Suggestion Don't allow new users to bump old posts

[Dionicio3]

Hello! I recently notice a lot of new users have been bumping post about 4 months since last reply. I feel that users should not be able to reply to posts if

1. They have less than 100 post
2. The last post was more that 90 days ago
3. The user joined within the last week

Hopefully this will solve the issue for the most part. Thanks.

EDIT: Ok, let be say what I mean, users should be allowed to comment on release threads, but random noob threads can not be replied to

EDIT2: No, what I'm thinking of someone bumps a release thread like this, that's ok. But if someone bumps a noob support question like this, that should not be allowed. (These are random example threads)

 

[BullyWiiPlaza]

Doing that will turn Temp into a dictatorship :c

You should see about StackOverflow and similar StackExchange sites. You can virtually do nothing as newbie and missing only one rule will get you teared up. Furthermore, you can be question-banned if your questions aren't qualitatively high.

GBATemp is nothing like it, the moderation is quasi non-existent unless someone is posting piracy, that makes them all go wild out of nowhere. Any other issues goes unnoticed because they just don't care even when reported.

 

[elBenyo]

I think if your account isn't three month old you shouldn't be able to open original threads at all. I doubt there is a contribution that can be made by such a new member that would be of any importance that couldn't already pertain to an existing thread. For example, this thread shouldn't exist and should be locked.

 

[Dionicio3]

I think if your account isn't three month old you shouldn't be able to open original threads at all. I doubt there is a contribution that can be made by such a new member that would be of any importance that couldn't already pertain to an existing thread. For example, this thread shouldn't exist and should be locked.

Ok, that is just dumb, I have seen a lot of new users create good, helpful threads. And the amount of time the user has been here does not only matter, I said 100+ post count.

 

[Deleted-355425]

Here's a better idea, lets just leave things the way they are.

 

[H1B1Esquire]

I like this, but there is still one problem, some noobs don't look at stickied threads. And those tend to be the people who bump random noob support threads.

That means you'd have to do some campaigning, such as, referring people to look at the sticky and inform them to ask a mod to close their thread because their question has been answered in detail.

 

[elBenyo]

Ok, that is just dumb, I have seen a lot of new users create good, helpful threads. And the amount of time the user has been here does not only matter, I said 100+ post count.

You seem upset because your account isn't three months old. I could make 100 posts in ten minutes if I were a spammer and your logic would be garbage, like this thread.

 

[Dionicio3]

You should see about StackOverflow and similar StackExchange sites. You can virtually do nothing as newbie and missing only one rule will get you teared up. Furthermore, you can be question-banned if your questions aren't qualitatively high.

GBATemp is nothing like it, the moderation is quasi non-existent unless someone is posting piracy, that makes them all go wild out of nowhere. Any other issues goes unnoticed because they just don't care even when reported.

This is not true at all, if people reports a post, staff you look, and deem it deletion worthy. I have reported plenty of non-piracy related posts and they have gotten deleted because they broke other temp rules

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

You seem upset because your account isn't three months old. I could make 100 posts in ten minutes if I were a spammer and your logic would be garbage, like this thread.

I have been here for 3 months, yes, but I have made over 1,600 useful posts. Thats more than you can say

 

[CZroe]

No, what I'm thinking of some bumps a release thread like this, that's ok. But if someone bumps a noob support question like this, that should not be allowed. (These are random example threads)

...except that your solution would not discriminate between the two and even if it did it would stop some necessary input. What if the OP in the thread got some information that worked for him based on some prior understanding of what someone meant, but someone else bricked their console by following what was said to a T (unlike the OP)? What if that person was worried that someone else would stumble on that thread just like he or she did and have the same tragic results? What if that scenario played out over and over before someone realized that the search ranking of that particular thread was sending waves of people there to meet the same fate? Are we really going to stop someone from adding a warning over some minor annoyance like having to see an old topic until it does again?

If you're worried that people will start answering the OP without looking to see if it has been answered in the thread and, this, keeping the thread alive, well, then you identified the wrong cause of the problem. The problem is people answering without reading the thread to see if it has been answered. A conversation should live, die, or live again with renewed vigor on the worthiness of the content itself, not how old it is. If a thread was not compelling enough to stay alive before and someone bumps it with nothing legitimate to add then it will die again on its own... as long as no one compounds the problem by complaining about necrobumps (while bumping the thread) or responding to the OP without reading the thread. Again: those are the real issues. If you have any bright ideas to deal with those instead without collateral damage to the legitimate and primary function of a web forum such as this, we're all ears.

