Old threads being responded to

Maybe the people complaining about old threads being revived don't want people to look at their old contentious, community standards violating posts.

Or maybe they're just tired of seeing people continue to try and fan a flame that has been put out.

Or maybe they're just hoping most people have enough sense not to take necroposted threads as current events.

Or maybe they're just wondering why some folks prefer living in the past to the present.

So many possibilities. I suppose it depends on where your head's at and how much you're willing to assume about others, doesn't it?

You ain't put out that flame yet, Missy!

coco

Or maybe some of us just like interesting things to read.

And, because Cienna is trying to be provacative in a positive way. perhaps we should follow suit, yes?

I would assume people are just irritated to see forum ettiquette breached. Even on forums with much, much more relaxed standards and rules than Second Life's, necroposting is widely frowned upon.

In any case, it wouldn't matter even if someone bumped a thread in which, say, Alty McAltson had threatened me with physical violence, insinuated that I have sexual relations with amphibious creatures and declared that I have the mental capacity of a pair of turnips. Since the posts were made under the rules of the time they were posted, any newly-discovered abuse can only be punished with the old rules, not the new.

I wonder if Linden Lab has a statute of limitations for its abuse program.

It would be oh-so more satisfying if lightning struck every time LL disproves of someone.

It has occurred to me that it might be more conducive to useful discourse about a subject in an old post if an entirely new thread were started ... instead of just bringing forward an old one.

So much to read thru and try to fit into current situation with old threads surfacing.

I'd read (and perhaps contribute to) a thread that began: "I know this has been discussed in the past, but I'd like a fresh eye on it ..." Or "I know we've talked about this before, but Im wondering if anyone had any new viewpoints to share ...".

Certainly things change and it might be time well spent to reconsider ideas that have been discussed in the past, particularly if there is new information or circumstance to bring to bear.

Jim, you hit it right on the nail. That's EXACTLY why folks don't like the necroposting.

edit:

And sure, anyone can ascribe any motivation to not supporting gravedigging, but a simple examination of logical reality is all that is necessary to deflate such claims.

The upside of the necroposting is that many of those threads will start a fresh batch of drama, resulting in the locking of same threads, and then they will be allowed to rest in peace.

Sorry, there's a pretty big difference between the flames of which I speak and the gas of which you do.

The bringing up of old threads is very disrupting. Forums are time-consuming enough without reading through three pages of something, only to discover that it's 8 months old.

Then - where people HAVE responded - if you want to catch that, you have to determine at which point the thread left off some months ago and started up again, say, yesterday. It's not worth it.

This sort of thing clutters the entire process, and makes me look at the page suspiciously, and tend to just decide to skip most of it for a few days, including all of it that appears to be old, figuring that in a few days that will clear out.

And Jeffrey - what's one person's positive is another person's negative. I feel what I push for is VERY positive - fewer personal attacks, for one thing.

And by the way, I don't believe that rule is a new one; it has just been unenforced in the past and continues to be unenforced in the present, day after day after day after day.

Forums where anyone can speak with dignity is, I believe, a positive thing to want.

Getting rid of the rule that bans anyone from the game because they have been banned from the forums is another positive thing to suggest. Having lived under both forms in TSO, I speak from experience.

All those things are positive. Equal opportunity for everyone to speak with dignity, a crack-down on personal attacks, and a lifting of the rule that overreaches in punishment and oppresses free speech, and I mean free speech even within the context of TOS rules.

Cienna's ideas, on the other hand, I find extremely non-positive, and largely formulated to elicit a negative response, both now and in the past (when it was decidedly worse). This is why I don't respond to the vast majority of them.

coco

Considering I have not submitted any ideas for consideration outside a proposal for supporting PDF files in SL, I'd be very curious as to what you imagine otherwise.

OK, a division is apparently needed, then. Ideas - such as what you just mentioned, versus commentary. I haven't found fault with any of your pragmatic ideas.

coco

Why do those two paragraphs seem conflicting to me? Not that I am saying either one is more correct than the other - it just seems that sometime we don't see our own hypocrisy and I find that to be a common issue in these forums.

edit : ty for the HTML help Escort x

Well ya know, you haven't been the target of it. That's the difference. I'm talking about personal attacks.

coco

no only is there necroposting, but there necrohijacking where people air an old dead topic in a new thread and hijack the thread.

like this... bold







...ok you need [ b ] [ / b ] tags without the spaces

x

edit: no not html but bb tags... (pedant I am)

Which is why you have my respect between going off on tangents.

To be fair, the problem is not the ideas being presented. It's how they are presented. I've said this personally for a while, and since Cienna recently used it as the crux of an argument, it bears repeating.


--------

There are really three main problems with the forums: ego, ego, and ego. Some people take extreme umbrage when their ideas are attacked and take it very, very personally. I say to that, "these things should be taken with a grain of salt." And I find, in general, the people who do best here are those that know how to divide arguments from individuals.



Without discussing different posting styles, the easiest answer to this is:
What's the best way to present an argument clearly and best for furthering ideas?


Avoid:

Necroposting isn't the way to do it, especially when one person (blaze) is doing most of it for kicks.

Yelling about it in three-page-long diatribes is not a way to do it. This buries relevant points under streams of "omg noes." Many posters also have trouble breaking their lengthy ideas with simple whitespace as needed.

And being generally smarmy and flippant just to be ugly isn't the way to do it, either. One poster in particular very nearly became my first ignore for this reason.



Instead:

Present ideas clearly and with appropriate emphasis and details.

Leave egos at the door.

Research topics before posting.

Let ideas stand by themselves.



It's really that simple, but so rarely adhered to.

Why thank you, Jeffrey!

While I agree with much of what you said, I don't believe ego to be the main problem with these forums. In fact, I think just staying on the forums for a number of people indicates a great deal of ego - in the good sense of an integrated personality and the ability to withstand continued assault, on your ideas and your character.

If the last part would just disappear, if we could all discuss ideas only, and leave character out of it, that would be a whole different can of beans.

coco

one thing i have noticed over the few years of watching forum/news discussions is that the fastest way to kill a thread is... don't reply

mind you this was entertaining reading and much better than the current tv soaps.

Mmmm ...

I'm going to reply to this thread in 1 year.

There's a fine line between courage and egocentrism. The latter being the problem.



Rise from your grave!

Well, I think the problem is too many personal attacks.

coco

And the point of origin of personal attacks is largely.... ego.

Personally, I think the chicken came before the egg.

OK - but by the same reasoning, if you take away most of the personal attacks, the ego that remains won't matter! Right?

coco