On Necroposting

[Crazycolorz5]

The SF Code of Conduct states that:

Necroposting (post in a very old topic) is forbidden.

• If a topic has not been posted in for 1 month AND has fallen outside the first page of a board, any posts made in that topic will be considered necroposting.
• Instead, if necessary, simply make another topic. This rule does not apply to the creators of art topics, fan projects, and other threads of similar nature that need to be updated. Examples of acceptable use of necroposting are:
  • You have asked a staff member and they have permitted you to post in an old thread.
  • You have a project thread, and you must bump it to alert people to an update you just did.
  • You have some well thought out criticism to post in someone's art thread.
    • This is acceptable as long as the thread hasn't been devoid of activity by the artist for more than 3 months.
  • You have a bug report or constructive advice for a fangame.
    • This is acceptable as long as the thread hasn't been devoid of activity by the creator for more than 3 months.

When in doubt, ask a mod.

I'd like to discuss the merits of such a rule. What are the specific benefits of having an explicit rule for this? At the very least, look at this post: http://serenesforest.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=46060&p=3301367 ; I believe this to be an acceptable post, as it answers (and provides more information) to an unresolved problem. In general, I believe that necroposting rules bring very specific cons:
- Inability to add on new documentation to an old problem/request.
- Creation of many threads asking the same question/making only small incremental steps to one end.
- Discouraging continued discussion on a topic (one must agree that creating a new a thread is a much larger barrier to posting than simply replying).

Next, allow me to give a few examples of "necroposts" that undeniably helped the community in question and were on topic.
FE8 Native Instrument Map
Danger Zones

In sum, I'd like to propose the following point:
A post should be acceptable as long as it is on topic and contributes to the topic of the thread.
(and, of course, following all other regulations).

At the very least, there should be an exception to documentation-based threads, commonly found in Fan Projects, that would be more general than the stated "You have a bug report or constructive advice for a fangame."

However, I firmly believe that any post that is productive and contributes to a topic should never be discouraged.

Edited May 17, 2016 by Crazycolorz5

[Alm]

What you're saying makes sense to me, man. I'm totally on board with this idea.

[circleseverywhere]

Why does this rule even exist? Just clutters up the board with repeated topics.

[Tangerine]

While you're reading the code of conduct, you probably should've seen the part that says PMing our admins is the acceptable way to offer suggestions on policies rather than making a thread, lol.

Anyway, several exceptions are made for the FP section, if you'd read the guidelines that we have posted in that forum. Specifically -

"As long as the post, update or query is relevant to the topic at hand, don't worry about necroposting."

- would apply to everything you mentioned potentially having an issue with in the relevant section. We discourage people from bumping old project threads in the main section because we want the active projects to be featured on the front page rather than ones no longer being updated by the author (that's what our directory is for), and this is something that every project creator we spoke to before deciding on the rule agreed upon. Authors can bump their threads whenever they want if they have an update or want to reassure users that it's still being worked on.

As for why it exists in general, we are a large and old forum, and there is very little value in allowing people to bump threads from 2008 that are no longer relevant with discussions held between users who are potentially no longer active and able to reply. Creating new threads creates newer and more relevant discussion. Nobody wants to see a 2008 thread about how bad Marcus is on the front page of our FE7 section because someone thought it would be hilarious to bump. If someone considers it a barrier to have to make a new thread to talk about their favorite FE game and would rather post in a thread that was made when they were still in elementary school, then they probably were not very interested in having a genuine discussion to begin with.

Regardless, we're not strict on it, and if a thread is actually relevant and it makes less sense to create a new thread for whatever reason, it's very unlikely we'd say no if contacted.

Edited May 17, 2016 by Tangerine

[Baldrick]

A post should be acceptable as long as it is on topic and contributes to the topic of the thread.

The rule already allows for these kind of posts; the examples you cited would fall under the second exception.

I've only ever seen it enforced on non-productive posts, anyway.

[MisterIceTeaPeach]

Seriously I never have understood this rule.

It's still better than spamming the forum with the same topic Imo.

Some topics like discussing about a certain videogame never gets old.

[henrymidfields]

Just out of curiosity:

For those of you who are also members on other forums, do they have anti-necropost rule too? (For reference: I'm also a member at Bulbagarden, and they don't have any necroposting rules.)

