TheAdjHe demanded a cool forum title of some type.Join Date: 2004-05-03Member: 28436Members, NS1 Playtester, Constellation
I actually laughed my ###### off when I saw that this was a necromancy thread that was necro'd....I thought it was someone getting pissed about locking threads from august of last year until I looked at the dates about 10 posts into reading the thread. ROFL, nice job on the necro.
<!--quoteo(post=1564000:date=Jul 21 2006, 03:01 PM:name=surprise)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(surprise @ Jul 21 2006, 03:01 PM) [snapback]1564000[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> you get a cool cookie from me <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I WANT A PICTURE OF A COOKIE(You lazy guys)! Someone find me a picture of a cool cookie NOW!
Edit: Thanks to Dark_Soul74, I have my cool cookie <img src="http://www.coolcookies4u.com/images/cookie%20photos/coolcookies300.jpg" border="0" alt="IPB Image" />
<!--quoteo(post=1563992:date=Jul 21 2006, 07:08 AM:name=Petco)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Petco @ Jul 21 2006, 07:08 AM) [snapback]1563992[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> Now that search apparently does search any topics older than 6 months, we shouldn't lock any bumped threads that were created one year ago. Since the NS forums were down for almost one year. I mean if people bumped a thread three months ago BEFORE the forums went down, saying something like "Yeah, I agree", then that thread should be locked.
But since the forums were down for almost a year (2005 August and now it's open for consties to test July 2006), we shouldn't lock any threads that were made in Augest 2005. I mean if someone says "Yeah, I agree" to a thread that was made in August 2005, we shouldn't lock it, since technically it should have stayed on the page if it weren't for the forum outage. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
and for those that didn't get the idea... 4 months in GD would have killed this thread ANYWAY... <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tounge.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":p" border="0" alt="tounge.gif" />
<!--quoteo(post=1564093:date=Jul 21 2006, 05:29 PM:name=Delarosa)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Delarosa @ Jul 21 2006, 05:29 PM) [snapback]1564093[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> and yet you necromanced a thread from august 2004 <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Well techically it's from May 27, 05. I mean that's the date it was last active, so only a little less than three months when the forums went down. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tounge.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":p" border="0" alt="tounge.gif" />
Alright, now that there was a rollback, this post was missing. This post was a little longer, but I forgot exactly what I wrote, but it's something like this.
I'll post it again. Now that the forums are semi-public, and soon to be public again, we should expect some threads to be bumped from 2005. If it was a post that was bumping something from 2005, even if it's a post saying something like "I agree" or "Anyone else play this?", we shouldn't mind that.
Let's just pretend that there was neven a forum downage. Let's ignore 2005, and pretend 2005 is really 2006, thus all posts from 2005 are really from 2006, and could be bumpable without harm.
<!--quoteo(post=1566187:date=Sep 14 2006, 10:15 PM:name=Petco)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Petco @ Sep 14 2006, 10:15 PM) [snapback]1566187[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> Alright, now that there was a rollback, this post was missing. This post was a little longer, but I forgot exactly what I wrote, but it's something like this. I'll post it again. Now that the forums are semi-public, and soon to be public again, we should expect some threads to be bumped from 2005. If it was a post that was bumping something from 2005, even if it's a post saying something like "I agree" or "Anyone else play this?", we shouldn't mind that. Let's just pretend that there was neven a forum downage. Let's ignore 2005, and pretend 2005 is really 2006, thus all posts from 2005 are really from 2006, and could be bumpable without harm. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You didn't even let the thread leave the front page. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":(" border="0" alt="sad-fix.gif" />
I didn't bump it either, people will get bored and let it leave the frontpage soon enough, I just thought it necessary to remind everyone in the mean time.
The only way the joke is funny is if people get bored with it so it drops off the front page for a couple months. Continual bumpage would just lead to a lock anyway.
And, I was thinking about ressurecting this thread, but 1) I knew one of you guys would anyway, and 2) I'm far too lazy to search.
