![]() |
Why is it illegal to post on a thread that is more than a month old?
I was recently given a warning for this. It seems like a pretty stupid issue, especially since it's a pain to start new threads and have people comment on them when there's a perfectly good old thread. Why is it illegal?
Another question: What will happen to me if I accidentally do it again? |
It's frustrating. Old topics are old for a reason, and that's generally because the topic has gotten stale and/or has been dropped. In most sections you're perfectly free to make a duplicate of the old thread (so long as it really is dead) if you really feel the need to post about it.
Basically: It's a rule that has always been there and probably won't change, and as long as you're aware of yourself you won't break it again. |
Before that, I had never deliberately checked the dates on any of the posts. It's kind of paranoia-inducing, but I'll try.
I'm still struggling to truly understand it. Maybe it's an issue that only arises over the scope of thousands of threads. I know that on Facebook discussion boards, with which I have more experience, posting on old topics is welcomed and new versions of old ones are almost never created. |
Regarding the second part of your question, don't do it and you'll never have to find out. But I'd imagine that you would receive a 2-point infraction as you've already been warned and depending on your past infraction history possibly temporarily banned.
Quote:
Another thing is that it's easier to find the discussion you want if it's active and if it isn't active, you can make it yourself. You don't have to go digging through the forums for stuff. |
Also, often the information in those threads are old and outdated. For example, say you post in a thread where they're discussing something related to Black and White, but it was created before the English names were revealed. People would be reading that, confused as to what the names are, because the thread is so old and no one posted in it. There's also the issue of people posting the same thing twice in a thread; if they posted once in a thread 6 months ago, I doubt they're going to remember that they did and will post again.
I've actually never been on a forum where this wasn't a rule...but tbh I don't understand why the forum doesn't auto-lock anything older than a month old that's not stickied. I never understood that on any forum xD; |
If you feel that reviving the thread woul stir up a meaningful conversation, you could always make a new thread on the topic.
|
Quote:
|
because they don't want old threads to come back after they been talked about heaps and there is no more to talk about
|
Also, all boards where the month rule apply have the "only show threads from the last month" default setting, so you actually have to go actively looking for old threads. If you simply look at the main thread index in every forum, you should be okay.
|
Quote:
|
But to be clear, it is always okay to post on stickies, no matter how old they are, right?
|
Yes, if it's an open sticky, then no matter how old it is you are allowed to post in it.
|
I agree. I see some great discussions from way back then that I'd love to add to. It's a shame for this rule honestly. Just my opinion.
|
Then make a new thread on the topic. If you want to add something to the discussion, then there's most likely someone else who would like to as well. Starting up a new thread on the topic would allow the members who weren't around when it happened to discuss the topic. But bumping up the old thread, you're bringing back a discussion that members who probably aren't around anymore talked about.
Quote:
|
Actually, looking at what you said, I kinda agree with that. Although the punishment is too harsh IMO. Warnings should be given for serious offenses.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
^^ I know, but some people might take it bad. I've met people that get upset cause they receive warnings and it makes them feel that they did something serious or really wrong, to take the first step into getting banned.
^ Yeah but those threads just get locked. Maybe the warnings wouldn't be considered serious if they weren't like the first step towards getting banned. It's like being under a trap if warnings are going to be given so loosely. |
If the member has a question and they are concerned that something might be against the rules or could cause them to get a warning then they could contact the staff member of the area they are posting in or a Higher Staff member. I received one warning for telling my friend he was not allowed to have NOK(Korean Pokemon) traded and that was way back in 08 and I haven't managed to receive anything like that since. So I don't think it will be too much of a problem, if you don't worry about it, observe the date of the previous post or the rules of the forum and it's subsections there really shouldn't be a worry of infractions, warnings, or bans in the slightest.
|
I know, I'm just saying some people are more sensitive and they might feel like they've done something really really wrong to get the first step to getting banned.
|
Along with what was said above... being the person who gave the warning in the first place in this instance (said instance involving a thread nearly half a year old since the previous post, never mind the usual month limit), I don't see how it was too harsh. As every automatic warning message states after all (because you get notified of it via PM):
Quote:
Also, it's not easy to be able to take into account people who may still take warnings too strongly or whatnot - that'd require knowing each person's personality and/or mind reading abilities, to put it simply. I don't believe I should not give warnings just because someone might be upset with it - I try to give people a similar treatment for doing the same thing, no matter who they are, if I know them or not, and so forth. Hope that explains it somewhat? |
But although they may feel that way, the fact remains that it's not the first step to being banned, and it's not a harsh punishment. If they're upset over the warning they can contact the staff member that gave it to them and have it explained, but PC can't build its warning/infraction/ban rules off of people that are overly sensitive to any kind of correction, no matter how much or little it counts against them.
|
I don't know. Just seems to me like warnings are a little more serious than they are pushed to be.