[Crazycolorz5]

@Tangerine (as I don't know how to make a direct reply post on this forum software)

Sorry; the way that clause was phrased in the Code of Conduct sounded like it was more directed towards appeals and things like that. Furthermore, I wanted a public post to be able to discuss specifically the merits of having such a rule, and to get a more public opinion.

I do see your point about how someone determined enough would make a thread anyway, but again, this unnecessarily populates the forum with threads (which also makes the forum harder to search alongside just having additional clutter), and it is still a barrier to post. The forum should be as accessible as possible, and I think in the mindset of many members, starting a new threads take a lot more determination and possibly understanding of the community than a simple reply. As another point, starting a new thread wouldn't retain previous discussion, so rather than refer to what has already been said, the points would be restated.

Though I do suppose having very, very old threads can complicate this. So how about if the rule is amended to have one year since the most recent post as the freshness cutoff, with a general exception that the OP may always post in their thread?

@Tricky

I think it's ambiguous at best whether they fall under that exemption. The things in question aren't specifically fan works, and it's not so much of an update being posted as an alternative version. To complicate matters, it's not even the creator of the thread/original work that is adding to it. I suppose it could be argued to fall under the second exemption, but since it's not clear, it'd, by proper following of the code, require PMing a moderator, which is another step hindering the posting of useful content, making the forum less accessible.

If the post is non-productive, it should be able to be caught under the rules about being off-topic, so necroposting never needs to enter as a the reason to punish to those kinds of posts.

[Tangerine]

Seriously I never have understood this rule.

It's still better than spamming the forum with the same topic Imo.

Some topics like discussing about a certain videogame never gets old.

They definitely get old lol. Our site is 11 years old and our forum is 9. You can't bump threads from that long ago and consider it relevant or acceptable. A lot of the people who posted in those threads may not even be around anymore, and the views and opinions of the ones who are have surely changed. Information in those threads will absolutely be outdated, and SF as a resource is what we were built on. It's in bad taste in general to bump threads that old for everyone involved from a social standpoint - many of those people could be embarrassed by how they might've acted at the time, especially considering the general age group of our user base. There are plenty of reasons why it makes sense to keep necroing in check on a forum as old as we are.

Just out of curiosity:

For those of you who are also members on other forums, do they have anti-necropost rule too? (For reference: I'm also a member at Bulbagarden, and they don't have any necroposting rules.)

Plenty of large forums have necroposting rules. Off the top of my head, Serebii and Zelda Universe are two sites similar to ours (that share a lot of viewership with us, too) who have their own set of rules regarding necros. GameFAQs is the largest video game forum on the web and has always had some form of built-in measure against necros.

@Tangerine (as I don't know how to make a direct reply post on this forum software)

Sorry; the way that clause was phrased in the Code of Conduct sounded like it was more directed towards appeals and things like that. Furthermore, I wanted a public post to be able to discuss specifically the merits of having such a rule, and to get a more public opinion.

I do see your point about how someone determined enough would make a thread anyway, but again, this unnecessarily populates the forum with threads (which also makes the forum harder to search alongside just having additional clutter), and it is still a barrier to post. The forum should be as accessible as possible, and I think in the mindset of many members, starting a new threads take a lot more determination and possibly understanding of the community than a simple reply. As another point, starting a new thread wouldn't retain previous discussion, so rather than refer to what has already been said, the points would be restated.

Though I do suppose having very, very old threads can complicate this. So how about if the rule is amended to have one year since the most recent post as the freshness cutoff, with a general exception that the OP may always post in their thread?

@Tricky

I think it's ambiguous at best whether they fall under that exemption. The things in question aren't specifically fan works, and it's not so much of an update being posted as an alternative version. To complicate matters, it's not even the creator of the thread/original work that is adding to it. I suppose it could be argued to fall under the second exemption, but since it's not clear, it'd, by proper following of the code, require PMing a moderator, which is another step hindering the posting of useful content, making the forum less accessible.

If the post is non-productive, it should be able to be caught under the rules about being off-topic, so necroposting never needs to enter as a the reason to punish to those kinds of posts.

It's at the bottom right of a post. Multi Quote to quote multiple people, Quote will quote one person and take you to the post box.

