Quote:
Originally Posted by karen_in_nh_2012
I assume you meant "relevant." And what is wrong with starting a new thread?!
Which is exactly what happened in this thread. Yes, let's give advice to someone who posted 6 years ago.
Gee, I never noticed that. Seriously, OF COURSE I've noticed that, and of course what I have also noticed is that new (usually new) posters will simply add on to old threads when they have their own question (which is sometimes related, sometimes not). Or they will give advice to someone who hasn't been online at CD in 5 years.
I wish that CD would instead tell newbies, "The 'new thread' button is your friend." I suspect I am not the only one.
|
Well, if the way CD is run is not to your taste, you could always start your own forum that would, no doubt, be run perfectly.
I wish the people who for some reason get their panties in a twist over resurrected threads
when it is the forum policy that it is allowed and encouraged and thus are a major source of thread disruption would just get over themselves, frankly.
As for not being the only one, doesn't that fall into the "But, Moooooom, EVERYBODY's doing it!" school of behavior justification?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pitt Chick
Hahaha... and so it goes.
Now bandwidth is being wasted by debating who is wasting bandwidth!
And by accusations of thread police....
all of which would have been avoided if the poster did NOT resurrect an ancient post and started a new one instead.
Oh the irony!
|
Or, it would have been avoided if someone hadn't decided to be thread nanny because a poster didn't post in exactly the precise way that they themselves prefer (in which case the poster would have been jumped on by someone else telling them they shouldn't have started a new thread, they should have searched for old threads on the same topic).