<!--quoteo(post=1566635:date=Sep 17 2006, 02:46 PM:name=Sky)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sky @ Sep 17 2006, 02:46 PM) [snapback]1566635[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> The only way the joke is funny is if people get bored with it so it drops off the front page for a couple months. Continual bumpage would just lead to a lock anyway.
And, I was thinking about ressurecting this thread, but 1) I knew one of you guys would anyway, and 2) I'm far too lazy to search. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Also if a admin/mod decides to <b>sticky</b> this topic, we can't bump it.
*Hopes he didn't give the idea for admins/mods to sticky this topic*
Now that the forums are online fo' real, we're going to have tons of people coming back or singing up that have been gone for like, forever. Does this mean huge impeding threadromancy? Only time will tell!
Well, my only reason for waiting this long to come back is that my login wouldn't work till now... odd. Anyway, good to see all the old people that are still around.
A thing about thread necromancy, sometimes for example, in the Urbandead topic where there were around 50 pages worth of hundreds of posts, that topic shouldn't really be bump.
If a new person decides to join Urbandead, and have questions, he doesn't know whether to try to search the 50 pages worth of posts, one by one, or just simply ask it.
If he does ask it, he's probably likely that the question was already answered. This process repeats into a never ending spiral of duplicated questions and answers for eternity. Fortunately, we locked that topic, and this <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=99441" target="_blank">topic has been created.</a>
<b>Certain times, those are the case, and it is not wise to bump topics. </b>
<b><u>But</u></b> this topic <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=99555" target="_blank">should have not need to be created</a>, instead KFDM should have bumped this <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=99120" target="_blank">topic</a>.
The reason why he should have bumped that topic was:
1. It was made only a <i>few</i> weeks ago!
2. It did not contain hundreds of post, so that a new reader may get lost in the topic because of hundreds of posts.
3. That topic may have contained information that was useful, not present in KFDM's new topic.
So KungFuDiscoMonkey, you <b><!--coloro:red--><span style="color:red"><!--/coloro-->fail<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--></b> at thread necromancy.
Edit: Spelled out KFDM's name in the above line for more dramatic effect.
<!--quoteo(post=1592280:date=Dec 26 2006, 03:39 AM:name=Black_Mage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Black_Mage @ Dec 26 2006, 03:39 AM) [snapback]1592280[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> threadcromancy! ban the offender at once! <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again, posting in a topic that was made weeks, months, or even years ago is no offense if there is something to say besides "lol", "WTH", or "hax".
Old threads are the same as new threads, it can be useful for people who have never seen the thread before and can be a great refresher for those who have seen the thread but have forgotten all about it.
<!--quoteo(post=1624170:date=May 1 2007, 04:04 AM:name=Shockwave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Shockwave @ May 1 2007, 04:04 AM) [snapback]1624170[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> Yes, if you're Alanis Morisette. For the rest of the world, no.
I wondered when this would pop up again. I couldn't do it since that would be a double post and against the whole point of bringing this thread back every so often.
The recent bumpage of the Minerva thread got me thinking. I mentioned earlier that it's annoying to post in a super old thread by accident, but that generally doesn't happen a whole lot. Mostly it's just when someone links it and you don't check the date. What <i>does</i> happen, however, is some newbie bumps something and then you post in it without realizing it's like, a million years old. Normally I'm sort of harsh on people who don't realize that the thread they're posting in is mega-dated, but if it's at the top of the forums, I guess you can be forgiven for not checking the date.
Comments
you get a cool cookie from me
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I dish out the cool cookies thank you very much.
Edit: Thanks to Dark_Soul74, I have my cool cookie <img src="http://www.coolcookies4u.com/images/cookie%20photos/coolcookies300.jpg" border="0" alt="IPB Image" />
Now that search apparently does search any topics older than 6 months, we shouldn't lock any bumped threads that were created one year ago. Since the NS forums were down for almost one year. I mean if people bumped a thread three months ago BEFORE the forums went down, saying something like "Yeah, I agree", then that thread should be locked.
