• Anything ‘published’ on the web is viewed as intellectual property and, regardless of whether it displays a copyright symbol or not, is therefore copyrighted by the originator. The only exception to this is if there is a “free and unrestricted reuse” statement associated with the work.

    In order to protect our members and TFL from possible litigation, all members must abide by the following new rules:

    1. Copying and pasting entire articles from another site to TFL is strictly prohibited. The same applies to articles from print or other media, and to posting photographs taken of copyrighted pages or other media.

    2. Copyright law provides for “fair use” of portions of a copyrighted work. You can copy no more than a SINGLE paragraph from the article to your post (3 or 4 sentences at most).

    3. You must provide a link to the article along with the name of website. For example: ww.xxx.yyy/zzz (The Lower Thumbsuck Daily News).

    4. You must provide, in your own words, a brief summary of the article AND your reasons for believing it will be of interest to TFL members. Failure to do so may result in the thread being closed or your post being deleted as a “cut and paste drive by.”

    5. Photographs and other images are also copyrighted. "Hotlinking" of images (so that it appears in your message) from other sites is also prohibited unless you own rights to the image. If you wish to share an image, provide a clickable link to it.

    Posts that do not follow these new guidelines will be altered or deleted by staff. Members who continue to violate this policy may lose their posting privileges at TFL.

    Thank you for your cooperation and your participation in TFL, the leading online forum for firearms enthusiasts.

Why are resurrected threads always closed?

S

Sponge14

New member
I don't understand why threads that are civilized and informative are closed due to their age? Most forums harp on the fact that people should search for old threads rather than post new ones, but here when an old thread is brought back up, even if there is still good information, they are being closed? More than a few times I have wanted to comment in a thread that was resurrected, only to find it was locked for no other reason but it's age. Gun's and the knowledge surrounding them don't change with thread age.... Can someone maybe take another look at the policy of closing old threads when the only reason for closing is their age?
 
I have to agree. If an old thread creates a new line of discussion, what does it mattter when it was started.

Wouldn't it be better to have all the old and new information contained in one thread rather than having two threads on the same topic?
 
I also think the threads get shut down too quickly. I'm having problems uploading photos, cause they're too large. A paint program, what ever that is, called screenhunter was recommended by staff. While downloading it a popup said can cause damage to the computer and Norton said safe. When I went back to the thread to ask what the risk of damage could be it was already shut down by staff. There were just a few posts and good questions were being asked. I don't have any say and that's OK, but what gives? I see this nowhere else and it is a shame how many threads are locked down. Anyway, I'm too disgusted when it comes to uploading anything now.
 
One problem is that new posters tend to reply to the OP, and there's just no reason to keep a thread going when the "what to buy" question has long since been settled. Other times the person doing the resurrecting is asking a completely unrelated question, one that should have been its own thread.

Speaking for myself, I never see a resurrected thread that was worth dredging back up for continuing discussion. I'd personally love it if threads would be automatically locked after a set period of inactivity (say, a month or so).

Remember- locking a thread only keeps it from accepting new posts. It does NOT disappear from the forum; you can still link to it in the OP if you would like to refer to a five year old discussion (seems these resurrected threads are never only a few months old... always several years).
 
And Technosavant gets the cookie for the correct answer.

Yesterday I closed a thread in the Rifle section.

The new message was a response to the original poster.

The thread was started in May 1999, was based on a rumor that ultimately turned out not to be true, and most of the original participants in that thread haven't been active in some time.

What conceivable reason would there be for keeping that one open?

None.

Gunsmoke, you seem to talking about a question you asked in Site Questions and Tech Support.

We tend to close SQ&TS threads as soon as the original poster's ORIGINAL question has been answered. If we don't, they often just plod along, not shedding much, if any, new light on the new question.

The fact that your original thread had been closed shouldn't have made much, if any, difference, you could have posted a new thread with your newer question.

Finally, yes, we like it when members search before asking a question. But just because they've found a thread that seems to answer their question doesn't mean that their question should be appended to a thread that's years old.

It's simply better that they ask any follow on questions in a new thread. That way THEIR question gets the attention it needs, instead of people jumping in and opining on a post that was made years ago.

Currently we on staff are discussing this very issue, and there's a very good likelihood that this issue of resurrecting years-old zombie threads isn't going to be an issue much longer.
 
gunsmokeTPF said:
A paint program, what ever that is, called screenhunter was recommended by staff.
Click to expand...
Where did anyone from Staff recommend a program called "screenhunter"? I can't find it referenced anywhere.


Back to the original question in this thread. Let me reiterate what Mike just said:
Mike Irwin said:
It's simply better that they ask any follow on questions in a new thread. That way THEIR question gets the attention it needs, instead of people jumping in and opining on a post that was made years ago.
Click to expand...

That aspect of resurrected threads is the most frustrating, at least it is to me. When someone brings back an old, old thread and adds a new question or even some bit of otherwise useful information, we find that subsequent posts most often address the old posts, often ignoring the new question or information entirely.

The best method to add new information to an old subject is to start a new thread and reference the old one in a link if necessary. That way, those opening and reading the new thread know exactly why the thread was created. No one is answering a decade old question or responding to members who don't even visit TFL any longer.
 
MalH, the thread was "Why Use[img/img] For Pictures". Sorry, meant to say Varmiter recommended a site http://anyguess.wordpress.com/picture-tips/ and JohnKSa, who was staff, closed it down.

My problem was when I went on that site it had something called screenhunter and while trying to download it a popup said it could damage my computer and Norton said it was safe, so naturally I ran for the hills. All I wanted to ask Varminter was if there was a risk using it. It ain't worth screwing up my computer just to show some pictures no matter how interesting they were.

It's pointless starting a new thread when this one hardly existed. That thread was around for only a few days. Good LORD, is someone monitoring a screen watching all of us like Internal Affairs? I can understand shutting things down when individuals become aggressive, or insulting, or really off the wall. I can understand it if there were complaints, but please loosen up a little and let the words flow a little bit. We're not on TV, or radio and there aren't any commercial breaks.

I must have been doing something taboo the first time I posted, cause I even resurrected a thread re: Colt Bisleys. It was a few years old and interesting to me and I had something interesting to say. I don't think it mattered if all who posted were dead, cause others picked up on it for a while.

I don't mean to insult those running this forum. This is yours and I'm only a guest giving an opinion. I've been on other forums, but never posted photos, or had any desire to. I have no problems sending them on emails, but probably spend less time on my computer than most here. I guess we're all not meant to be computer savvy. I'll just go clean my guns and that I know how to do!
 
MalH, the thread was "Why Use[img/img] For Pictures". Sorry, meant to say Varmiter recommended a site http://anyguess.wordpress.com/picture-tips/ and JohnKSa, who was staff, closed it down.
Click to expand...
I didn't close it, it was closed by another staff member. In addition, what remains visible on the thread is not the reason it was closed.

It was primarily closed as a result of material/posts that have been deleted/edited and are therefore not visible except to staff.

By the way, although no one has said it, not all resurrected threads are closed. Generally speaking, the mere fact that an old thread is resurrected isn't sufficient justification for a close, although it certainly figures into the decision if there are other factors involved.
Good LORD, is someone monitoring a screen watching all of us like Internal Affairs?
Click to expand...
It's more common than not that a staff member is on the forum keeping an eye on things, but it's not possible to watch everyone on the forum all the time. A good number of the staff actions taken are the result of a forum member noting a problem and letting someone on staff know.
 
Sorry, you were the last to post and then it was shut down. It really doesn't matter, cause I get it now. I don't think it's worth discussing anymore, cause you explained things very clearly. Thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top