Anyway, it doesn't really do anything to increase forum clutter, because you're not going to see duplicate threads within a short time span of one another very often. The ones you do see will be fairly spaced apart, and those are more or less something you need to accept on a forum that has thousands of active members. As for the search function, it does get a little muddied when searches aren't refined, but the relatively recent (relative to our age) addition of the tag system benefits from new threads being made with tags so that refined searches are more accurate in the long term.

I don't think it's pointless to discuss relaxing the rule, but a year is probably excessive and unnecessary. I've planned an overhaul of the CoC with better wording and a few rule edits for a while, but I decided not to bother until our forum upgrade within the next couple of months. I'll add it to the list and see how everyone else feels when the time comes and we're discussing rules individually while reworking it.

[ghast]

There's specific guidelines necroposting guidelines that I've created specifically for FP

http://serenesforest.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=54897 look into that.

I do see your point about how someone determined enough would make a thread anyway, but again, this unnecessarily populates the forum with threads (which also makes the forum harder to search alongside just having additional clutter),

I think cluttering the first page with not new topics would be more messy and frustrating for new posters than the current policy we have now. From a moderator perspective, your suggestion doesn't really change what's already in place, but just makes it harder for the small staff of moderators to make sure the newest and most relevant content on the forum is taking priority.

Its also just a thing about forums. The older a thread is, the more likely "dead" it is. That said, the more likely people who posted in that thread are inactive. You see a lot of this in cases of necroposting where when left unchecked sometimes no one bothers to reply anyway.

Fresh posts, even about a topic already discussed months back, promotes new discussion and perspectives. So in terms of retaining previous discussion, the new replier might just be left empty handed.

Like I said before SF is just a massive forum with a small, dedicated staff that need to overlook 100s of hundreds of threads and users. And I think a more rigid necroing policy than say, feu, is a reflection of the circumstances.

Perhaps one month is a bit outdated and we should push it to 2-3 like in FP, but I'd consider anything longer than that as an inactive thread with hanging thread posts that shouldn't be recycled.

The feedback is appreciated, though.

[Arch]

While you're reading the code of conduct, you probably should've seen the part that says PMing our admins is the acceptable way to offer suggestions on policies rather than making a thread, lol.

While we're on the topic of policy changes, I'd argue that "don't dissent in public" is the first "rule" that needs to be scrapped, lol.

Unless the goal is to minimize the role of public opinion, there's no real reason why users shouldn't be allowed to discuss rules and make suggestions openly.

Edited May 17, 2016 by Arch

[Ϲharlie]

While we're on the topic of policy changes, I'd argue that "don't dissent in public" is the first "rule" that needs to be scrapped, lol.

Unless the goal is to minimize the role of public opinion, there's no real reason why users shouldn't be allowed to discuss rules and make suggestions openly.

This topic wouldn't even be here if openly discussing rules and making suggestions was against the rules.

[ghast]

i think both public discourse and private conversation between mod and user has their own merits.

Privately gives a chance for both user and staff to intimately discuss the issue without the topic being at risk of derailing or having the staff deal with multiple posts addressing different things and consequently diverting the main discussion, sort of like what's happening right now.

I'm guessing that's what Tang was implying there.

I think privately would have worked better in this case now that I think about it, to be honest. As it was originally between CC and staff but the other posts didn't really contribute to anything to add to the topic (yet).

Edited May 17, 2016 by ghast

[eclipse]

While we're on the topic of policy changes, I'd argue that "don't dissent in public" is the first "rule" that needs to be scrapped, lol.

Unless the goal is to minimize the role of public opinion, there's no real reason why users shouldn't be allowed to discuss rules and make suggestions openly.

Here's an example of why that rule was put in place.

Mod: Cut (this stuff) out in thread.

Poster 1: BUT WHY?

Poster 2: (does "this stuff")

If things are taking a turn for the worse, and I need to step in, I don't want to see a bunch of people either ignoring what I said or arguing the merits of what I said. It's happened, and I've warned people for it.

[Crazycolorz5]

This topic wouldn't even be here if openly discussing rules and making suggestions was against the rules.

Because it's against the rules doesn't mean it wouldn't happen; Tangerine was saying in the first post that I should have PM'd this topic instead.

. . .

