Resurrecting old threads

[Chimpan-A]

Anyone else find this frustrating? I open a thread called something like “Sharp’s Current Form”, and am baffled when I read two pages of comments saying he will never make it at this club as he isn’t a natural finisher. Then I see that the original post was from 2006 but somebody has decided to add to it.
This is a made up example but you get my drift. Surely a post about a player’s current form is worthy of a new thread? And if there is a genuine update to an older thread, wouldn’t it be better to link that thread?
Just a thought, might just be me being grumpy!!

 

[BLADES1988]

I think we've had a thread on resurrecting old threads before mate

 

[Houston_Blade]

It's more frustrating when people post in the wrong area.

 

[HD8 Blades]

Mental note to bump this thread in 2025

 

[Jon P]

Isn’t the spirit of the game to check if there’s an existing thread with the same theme before starting a new one? Maybe that’s why…

 

[Chimpan-A]

So it IS just me! Just thought I would check.

 

[Varkanoid]

No its not its bloody annoying, seems to happen more often than not when there is not a lot of news going about. What baffles me is it these posters are actually looking for an old thread to continue when it takes less time to just click new thread.

Jon P some people taking it to the extreme. That "rule" is meant to only apply to current active threads on the first 1 or 2 pages not 1024 pages ago or 15 years ago. Especially when the original subject is "Sharp out for 6 months" when in fact he is playing on Saturday. Then the poster puts something thats completely unrelated to the subject or OP. This is what is most annoying.

 

[Snowflake]

No its not its bloody annoying, seems to happen more often than not when there is not a lot of news going about. What baffles me is it these posters are actually looking for an old thread to continue when it takes less time to just click new thread.

Jon P some people taking it to the extreme. That "rule" is meant to only apply to current active threads on the first 1 or 2 pages not 1024 pages ago or 15 years ago. Especially when the original subject is "Sharp out for 6 months" when in fact he is playing on Saturday. Then the poster puts something thats completely unrelated to the subject or OP. This is what is most annoying.

Perhaps threads more than two years old could go into a “history” folder. This would be capable of being accessed, but not “bumped”.

 

[Moan? Nope-I saw Longhorn]

Aye
It’s an absolute bastard having to check the date AND read the post (if you choose to)

 

[BladeByChoice]

I think it depends on the content, in your example the title ‘Sharp’s Current Form’, it should be self-explanatory that this thread is only newsworthy for the next few matches.

On the other hand, a few weeks ago I wanted to comment on Kevin Gage’s commentary, did a search on thread titles on found one called ‘Kevin Gage - summarising on Radio Sheffield’ form 2015 and posted there because my content seemed to fit (understand your point about linking the thread).

One niggle I have is threads titles, a couple of weeks ago we had a thread called ‘Club Shop new range’ this would be an excellent thread to run and run, being bumped when new items are put on sale. Looking at the content its obvious that its about a specific item, rainbow scarves so could have been titles club shop selling rainbow scarves.

Good idea from snowflake to have some kind of archive so threads added to after a certain date would not get bumped but people watching the thread would still get a notification.

I’ve also posted this in the comments and suggestions section.

 

[HodgysBrokenThumb]

So it IS just me! Just thought I would check.

It is very embarrassing to respond to a thread and then find out that it was all comments made 10 years ago. A friend of mine did this, that’s how I know…

 

[Blade.com]

So it IS just me! Just thought I would check.

No, I've found myself commenting or liking something and found out it's 6 years old. Whups.

 

[BladeInIreland]

Is it just me who gives zero fucks when somebody does or doesn't resurrect an old thread and/or post in the wrong section?

 

[BladeByChoice]

This thread is getting old now, can we stop bumbing it.

 

[Blade56]

Anyone else find this frustrating? I open a thread called something like “Sharp’s Current Form”, and am baffled when I read two pages of comments saying he will never make it at this club as he isn’t a natural finisher. Then I see that the original post was from 2006 but somebody has decided to add to it.
This is a made up example but you get my drift. Surely a post about a player’s current form is worthy of a new thread? And if there is a genuine update to an older thread, wouldn’t it be better to link that thread?
Just a thought, might just be me being grumpy!!