 

[Dionicio3]

...except that your solution would not discriminate between the two and even if it did it would stop some necessary input. What if the OP in the thread got some information that worked for him based on some prior understanding of what someone meant, but someone else bricked their console by following what was said to a T (unlike the OP)? What if that person was worried that someone else would stumble on that thread just like he or she did and have the same tragic results? What if that scenario played out over and over before someone realized that the search ranking of that particular thread was sending waves of people there to meet the same fate? Are we really going to stop someone from adding a warning over some minor annoyance like having to see an old topic until it does again?

If you're worried that people will start answering the OP without looking to see if it has been answered in the thread and, this, keeping the thread alive, well, then you identified the wrong cause of the problem. The problem is people answering without reading the thread to see if it has been answered. A conversation should live, die, or live again with renewed vigor on the worthiness of the content itself, not how old it is. If a thread was not compelling enough to stay alive before and someone bumps it with nothing legitimate to add then it will die again on its own... as long as no one compounds the problem by complaining about necrobumps (while bumping the thread) or responding to the OP without reading the thread. Again: those are the real issues. If you have any bright ideas to deal with those instead without collateral damage to the legitimate and primary function of a web forum such as this, we're all ears.

Um, people can always make a new thread...

 

[CZroe]

Most noob bumpers are uninformed and never read stickies which then causes some more pointless activity in an outdated thread, so this is not a bad suggestion. If the topic were still relevant, the thread would not be that inactive so there must be something wrong with it. However, there are some legitimate reasons still. A warning might be the best solution but the restriction might do some good as well.

I've already explained how that is a completely incorrect assumption. Even if I hadn't you're forgetting that if the bumped topic is worth reviving then conversations will resume. If it wasn't then it will die again. This "problem" deals with itself while the OP's suggestion creates a dangerous NEW problem. That makes the choice between the two obvious.

I think if your account isn't three month old you shouldn't be able to open original threads at all. I doubt there is a contribution that can be made by such a new member that would be of any importance that couldn't already pertain to an existing thread. For example, this thread shouldn't exist and should be locked.

LOL! Your logic is impeccable.

Um, people can always make a new thread...

...and how, may I ask, does that address the VERY REAL problem of people (including non-members) silently finding the old thread and suffering the consequences of the unchecked information there? A new thread doesn't just assume the place of the last in Google search ranking and links to the old thread don't suddenly get redirected to the latest thread freshly posted by a new user.

It's clear that you're still missing the most basic thing about why sequestering crucial info that belongs in an old thread is a bad idea so I suggest you re-read my original post in this thread before continuing. It happens FAR more often than you realize and, as I explained, very often motivates a new user to sign up in the first place.

 

[Dionicio3]

I've already explained how that is a completely incorrect assumption. Even if I hadn't you're forgetting that if the bumped topic is worth reviving then conversations will resume. If it wasn't then it will die again. This "problem" deals with itself while the OP's suggestion creates a dangerous NEW problem. That makes the choice between the two obvious.


LOL! Your logic is impeccable.


...and how, may I ask, does that address the VERY REAL problem of people finding the old thread and suffering the consequences of the unchecked information there? A new thread doesn't just assume the place of the last in Google search ranking and links to the old thread don't suddenly get redirected to the latest thread freshly posted by a new user.

It's clear that you're still missing the most basic thing about why sequestering crucial info that belongs in an old thread is a bad idea so I suggest you re-read my original post in this thread before continuing. It happens FAR more often than you realize and, as I explained, very often motivates a new user to sign up in the first place.

Im just saying, why not post a new thread, or post in the program's release thread. If they post in the program's release thread, more people will see it.

 

[CZroe]

Im just saying, why not post a new thread, or post in the program's release thread. If they post in the program's release thread, more people will see it.

...and I just told you "why not." You failed to consider several crucial scenarios and you're still doing it by framing the question this way.