Plenty of large forums have necroposting rules. Off the top of my head, Serebii and Zelda Universe are two sites similar to ours (that share a lot of viewership with us, too) who have their own set of rules regarding necros. GameFAQs is the largest video game forum on the web and has always had some form of built-in measure against necros.

. . .

Anyway, it doesn't really do anything to increase forum clutter, because you're not going to see duplicate threads within a short time span of one another very often. The ones you do see will be fairly spaced apart, and those are more or less something you need to accept on a forum that has thousands of active members. As for the search function, it does get a little muddied when searches aren't refined, but the relatively recent (relative to our age) addition of the tag system benefits from new threads being made with tags so that refined searches are more accurate in the long term.

I've planned an overhaul of the CoC with better wording and a few rule edits for a while, but I decided not to bother until our forum upgrade within the next couple of months. I'll add it to the list and see how everyone else feels when the time comes and we're discussing rules individually while reworking it.

Do you happen to have the rules Serebii and Zelda Universe have on it? It might be interesting to see how they implement it/to what success/how it's viewed. I'd also argue that a built in system (such as autolocking) is different than a rule against it.

To be honest, I doubt the efficacy of tagging. Since they're user-generated, I don't think they'll match up very often (with searches or other threads with the same tag).

I do think some kind of public forum for discussing new rules would be useful.

. . .

Its also just a thing about forums. The older a thread is, the more likely "dead" it is. That said, the more likely people who posted in that thread are inactive. You see a lot of this in cases of necroposting where when left unchecked sometimes no one bothers to reply anyway.

. . .

I think privately would have worked better in this case now that I think about it, to be honest. As it was originally between CC and staff but the other posts didn't really contribute to anything to add to the topic (yet).

If the topic is going to be dead anyway, is it necessary to have a rule specifically against posting on it? And if no one is going to reply, would it fall off of the front page again quickly? And if it doesn't, well, that means that people are replying and it has again become a worthwhile topic.

On the second section I'm addressing, I disagree; several people simply voicing their opinion is valuable. I'd like to point specifically to @henrymidfields's post in particular.

[ghast]

If the topic is going to be dead anyway, is it necessary to have a rule specifically against posting on it? And if no one is going to reply, would it fall off of the front page again quickly? And if it doesn't, well, that means that people are replying and it has again become a worthwhile topic.

On the second section I'm addressing, I disagree; several people simply voicing their opinion is valuable. I'd like to point specifically to @henrymidfields's post in particular.

1. I would say its necessary. I don't think its worth the trouble of bringing an dead topic back to life when you could just start a fresh new one.

Perhaps it would quickly fall off, perhaps it wouldn't. That might depend on how active the forum is.

I guess there's a bunch of variables: quality of the post, activity of the forum, history of the person posting, intent.

Personally I just am more comfortable having the ability to keep as many relevant topics as possible without running the risk of bringing back topics that are less likely to gauge discussion in old posts.

But I come from a background that isn't really strict on necros (FP and spriting) so what do i know!

Edited May 17, 2016 by ghast

[Magical Glace]

Just out of curiosity:

For those of you who are also members on other forums, do they have anti-necropost rule too? (For reference: I'm also a member at Bulbagarden, and they don't have any necroposting rules.)

Niether the Den nor Eientei have one, Eientei used to, but since it sprang off of SF's Touhou community in the first place it's CoC was modeled off SF's.

But, both of those are smaller forums.

[Freohr Datia]

Why are there concerns about the same topic being spammed over and over? Part of the point of the necroposting rule is that these old, inactive topics are going to be out of view by then because the newer activity is going to shove it back. One of the parts of the rule is that it has to be off the first page as well, so if it's a super slow forum it still shouldn't be an issue. And if people make a new topic about the same thing as another that's also active, they usually just get merged. It makes it so that there is no clutter.

I think the exceptions placed into the rule cover for the concerns well enough and the staff is always around to help when you have a questions on the exceptions. It is just around to try to keep things relevant, but it still tries to be adaptable.

But really, I will emphasize again, the staff is available to help. They aren't only around for enforcing, they're people too! You can approach them.

[Loki Laufeyson]

Just out of curiosity:

For those of you who are also members on other forums, do they have anti-necropost rule too? (For reference: I'm also a member at Bulbagarden, and they don't have any necroposting rules.)