I mean, if banning from the forum takes a simple three steps, the steps shouldn't be so loose. I understand what you all mean about getting warned being different from getting an infraction, but it just seems to me like it's serious. |
Well, it's usually more than a simple 3 steps - most infractions are only worth a few or couple points and you need to hit a limit (9 for these forums for the first time) to actually get banned. So it's more warning/s, infraction and then ban for multiple infractions. And again, it's hard to get an infraction after a warning if you simply take note of the warning as well - you can only get an infraction if you ignore it which would suggest you're just not paying attention to the rules on purpose.
|
Ohhh ok. I thought it was like "You get an offense = warning, another offense = infraction, another offense = ban"
Like, three steps and done, no questions asked. |
I suggest you read this thread: http://www.pokecommunity.com/showthread.php?t=122017
It should clear your doubts. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
ha! you're not going to believe this but the whole reason i got kicked out of the other gaming forums for doing that crap. i didn't intentionally bring up old crap but sometimes some of the people who posted those things still haven't gotten answers or will repost sometime in the future anyway so i don't see the problem. i won't fight the system here because it's not worth it but i totally agree with you. it's stupid. the way i see it is: if it pisses you off and you don't like it, then don't reply. the person will find out on their own if the topic is to be discussed any further. just let them be, i always say. my only suggestion is to keep you from doing it again always check the dates and if the post is more than like 2 pages back, you shouldn't respond to it. |
Quote:
The main issue I have with the rule, though, is the fact that it causes a huge backlog of abandoned threads that could probably be reduced to a couple hundred if people were simply allowed to post on threads whenever they wanted. Oh well. |
Quote:
People who are complaining about the ruling and calling it 'stupid', have you stopped to think why other forums have the same ruling? |
^ Ok, what you said sounds completely different than what the last guy said. The last guy said something that actually made it seem fair, the way you say it, you sound like Hitler No. 2 :S
|
Quote:
Also, according to Godwin's Law, comparing someone from the other party in a forum discussion to Hitler means you automatically lose the debate. Oops. |
forum can add a very easy system. thread will be showed to the normal users as locked if 1 month passed. only thread owner will be able to post. but in my opinion this rule is totally unlogical.
|
what about trade threads? they almost never get old unless someone closes it
|
Quote:
-Anyway, all I'm saying is, if you're a mod, you should be more professional and not sound like you're agitated or annoyed, even if you are. I've been a mod 6 times on different forums now, you don't solve problems by acting all high and mighty, you try to be reasonable and gently explain it, not lash out. For instance, BobandBill is probably the most professional mod I've seen yet, he doesn't go around locking threads and then bugging people about it, he either moves it, or locks it but offers advice like "You should try doing this and etc..", if I came off as rude, I apologize, just saying.- |
Quote:
Quote:
Back to the point of the thread though, I think everything that needs to be said has been said. If a thread hasn't been posted in in over a month, it's dead. Done. Deceased. Wilted. Kicked the bucket. Just don't post in it. It's not hard to check the the date of the last post that was made in the thread and then make a new one if it's too old. I don't see why this is having to be such a big issue. I'm surprised this thread is still even open at this point. |
I think this thread has well-outlived its usefulness...if it had any to begin with. I see nothing constructive coming from it and it's starting to get nasty, so...
Locked. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:09 AM. |
![]()
© 2002 - 2018 The PokéCommunity™, pokecommunity.com.
Pokémon characters and images belong to The Pokémon Company International and Nintendo. This website is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Nintendo, Creatures, GAMEFREAK, The Pokémon Company or The Pokémon Company International. We just love Pokémon.
All forum styles, their images (unless noted otherwise) and site designs are © 2002 - 2016 The PokéCommunity / PokéCommunity.com.
PokéCommunity™ is a trademark of The PokéCommunity. All rights reserved. Sponsor advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service. User generated content remains the property of its creator.
Acknowledgements
Use of PokéCommunity Assets
vB Optimise by DragonByte Technologies Ltd © 2023.