Resurrecting old threads
  • PaixGioiaAmorPaixGioiaAmor
    Posts: 1,473
    This sort of goes along with the "editing old posts" thread.

    Does anyone else agree with me that it's bad form and unhelpful to suddenly resurrect a thread from three, or even five or six years ago and just start chiming in? On another forum in which I participate, moderators will lock a thread when that happens and encourage the person to start a new one if they really have something to say on that topic.

    I was surprised when a thread from FIVE YEARS ago showed up that had me saying something negative about my employment situation. Another member, understandably assuming the posts were current said something like "I'll take your job if you're looking to leave!" before realizing how old the thread was.

    Now I don't regret saying what I said. And I don't want to edit it out or change it. As far as I'm concerned, it can be part of the archive and be searchable. But it causes confusion when things are dredged up into the present tense.

    Again, if you read a thread on a topic and feel that there's something on that topic you just have to say, why not start a new, current, and topical discussion, with people who still frequent the forum?
    Thanked by 2M. Jackson Osborn Spriggo
  • bkenney27bkenney27
    Posts: 444
    I always sensed people frowned upon starting a new thread if one exists already which is why I have been digging and asking questions on older threads (though, not 5 years, I don't think!). But when I do, I always note that I am resurrecting it first so everyone knows it's older if they don't pay attention to the dates. But I'm happy to start new ones, too! Whatever we decide is best.
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,451
    Bumping an old thread for renewed relevance (like - a post about a seasonal hymn which now in-season again) makes sense.

    Bumping a 5-year-old thread to add one random comment does not.
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 3,177
    Adding to what BK-XXVII saith:

    To resurrect a thread, in the last week of OT, about Kathy's Advent Calendar of Hymn-tune Introits, I think, would be A-OK; as would resurrecting a thread about the performance of the episemas in 'Tollite hostias' if someone reading has some new insights or relevant questions.

    I think BK's reminders that this is an old thread being resurrected would be good to consider a general policy.

    (Blast! Hit 'post' too late!)
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,934
    I wouldn't mind if threads of a certain age - say 2 years, 3 years, some arbitrary number - were completely deleted. Situations have changed, and much of the content may no longer be relevant. After all, this is a forum not an archive.
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,451
    were completely deleted

    Under no circumstance.

    this is a forum not an archive

    it is both

    You would not believe how many Google searches turn up results here.

    We have years of accumulated knowledge, wisdom, advice, culture, humor...

    I go back looking for old things I barely remember all the time.
    "What was that song... I know I read about it on the Forum a few years ago..."

    When we look back 100 years, or 200 years, it's amazing to me how little we know about what was going on, what really happened.

    This site, and millions more like it, are preserving a record of what was happening at this time to real people engaged in meaningful work.
    Thanked by 4gregp eft94530 GregoryWeber michael_in_MI
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 3,177
    Deleting threads might remove from CMAA valuable contributions to the thinking of Church music in general, and remove valuable resources (i.e. discussion about hymns, compositions, etc.). I would suggest closing these threads to future comments after say two or three years. If a topic seems perennially relevant, say a thread giving a new composition for Christmas, it should be open to allow 'bumping' or for the OP to post a new version.

    (I will again hit the 'post' button too late, sorry Adam.)
    Thanked by 3Adam Wood Andrew Motyka CHGiffen
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,451
    If you want to get your post count up, you have to TYPE FASTER!
    Thanked by 3bkenney27 Blaise Casavant Organist
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,934
    If you want to get your post count up, you have to TYPE FASTER!


    Some of you folks need to get meaningful lives, or at least work. LOL.

    The forum "archives" can be useful depending on your application. For someone doing research they could have a use. Much that is there is opinion, which may not be so helpful. It depends. There could be some selective editing of older content to separate the wheat from the chaff.
  • ronkrisman
    Posts: 1,388
    Chaff on Forum?

    Is outrage! (purple bold)
    Thanked by 7Andrew Motyka Adam Wood matthewj melofluent CharlesW CHGiffen bkenney27
  • Andrew Motyka
    Posts: 944
    Chaff on Forum?

