I dislike the Texan accent (Buffalo: title, abandoned, doctor)

[social bunny]

to OP: good for you. do us both a favor and don't come here then.

[TexasHorseLady]

I really don't get the angst over new folks posting on old threads and rejuvenating them (especially to the point of advocating that old threads be locked so no one else can post in them because you don't want to any more!). Seems to me it says that the thread holds some interest for them even if the original participants are done with it. And it's certainly no skin off MY nose if they want to enjoy it; if I don't want to read it, I haven't noticed anybody with a gun making me do so. I still have control over what threads I click on on C-D.

[PanTerra]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

I really don't get the angst over new folks posting on old threads and rejuvenating them (especially to the point of advocating that old threads be locked so no one else can post in them because you don't want to any more!). Seems to me it says that the thread holds some interest for them even if the original participants are done with it. And it's certainly no skin off MY nose if they want to enjoy it; if I don't want to read it, I haven't noticed anybody with a gun making me do so. I still have control over what threads I click on on C-D.

Are you OK? I personally don't portray any angst. However, I do find it a bit humourous the depths people go, digging deep in the archive to make a comment to an OP that hasn't been around for years, as if they are going to get a response from the OP.

[TexasHorseLady]

You could have fooled me (did, in fact) on the angst. If not angsting, why the comment regarding locking threads?

I doubt it's much trouble at all to run across old threads - no digging required. Newbies are advised to search the archives for answers to questions they have and, indeed, if they have not done so and post a question that has been responded to previously when they were not on C-D and might not even have known it existed, are about as often chastised for not doing so as some are chastised for posting to old threads. (It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation, it appears.) In the process of doing such a search, lots of threads are going to pop up, and strike the eye. No big mystery, really, especially for someone who is new to the forum and how it works.

A little Texas friendliness and charity would seem to be in order in that case, don't you think, rather than pouncing whenever someone posts to an old thread? Again, what skin is it off your nose?

[PanTerra]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

You could have fooled me (did, in fact) on the angst. If not angsting, why the comment regarding locking threads?

I doubt it's much trouble at all to run across old threads - no digging required. Newbies are advised to search the archives for answers to questions they have and, indeed, if they have not done so and post a question that has been responded to previously when they were not on C-D and might not even have known it existed, are about as often chastised for not doing so as some are chastised for posting to old threads. (It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation, it appears.) In the process of doing such a search, lots of threads are going to pop up, and strike the eye. No big mystery, really, especially for someone who is new to the forum and how it works.

A little Texas friendliness and charity would seem to be in order in that case, don't you think, rather than pouncing whenever someone posts to an old thread? Again, what skin is it off your nose?

You are overthinking my comment.

[TexasHorseLady]

So, what DID your comment mean? Was it just a throwaway dig at a newby, or at anyone who posts to an older thread? If so, why was it even necessary to make it? What did you get out of a casual attempt to make someone else feel bad?

[PanTerra]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

So, what DID your comment mean? Was it just a throwaway dig at a newby, or at anyone who posts to an older thread? If so, why was it even necessary to make it? What did you get out of a casual attempt to make someone else feel bad?

Really? I mean really? Are you chiding me now?

[TexasHorseLady]

Well, not really. I was chiding you BEFORE.

Now, I'm just trying to figure out, if I was over thinking your statement as you say, what it really was, because I wasn't really having to think all that hard before, it seemed pretty obvious. I was just explaining why it would be very easy for someone to run across an old thread and resurrect it without having to dig deep at all.

[PanTerra]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

Well, not really. I was chiding you BEFORE.

Now, I'm just trying to figure out, if I was over thinking your statement as you say, what it really was, because I wasn't really having to think all that hard before, it seemed pretty obvious. I was just explaining why it would be very easy for someone to run across an old thread and resurrect it without having to dig deep at all.

I don't think you are really trying to figure it out , since I explained my reason in a previous post - because it you were, I suspect that the explanation that I gave would have sufficed and wouldn't warrant any more delving. I think you are more interested in chiding. Besides these last few post will most likely get deleted for derailing this oh so timely and pressing topic.

[doctorjef]

Many old threads had already become impossibly long by the time they were abandoned, before later being dug up like an old dog's bone. The problem as I see it with extremely long threads is that one isn't going to be motivated to follow the whole development of the discussion, especially in a resurrected thread in which the bulk of the posts are quite old. To me it seems preferable to start an entirely new discussion in the form of a new thread, even if the new thread is covering a topic that has already been covered, perhaps by multiple threads over the years. Actually, that happens all the time on more mundane topics like asking about school districts, real estate developments, etc.