones? Seriously?


Again, if you had wanted to start a discussion about the reasons for the threadnomancy rule existing, and whether or not there was a need for the rule, that would have actually been a worthwhile use of everyone's time. This isn't what you did, though. You decided to stick it to the man by standing up on a hill and pissing into the wind. And I'm honestly confused as to what you expected to come from that. Particularly since, if we were actually as petty as you seem to think, the most likely response would have been us quietly showing you the door.

Dakka mods = saintly levels of patience.

They aren't paid enough for this.

Absolutely not. That's you using dismissive and ableist language to avoid the point of your own malfeasance.

Nakedly so.

Double-down on your pettiness, why don't you. Again, the fact that you think "eh, I might help out if you're nice to me" is an acceptable answer is illustrative of the entire problem.

 Excommunicatus wrote:
. Again, the fact that you think "eh, I might help out if you're nice to me" is an acceptable answer is illustrative of the entire problem.

It is, but not in the way that you seem to think.

The fact that you think being polite is optional is the actual problem.


The issue that started this thread was you having a problem with a moderator's decision to follow a standard site procedure exactly as we've been doing for years. The way to resolve that is to discuss it. The way to discuss it is politely. That's not just a rule of the site, it's simple, basic, common courtesy.

Your behaviour affects how people will respond to you. If you want a positive response, insulting people is rarely the answer.

 insaniak wrote:

The fact that you think being polite is optional is the actual problem.

Get that printed on a t shirt, you've underscored everything wrong with the 21st century!

 insaniak wrote:

 Excommunicatus wrote:
. Again, the fact that you think "eh, I might help out if you're nice to me" is an acceptable answer is illustrative of the entire problem.

It is, but not in the way that you seem to think.

The fact that you think being polite is optional is the actual problem.


The issue that started this thread was you having a problem with a moderator's decision to follow a standard site procedure exactly as we've been doing for years. The way to resolve that is to discuss it. The way to discuss it is politely. That's not just a rule of the site, it's simple, basic, common courtesy.

Your behaviour affects how people will respond to you. If you want a positive response, insulting people is rarely the answer.

Asked and answered. See my second post.

Insisting that shining a light on staff over-reach is impolite is a ludicrously naked attempt to cloak yourself and misdirect the point, yet again. Nothing I have said is objectively impolite. It maybe just feels like that 'cause it cuts close to the bone.

Also, this thread was bumped after almost a month of inactivity. Deliberately. It wasn't locked, even though the new post (deliberately) added nothing to the topic. You didn't lock it. You responded. We're still here. So, about following "standard site procedure" which you have "been doing for years" then...

A Technically Correct only becomes a matter of choosing to act on the matter or observe for escalation: it is a judgement call.

Rules and police lead to a "polite" society.

Rules and moderators lead to a "polite" forum / board.

In any kind of structure it is considered silly to take a rude run at the rules enforcers, they see enough bull-pucks during the day and it is a strong effort of self control not to slap down the rude (follow rules, yep, follow the rules).

They also have to lean toward "rules as intended" since for instance, what truly is being respectful and polite?
We all know what that is but the details vary from person to person.
So then you lean on warnings to help point the person in the right direction.

The way I look at it, the board is pretty indulgent in these off-topic discussions that do not further the board's focus.
It is also a "good" sign when some people feel they need a bit more closure (mourning?) for a topic getting locked.
Trying to use the board's own forum to administer "snark" is a fool's game since they are under no obligation to tolerate or humor it.

I tend to like to read the opinions over a controversy, I personally cannot get uptight enough on most matters until people get "impolite".

Well thats a good point with the leaning on warnings thing Talizvar. It has made me think about a question.

Can we please have a reset of all warnings if we dont get any warnings for lets say 1 year or some thing?


Thank you.