Necroposting

[HaruHotaru]

Okay. I was talking more on dead threads rather than individual, dead posts (necroposting). I understand better now.. sorry bout that.

[Aniki]

Originally Posted by iPhantom

If it was a new thread I would just post 'I agree', there is no problem. If I were to post on an old topic I wouldn't quote him at all but since I agree with him I would share my opinion (same as him) and why. I don't think those necroposters have time to explain why they agree, they just want to increase post count.

Bravo! If the thread is active, then 'I agree' posts are not spam, but if the thread is old, then it IS a spam!? Wow, what a way of thinking. Thanks to it one might understand that there's absolutely nothing wrong to post all the 'I agree' and other pointless posts.

Originally Posted by iPhantom

This way you REVIVE the thread for others and PUT A VALID ARGUE for your opinion. Hell, 5 straight necroposters could revive a thread saying I agree citing only one guy.

So, and 1 person might necropost 5 dead threads with their pointless posts, where each thread might become alive thanks to other members.
The chances of your lame example to happen aren't bigger than mine.

Originally Posted by iPhantom

Reviving an old post VIA necroposting is a bad habit and should be stopped. revive it with an argument, it's fine.

Reviving with an argument is fine huh? Recently I stopped believing in that.
The Geisha --- is it art? thread explains it. It wasn't buried 5 pages back (the whole J-art section has only 8 pages), but it is old, not full three months have pasted before GkScott revived it with his good argument, and the thread was alive again, but you and that burkhar...whatever didn't bother to post something relevant, yours are completely pointless. And this just proves that it doesn't matter if the thread is revived with a good argument or with another pointless post. If, after that, people want make their comments, they'll post them, no matter will their posts be relevant or not.



Besides some pointless posts ThirdSight and nobora added their arguments to the topic. Since both didn't quote GkScott's post I understand that they just replied to the OP's question, and because of that it would be interesting to know: would they still post their arguments if GkScott's post was completely pointless, or would they ignore it just because of that?

[iPhantom]

Bravo! If the thread is active, then 'I agree' posts are not spam, but if the thread is old, then it IS a spam!? Wow, what a way of thinking. Thanks to it one might understand that there's absolutely nothing wrong to post all the 'I agree' and other pointless posts.

Never said they're not SPAM in an active thread, assuming things the way you like won't help. I said it is a weak form of spamming... did not specify it active or inactive. This first paragraph was a bunch of nonsense coming from you.

So, and 1 person might necropost 5 dead threads with their pointless posts, where each thread might become alive thanks to other members.
The chances of your lame example to happen aren't bigger than mine.

Lame example? Look at your lame way of thinking. Necroposters DON'T help, you see the consequence of their posts before the post itself. I don't get why you skip judging how bad is for posts to have garbage like 'I agree' and 'OMG'. Like I said, if you want to revive a post, don't use this way, add an argument but you clearly like the 'OMG I agree' way. Please develop why?

Reviving with an argument is fine huh? Recently I stopped believing in that.
The Geisha --- is it art? thread explains it. It wasn't buried 5 pages back (the whole J-art section has only 8 pages), but it is old, not full three months have pasted before GkScott revived it with his good argument, and the thread was alive again, but you and that burkhar...whatever didn't bother to post something relevant, yours are completely pointless. And this just proves that it doesn't matter if the thread is revived with a good argument or with another pointless post. If, after that, people want make their comments, they'll post them, no matter will their posts be relevant or not.

This is just plain wrong. I replied to an already active thread. It wasn't me who necroposted... sorry but you seem to not understand it very well. The Geisha thread was started by AlphaDuck, and everybody had different opinion from him. He was banned because of flaming and such, we are commenting on that... it is relevant because it happened on that thread. Usually AlphaDucks thread are flame ones anyway. I can't believe you defend yourself by taking an example of unusual threads.

Besides some pointless posts ThirdSight and nobora added their arguments to the topic. Since both didn't quote GkScott's post I understand that they just replied to the OP's question, and because of that it would be interesting to know: would they still post their arguments if GkScott's post was completely pointless, or would they ignore it just because of that?