    Is outrage! (purple bold)


    This is even funnier because you didn't know how to make the purple bold. Neither do I, and I'm doing it your way from now on.
  • WJA
    Posts: 237
    Chaff on Forum?
    Is outrage! (purple bold)

    This is even funnier because you didn't know how to make the purple bold. Neither do I, and I'm doing it your way from now on.


    To make text bold, put it between these tags: <b> text </b>.

    To make text purple, put it between these tags: <font color=purple> text </font>.

    To make text purple and bold, put it between both of these tags: <b> <font color=purple> text </font> </b>.
  • matthewjmatthewj
    Posts: 2,694
    I think its far more funny to put (purple bold) next to the comment.

    I propose making this our new joke.
    Thanked by 5gregp francis veromary eft94530 Casavant Organist
  • WJA
    Posts: 237
    I think its far more funny to put (purple bold) next to the comment.
    I propose making this our new joke.

    I suppose. It's kind of meta, though. Actually, using purple text was kind of meta, so (purple) would be meta-meta.
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 3,177
    If you want to get your post count up, you have to TYPE FASTER!


    453 POSTS! By the way, how do you feel about the music of Alexander Peloquin?
    Thanked by 3Kathy ryand Ally
  • matthewjmatthewj
    Posts: 2,694
    Dated.
    Thanked by 2Adam Wood Spriggo
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 3,177
    Intentionally Passe.
    Thanked by 1Adam Wood
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,451
    I am so glad that just happened.
    Thanked by 1Ben
  • BenBen
    Posts: 3,114
    So am I. (purple bold)
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 3,177
    Thread drift after six posts - that must be a new record!
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,451
    Meta-threads are especially prone. We should delete all meta-threads. I mean, what's a meta- for anyway?
    Thanked by 1Salieri
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    Meta meta bo beta banana fana mo bettah (that one for Kathy {purple bold|)-fee fie fo feta:
    META!

    Double parentheses, even! And cheese for the Greeks.
    I don't feel anything, not even my toes!
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,500
    It's nice how y'all refer to me in this old, bold, purple thread! Cheerio, fellow forum folks!
  • ClergetKubiszClergetKubisz
    Posts: 1,912
    Because also when someone starts a thread about something that has already been discussed, they tend to get a lot of "search this thread" and "we did that five years ago, look it up yourself."
    Thanked by 2bkenney27 eft94530
  • BenBen
    Posts: 3,114
    I can't wait for the irony of this thread being dug up in 2015. I will make sure to do it myself.
    Thanked by 2Blaise eft94530
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,451
    Set a timer.
    Thanked by 1Ben
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    You are all full of hot air. (bolded purple in italics, capitalized, underlined and struck through)
    Thanked by 1veromary
  • BenBen
    Posts: 3,114
    Happy new year.

    Also, bump.
    Thanked by 6Kathy eft94530 MarkThompson Adam Wood bonniebede Casavant Organist
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    hmmm... seems it is STILL just hot air... time hasn't changed a thing. I vote that we keep ALL threads for archival reasons. This one is proof!
  • bhcordovabhcordova
    Posts: 1,152
    On the forum that where I am a co-administrator and a moderator, we have old topics resurrected all the time. We also have new topics started that are similar to topics that were just started a few days before. No biggie.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    yea, there's no controlling the wild wild west
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 3,177
    I can't wait for the irony of this thread being dug up in 2015

    Bump.
  • Scott_WScott_W
    Posts: 468
    My necromancy contribution (mild language warning):

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rxv_dkf-JFw
  • ghmus7
    Posts: 1,465
    Well i think old threads get worn outbut i don't want to get tied up n the issue....i mean it would just be sew typical...
    Thanked by 2M. Jackson Osborn CHGiffen
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,368
    Yes, Greg, and there seem to be some sew and sews who just love to drag up threadbare old threads. Then again, certain threads may have a bespoke substance to them and have some timelessness and quality to commend them; but most of them, as you say, are sew worn out.
  • StimsonInRehabStimsonInRehab
    Posts: 1,916
    "I believe in the resurrection of the thread . . ."
    Thanked by 4ClergetKubisz eft94530 CHGiffen igneus
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,945
    But what about the undead?
  • CeciliaJulia
    Posts: 52
    Five years!!
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    Congrats to threads that are still here, and posters who put them on the forum!
Add a Comment