Yes. Only one i belong to does not, and its a little jarring tbh. Someone bumping a topic from 2009 about if Jon Snow is related to so-and-so is not only allowed but kind of encouraged there. Mostly because they have limited space in terms of servers/data/etc and that the discussion can still be relevant given the fandom its for. The concerns are still real though, that inactive members cannot reply, etc. So the mods there arent arsed if people make new topics with the same discussion intent. (plus they archive really old topics dating before a certain point)

Just about every other forum ive ever been on save that one (and a now defunct Harry Potter one) have had necroposting rules. Repeated necroing often led to some kind of consequences.

[MisterIceTeaPeach]

They definitely get old lol. Our site is 11 years old and our forum is 9. You can't bump threads from that long ago and consider it relevant or acceptable. A lot of the people who posted in those threads may not even be around anymore, and the views and opinions of the ones who are have surely changed. Information in those threads will absolutely be outdated, and SF as a resource is what we were built on. It's in bad taste in general to bump threads that old for everyone involved from a social standpoint - many of those people could be embarrassed by how they might've acted at the time, especially considering the general age group of our user base. There are plenty of reasons why it makes sense to keep necroing in check on a forum as old as we are.

I have to disagree.

The topics get old but not the games. They're timeless. There are still new people who start to play videogames after years of the release and would like to discuss. Videogame reviews should be pinned for that reason and also games which are still in progressing.

Anyways I'd like to see more things pinned instead of starting the same topic each week.

It would simplify the overview for the users (at least for me) and save us from some new (and unnecessary) threads. I see pretty much each week the same questions about FE14 (who how to promote to which class, class discussions...). All these topics are very common and should be pinned consequently. If new topics with a similar or identical content are made, they should be sent to the pinned one.

[ruadath]

To add to this discussion, I'll just note that if you have a good reason to necropost, you can usually just PM one of the mods and ask them if it's OK... and assuming your reason is legitimate they'll just be like "sure, whatever" or offer an alternative suggestion and you can do that.

[Tangerine]

I have to disagree.

The topics get old but not the games. They're timeless. There are still new people who start to play videogames after years of the release and would like to discuss. Videogame reviews should be pinned for that reason and also games which are still in progressing.

Anyways I'd like to see more things pinned instead of starting the same topic each week.

It would simplify the overview for the users (at least for me) and save us from some new (and unnecessary) threads. I see pretty much each week the same questions about FE14 (who how to promote to which class, class discussions...). All these topics are very common and should be pinned consequently. If new topics with a similar or identical content are made, they should be sent to the pinned one.

I don't know what this has to do with necroposting. There are no rules against posting in an old game's forum.

We have a pinned thread for general questions. It's a forum with thousands of active users, there are going to be repeat questions and posts. Not having a necroposting rule wouldn't solve that.

Moderating every single person who has a similar question doesn't accomplish anything. If discussion threads are similar enough they can be merged, and if someone has a similar question to someone else then they can be pointed in the right direction by users.

Edited May 18, 2016 by Tangerine

[MisterIceTeaPeach]

There are no rules against posting in an old game's forum.

I see. I didn't know it actually.

We have a pinned thread for general questions. It's a forum with thousands of active users, there are going to be repeat questions and posts. Not having a necroposting rule wouldn't solve that.

I just found it noticeable to see topics about the same content quite recently.

I mean it's too late anyways since FE14 has multiple hundred of topics already and it'd be way too time-consuming to add them together.

It was just an idea of myself for an upcoming FE game to pin topics like Promotion thread which deals with all specific questions about this topic instead of having like 30 own topics.

[Integrity]

To add to this discussion, I'll just note that if you have a good reason to necropost, you can usually just PM one of the mods and ask them if it's OK... and assuming your reason is legitimate they'll just be like "sure, whatever" or offer an alternative suggestion and you can do that.

signal boosting this bitch, if you just ask one of us and have a modestly good reason to want to necro instead of making a new thread we'll usually say yes lol

[Gradivus.]

I think mods just shouldn't follow the 1 month/2 pages rule too strictly, because there's stuff like projects or playthroughs on hiatus where there's no need to lock them just because someone posts. There's no problem with locking year-old threads though.