It would appear to be a tradition on here that when a thread which hasn't had any new posts suddenly gets revived, it is closed with a message saying something like "please don't bump old topics".

Some forums seem to do it this way, others don't, however, I noticed a thread on here a while ago which was started by a staff member over a year ago, and which still occasionally gets new posts, yet it hasn't been closed. If a thread is obviously dead and buried, bar the 'closed' sign at the bottom of the last post, that's fair enough, but I there are others which I believe are just as relevant now as they were when they were started, and that the length of time since the previous last post and a new one doesn't really make any difference.

What's wrong with posting in an old but still relevant topic anyway ?

I think it depends on three things:
1. What the topic is about
2. Who is bumping the topic
3. Why they're bumping the topic.

Sometimes a topic is bumped because somebody has found it through a search engine. It's either spam, or somebody who came here for one post and then disappears again! In this case it should be closed.

If the topic is a serious discussion, then chances are it might still be relevent and interesting. Other times it's a thread that is no longer relevant and hideously out of date. It's also an issue if the points being discussed now have already been covered.

I think it's also unrealistic that if a Staff member wants to bump a topic they shouldn't be able to. There's always been a rule here that the bumping of topics isn't acceptable, but obviously that isn't always the case. I think the way it works now is pretty well managed.

From reading this forum it depends on who you are and who you know...

I hate when people ask to not bump old topics, but then whine when people don't use the search feature... If I search for a topic, and I have an additional question (which is more than likely) it only makes sense to bump the topic.

I'd say it has more to do with the intent behind the bump. If a topic is just being bumped to +1, then yes it needs to be locked. However, if the person bumping the topic adds something to the thread & the thread itself is still a worthwhile topic, it should be left open for discussion.

I think that is basically what happens.

See http://forums.invisionpower.com/index.php?...&p=15128747 he adds something (granted not much) to the thread and it hasn't been locked, at the same time this bump http://forums.invisionpower.com/index.php?...t&p=1512875 is fairly pointless and so is locked

I'm going to bookmark this thread so I can bump it a year from now.

I still like the idea of the checkbox that vb has or had to bump old topics.

I just use it as an excuse to use my image.

Normally I don't care if it's a news article discussion or something to that effect, but picture posts that get bumped that are more than a month old annoy me to no end.

"She's hot." Yeah, thanks, and if you said that two years ago I wouldn't ban you. >_>

I think it's silly to have rules to stick by no matter what for things like this. Using common sense is a much better way forward. If someone bumps a topic with something worthwhile, then that's fine. Obviously we don't want people bumping old topics to say 'I agree' or something like that. It also depends on the length of time - although we generally say a month old is 'old', obviously it's more likely to be OK than a topic bumped from 2004. I think relevance is directly linked to age... The older a topic is, the less likely a bump is to be relevant to it.

That sounds fair enough.


That's the picture I was looking for when I did the subtitle

As an example, someone bumped this topic today, but their post is interesting and informative, so it's fine.

Well said, Lieutenant!

Personally, I think it's about relevance. If someone bumps an IPB suggestion from 2004 that's already been implemented, just so they can voice their support for the suggestion, well that's relatively pointless. Likewise if someone bumps a news post from 2004 that is no longer relevant (say for example a study that was later proved invalid), that's not relevant. But if someone searches for a topic and adds something of value, I don't generally think it warrants being closed.

Similarly, this is a "professional" site (i.e. this is a public face to a corporation). I'm personally MUCH more lax about this sort of thing on a personal site, or a hobby site. I generally don't like moderating

I don't really care Bump all the old topics you want, as long as your not doing it to be ignorant. How much of an inconvenience is it anyways?

What I personally don't like about topics getting bumped is it's a topic I read last year and it gets bumped, and I end up reading through it from the beginning not realizing what the date is. For me it's a waste of time, especially if I didn't notice the date.

When someone asks another to use the search feature it usually means that they should look for similar topics on the forum to read, not to add a reply to it. If they still have questions, they can post a new topic referencing the old topic via link.

Whether or not a topic should or shouldn't be bumped is really a common sense thing. Most of the time an old topic shouldn't be bumped. The best situation to bump a topic that I can think of is when information given in that topic is not accurate and the user is correcting the information. It's beneficial because if someone found that topic in a search engine they would want accurate information. In that case you may want to reply, but not bump the topic... (wish that was a feature).

Conversely, if you search for a topic and find a relevant one, most of the time the poster doesn't realize the topic date either.

True, but one of the common things you look for when searching a topic is the date. When reading the latest topics on the first page, it's not one of the first things you think of

If you don't look at the date when reading the topics most recently posted in, why should when searching? I don't look at it when searching, especially not if I'm looking for some information.

I'm just saying that you're more inclined to look at the date when replying to a topic that you found while searching vs a topic that you'd find on the first page .

That has to be the worst thing for me too. When I start reading a thread and stumble upon a post I made months or years before hand.

Personally I think it would be a lot cleaner to start a new topic and put a link inside to the original topic as a reference point.