Cyberdyne wrote on 2020-10-07, 05:45:
If you have something to say about that thread?
I didn't say it was a rule violation, I said it was not okay.
(The abandonware link was definitely a rule violation though.)
You want to bump a decade old thread? Well, It's very simple what to do instead:
1. CREATE a new thread.
2. In the first post in the thread, LINK back to the old one.
3. If you really must, QUOTE the old thread for reference.
In our earliest of days, we thought that most threads were okay to let run on forever.
Especially those where we were trying to find the answers to questions, or a final solution to a problem, when most posts were in The Guide (DOS or Windows).
Our game plan for such reference threads was that we'd lock threads where we'd come across some solution, and make a new thread in Deep Thought distilling the information down to instructions, ending the conversation.
Given how little use Deep Thought has seen, you can see how well that plan worked out.
This was pre-Marvin, during the times when the forum's focus was on computer game compatibility.
This was also mostly pre-VOGONS hosting of DOSBox Forums.
And definitely pre-wikis, for the most part.
But anyway, some of those threads in The Guide DID last years.
And then the conversation died in some of them, for many more years.
And we never bothered locking them due to age.
And now, VOGONS is 18 years old. I don't think we ever thought it would last this long!
But we gathered together a great community of emulation experts, and hardware experts, and hobbyists, and amateurs, over the years, and it seems there's something for every PC nerd of all stripes to be interested in.
It's a unique community - there's few others like it online. 😀
So yes, forum threads can be good as a repository of information. And the wealth of information in VOGONS is deep and vast.
But hard to find, no matter how good the search engine, so that's why wikis and so on were eventually created to be companions to VOGONS, especially when Deep Thought maintenance had dwindled.
BUT as it turns out, forum threads aren't JUST a repository of information - they're a conversation. And conversations have a natural ebb and flow, a birth and a death.
Let's say that you're in a group of friends. Do you really walk up to them and say "hey, remember that thing we were talking about 15 years ago? I have things to add to that conversation now."
They'd all look at you as if you were odd - which you would be... odd.
Instead, it's socially acceptable to start a new conversation - and if anyone remembers, reference the old one.
Now, this IS the Internet - it's not Real Life, and not beholden to the same conversational mores that we abide by socially as various cultures flung around this world.
But yet, some still seem to appear, moreso as the Internet ages and its early hubs become community keystones. Delayed by some duration, but there's still some sense of them.
So... would you wander onto Google Groups' USENET archive and quote someone's email from 1986 to resurrect that USENET email chain? No, you wouldn't, and shouldn't, even though you could. And some people will. I'm glad I'm not on USENET any more.
Still, I have posts on VOGONS that I made over 18 years ago. Even if the conversation you have to add is related and relevant, isn't there some deadline under which I shouldn't have to see my words from 23-yr-old me be thrown up in my face, my notifications, flagged or emailed about? I probably don't know half of the ones that will do that, to be honest.
Isn't there some point where your gut tells you "this conversation has been dead for a while... let's start a new one!"?
Isn't there some deadline under where it just stops making sense to do much more than obliquely reference the past conversation?
For me, that deadline is about 3.5 years since last reply. Not days, not weeks, not months - years. And not since first post - since last reply. Just a gut feeling. But everyone is different. Which is why there's a guideline and no official rule. Why some moderators care, and others don't care as much. And why it's not evenly applied. And why some cases we let slide.
In the older threads, some participants are banned, some are even dead - it's been 18 years. They're not gonna rejoin the conversation and answer your new post in response to their question - they've moved on, they're in a different point of life than they were 12 years ago, or 18 years ago. Some people joined VOGONS, posted their question, participated for a few years, but didn't return - if the forum software went to email them a notification, that email would probably bounce. Others have been here off and on for well over a decade, our MVP veterans of many discussions, troubleshooting, arguments...
What we've seen is that if you don't draw a line -somewhere-, it's conversational chaos.
Based on my many years of experience, I would tell 23-yr-old me that as it turns out, far MORE people find posts quoting or responding to multiple-years dead conversations -annoying- than helpful, no matter if there's been some earthshaking discovery/solution or not.
But that doesn't mean you can't find a way to respond! 😀
1. CREATE a new thread.
2. In the first post in the thread, LINK back to the old one.
3. If you really must, QUOTE the old thread for reference.
So I usually recommend to start a new thread! It may become the more popular one for years to come.
All of the above is merely my point of view such as it is right now, and not official rules of VOGONS or its admins or moderators.
---
There's a new-ish relevant XKCD... I'll embed it here:
The "flavor text" for the above cartoon as written by the cartoonist Randall Munroe: (https://xkcd.com/2363/ )
"(c) You can have a scooter when you pay for it yourself, and (d) if you can't learn to start a new thread rather than responding to an old one, you'll be banned. [thread locked by moderator]"
😁