As a conservationist worried about global warming I’m not happy with single use threads and support recycling old ones

 

[Nosworthys Throw]

Is it just me who gives zero fucks when somebody does or doesn't resurrect an old thread and/or post in the wrong section?

High five brother

 

[diode_blade]

As long as the thread doesn't bounce....

 

[Bladesman]

So it IS just me! Just thought I would check.

It states the original date of the thread before you click on them.

 

[Edgar Allan Poo]

Is it just me who gives zero fucks when somebody does or doesn't resurrect an old thread and/or post in the wrong section?

I'm all for resurrecting the dead but posting in the wrong section is unforgivable.

 

[Chezzy Blades]

I'm all for resurrecting the dead but posting in the wrong section is unforgivable.

What of those heathens that resurrect an old thread that had died because it was posted in the wrong section?

 

[Edgar Allan Poo]

What of those heathens that resurrect an old thread that had died because it was posted in the wrong section?

Punishment should be of Taliban type proportions.

 

[Jon P]

No its not its bloody annoying, seems to happen more often than not when there is not a lot of news going about. What baffles me is it these posters are actually looking for an old thread to continue when it takes less time to just click new thread.

Jon P some people taking it to the extreme. That "rule" is meant to only apply to current active threads on the first 1 or 2 pages not 1024 pages ago or 15 years ago. Especially when the original subject is "Sharp out for 6 months" when in fact he is playing on Saturday. Then the poster puts something thats completely unrelated to the subject or OP. This is what is most annoying.

Can't argue with that!

 

[Bladesman]

No its not its bloody annoying, seems to happen more often than not when there is not a lot of news going about. What baffles me is it these posters are actually looking for an old thread to continue when it takes less time to just click new thread.

Jon P some people taking it to the extreme. That "rule" is meant to only apply to current active threads on the first 1 or 2 pages not 1024 pages ago or 15 years ago. Especially when the original subject is "Sharp out for 6 months" when in fact he is playing on Saturday. Then the poster puts something thats completely unrelated to the subject or OP. This is what is most annoying.

The thread has a timestamp. It is easy to see it before you click on a thread.

Some news stories or old threads become relevant again. Especially in the rumour mill with transfer targets.

 

[Blade56]

I'm all for resurrecting the dead but posting in the wrong section is unforgivable.

This reply should be in the Unforgiving Chat section along with spells and curses not General Blades Chat section

 

[Edgar Allan Poo]

This reply should be in the Unforgiving Chat section along with spells and curses not General Blades Chat section

Is that a hidden thread by invite only? Would it help if I bribed a minor official?

 

[Blade56]

Is that a hidden thread by invite only? Would it help if I bribed a minor official?

It will cost you……

 

[Bladesman]

It will cost you……

View attachment 124173

Bargain!

 

[DifferentClass]

Billy Sharp is a fat useless git who will be in non-league in two seasons. If you think he'll ever become a Blades legend you must be smoking spice.

Oops, thought it was 2006!

 

[Varkanoid]

The thread has a timestamp. It is easy to see it before you click on a thread.

Some news stories or old threads become relevant again. Especially in the rumour mill with transfer targets.

When you skim down the threads the red subject stands out I dont often see the date underneath as its light grey and I click on the thread due to the subject header.
If you read some of the resurrected posts you think what was the point in posting again 2006, 2013, 2008. Nobody is going to accuse you of posting a duplicate thread if you think about it. Would mean they then have to search for a thread to match the new one. Thats the point.

Anyway as I said IMHO its annoying and just need to go searching now for that old thread from 1995 so I can add my msg.

 

[BladeByChoice]

You cannot see the date on portrait screens (most phones), use you dev tools and look at the site with various emulators.

portrait


landscape