 

[Dionicio3]

...and I just told you "why not." You failed to consider several crucial scenarios and you're still doing it by framing the question this way.

And what are these "crucial" scenarios?

 

[CZroe]

And what are these "crucial" scenarios?

Was I not clear enough when I specifically instructed you to read my first post in this thread?

I'm not surprised you missed it. Heck, you even missed your own contradiction in your previous post! You know: the one where your suggestion in the OP would also block them from posting in a programs's release thread. If you failed to consider that originally, what other scenarios did you fail to consider? Start with the ones I gave you about non-members stumbling on dangerous information here by way of Google. There are more, but even the ones we've laid out for you are MORE than enough to show that you didn't think this through.

You should see about StackOverflow and similar StackExchange sites. You can virtually do nothing as newbie and missing only one rule will get you teared up. Furthermore, you can be question-banned if your questions aren't qualitatively high.

GBATemp is nothing like it, the moderation is quasi non-existent unless someone is posting piracy, that makes them all go wild out of nowhere. Any other issues goes unnoticed because they just don't care even when reported.

Yeah? Well, some other places are more elitist/exclusionary/professional/all-business. So what? Some places don't suffer noobs in their space. Even so, you described moderation practices. Strict moderation doesn't mean they'd be stupid enough to shoot themselves in the foot with half-baked automated moderation like the OP suggests.

 

[Dionicio3]

You know: the one where your suggestion in the OP would also block them from posting in a programs's release thread.

Um, I said to allow this

 

[CZroe]

Um, I said to allow this

Your response was much too fast to have considered the post, indicating that you are being defensive instead of actually being open to criticism or suggestion. You aren't even considering the part you are responding to, since it requires magic or scary-accurate-but-revolutionary AI or something to pull off in the automated way you suggest.

 

[The Catboy]

This one just seems like a guilty for being new, punishment.
This ruling just seems arbitrary. A lot of the restrictions put onto newbie accounts were put there not because of the actions of newbies, they were done to prevent spambots. Like how newbies can't reply/send PM's until they hit 10 posts. That was added because spambots were spamming the PM system.

 

[raulpica]

This ruling just seems arbitrary. A lot of the restrictions put onto newbie accounts were put there not because of the actions of newbies, they were done to prevent spambots. Like how newbies can't reply/send PM's until they hit 10 posts. That was added because spambots were spamming the PM system.
This one just seems like a guilty for being new, punishment.

Sounds like a good idea in my book - you know what happens a lot? Newly registered member PM-offers old member a brand-new spanking 3DS for cheap. Old member just thinks "damn this is too good of a deal to let it slip", new guy gets the money, nothing gets sent, scammer disappears. Yeah, you could go and blame the guy, but that would be just plain wrong. I've bought lots of times from new users on eBay and the internet in general - they all have to start somewhere and it just happens that often I'm THAT guy. And luckily enough, I never got scammed and got some AMAZING deals, but still I'm always aware that it could happen. So yes. I can understand people risking their money just to get a bargain, as I often do it myself.

With that rule in place, most scammers won't bother doing 10 non-spammy posts and if they start spamming, we easily ban them. Obviously it'd be much better if our members didn't buy from new users altogether, but you can't really stop it.

So yeah, we're protecting our community here - not just resting on our laurels.

 

[The Catboy]

Sounds like a good idea in my book - you know what happens a lot? Newly registered member PM-offers old member a brand-new spanking 3DS for cheap. Old member just thinks "damn this is too good of a deal to let it slip", new guy gets the money, nothing gets sent, scammer disappears. Yeah, you could go and blame the guy, but that would be just plain wrong. I've bought lots of times from new users on eBay and the internet in general - they all have to start somewhere and it just happens that often I'm THAT guy. And luckily enough, I never got scammed and got some AMAZING deals, but still I'm always aware that it could happen. So yes. I can understand people risking their money just to get a bargain, as I often do it myself.

With that rule in place, most scammers won't bother doing 10 non-spammy posts and if they start spamming, we easily ban them. Obviously it'd be much better if our members didn't buy from new users altogether, but you can't really stop it.

So yeah, we're protecting our community here - not just resting on our laurels.

Are...are you agreeing with me?

 

[Dionicio3]

Are...are you agreeing with me?

That's what it looks like