But since the forums were down for almost a year (2005 August and now it's open for consties to test July 2006), we shouldn't lock any threads that were made in Augest 2005. I mean if someone says "Yeah, I agree" to a thread that was made in August 2005, we shouldn't lock it, since technically it should have stayed on the page if it weren't for the forum outage.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
and yet you necromanced a thread from august 2004
<!--coloro:#CC0000--><span style="color:#CC0000"><!--/coloro-->LOCKED<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
and for those that didn't get the idea... 4 months in GD would have killed this thread ANYWAY... <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tounge.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":p" border="0" alt="tounge.gif" />
or IS it locked?
and yet you necromanced a thread from august 2004
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well techically it's from May 27, 05. I mean that's the date it was last active, so only a little less than three months when the forums went down. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tounge.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":p" border="0" alt="tounge.gif" />
I'll post it again. Now that the forums are semi-public, and soon to be public again, we should expect some threads to be bumped from 2005. If it was a post that was bumping something from 2005, even if it's a post saying something like "I agree" or "Anyone else play this?", we shouldn't mind that.
Let's just pretend that there was neven a forum downage. Let's ignore 2005, and pretend 2005 is really 2006, thus all posts from 2005 are really from 2006, and could be bumpable without harm.
Alright, now that there was a rollback, this post was missing. This post was a little longer, but I forgot exactly what I wrote, but it's something like this.
I'll post it again. Now that the forums are semi-public, and soon to be public again, we should expect some threads to be bumped from 2005. If it was a post that was bumping something from 2005, even if it's a post saying something like "I agree" or "Anyone else play this?", we shouldn't mind that.
Let's just pretend that there was neven a forum downage. Let's ignore 2005, and pretend 2005 is really 2006, thus all posts from 2005 are really from 2006, and could be bumpable without harm.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
i object! any and everyone should be banned!
And, I was thinking about ressurecting this thread, but 1) I knew one of you guys would anyway, and 2) I'm far too lazy to search.
The only way the joke is funny is if people get bored with it so it drops off the front page for a couple months. Continual bumpage would just lead to a lock anyway.
And, I was thinking about ressurecting this thread, but 1) I knew one of you guys would anyway, and 2) I'm far too lazy to search.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Also if a admin/mod decides to <b>sticky</b> this topic, we can't bump it.
*Hopes he didn't give the idea for admins/mods to sticky this topic*
I bring <b>nothing</b> to the table.
If a new person decides to join Urbandead, and have questions, he doesn't know whether to try to search the 50 pages worth of posts, one by one, or just simply ask it.
If he does ask it, he's probably likely that the question was already answered. This process repeats into a never ending spiral of duplicated questions and answers for eternity. Fortunately, we locked that topic, and this <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=99441" target="_blank">topic has been created.</a>
<b>Certain times, those are the case, and it is not wise to bump topics. </b>
<b><u>But</u></b> this topic <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=99555" target="_blank">should have not need to be created</a>, instead KFDM should have bumped this <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=99120" target="_blank">topic</a>.
The reason why he should have bumped that topic was:
1. It was made only a <i>few</i> weeks ago!
2. It did not contain hundreds of post, so that a new reader may get lost in the topic because of hundreds of posts.
3. That topic may have contained information that was useful, not present in KFDM's new topic.
So KungFuDiscoMonkey, you <b><!--coloro:red--><span style="color:red"><!--/coloro-->fail<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--></b> at thread necromancy.
Edit: Spelled out KFDM's name in the above line for more dramatic effect.
threadcromancy! ban the offender at once!
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again, posting in a topic that was made weeks, months, or even years ago is no offense if there is something to say besides "lol", "WTH", or "hax".
Old threads are the same as new threads, it can be useful for people who have never seen the thread before and can be a great refresher for those who have seen the thread but have forgotten all about it.
- Shockwave
Yes, if you're Alanis Morisette. For the rest of the world, no.
- Shockwave
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's like ray-hee-ain on your wedding day.