And you point is? 2 arguments + 1 necroposting is better than 3 posts with arguments?

[Ronin4hire]

Originally Posted by Aniki

Reviving with an argument is fine huh? Recently I stopped believing in that.
The Geisha --- is it art? thread explains it. It wasn't buried 5 pages back (the whole J-art section has only 8 pages), but it is old, not full three months have pasted before GkScott revived it with his good argument, and the thread was alive again, but you and that burkhar...whatever didn't bother to post something relevant, yours are completely pointless. And this just proves that it doesn't matter if the thread is revived with a good argument or with another pointless post. If, after that, people want make their comments, they'll post them, no matter will their posts be relevant or not.



Besides some pointless posts ThirdSight and nobora added their arguments to the topic. Since both didn't quote GkScott's post I understand that they just replied to the OP's question, and because of that it would be interesting to know: would they still post their arguments if GkScott's post was completely pointless, or would they ignore it just because of that?

If they or you really felt that strongly about it they would've started a new thread reviving the issue or found it and posted in it anyway.

So to argue the case that necro-posting brings more opinions to the fore and therefore is something to not be actively discouraged (which is all MMM seems to be doing here) is stupid.

[Aniki]

Originally Posted by iPhantom

Never said they're not SPAM in an active thread, assuming things the way you like won't help. I said it is a weak form of spamming... did not specify it active or inactive. This first paragraph was a bunch of nonsense coming from you.

So now you're classifying spam into categories. Spam is spam, no matter what kind it is. Get over it.

Originally Posted by iPhantom

Lame example? Look at your lame way of thinking.?

Yes, it was lame. Next time, skip the lame examples and you won't see any. That was my point.

Originally Posted by iPhantom

Like I said, if you want to revive a post, don't use this way, add an argument but you clearly like the 'OMG I agree' way. Please develop why?

It doesn't matter to me was the thread revived with a good argument or with just another pointless post. Read my first post in this thread if you want know why, because I'm tired to write the same all over again.

Originally Posted by iPhantom

This is just plain wrong. I replied to an already active thread. It wasn't me who necroposted... sorry but you seem to not understand it very well.

Which of the words "GkScott revived it with his good argument" you didn't understand in my last post!

Originally Posted by iPhantom

The Geisha thread was started by AlphaDuck, and everybody had different opinion from him. He was banned because of flaming and such, we are commenting on that... it is relevant because it happened on that thread. Usually AlphaDucks thread are flame ones anyway.

Geisha --- is it art? <---- The main question the OP asked.

You posted

I'll miss him. Good times back then

Yeah, you're right, that is relevent. How could I even doubt, it really explains are geisha's art or not.

Originally Posted by iPhantom

I can't believe you defend yourself by taking an example of unusual threads.

I trying to explain it you at any way as posible, but you're to stuborn to listen.

Originally Posted by iPhantom

And you point is? 2 arguments + 1 necroposting is better than 3 posts with arguments?

This last part wasn't aimed at you. I was just thinking loudly. Sorry if you misunderstood.

Originally Posted by Ronin4hire

If they or you really felt that strongly about it they would've started a new thread reviving the issue or found it and posted in it anyway.

I guess, what I was trying to say was, if they really want they'd post their arguments no matter what would be written in the persons who revived the thread post.

[iPhantom]

[quote=Aniki;675950]So now you're classifying spam into categories. Spam is spam, no matter what kind it is. Get over it.[quote]

No, it's not. Would need another thread to explain different spam types (bots or individuals, advertising form or posts not related to the thread). There is a lot about spam.

It doesn't matter to me was the thread revived with a good argument or with just another pointless post. Read my first post in this thread if you want know why, because I'm tired to write the same all over again.

Does not to you? We're talking about how it helps the forum, not you. We need quality members, not posts-count maniacs who necropost.

Which of the words "GkScott revived it with his good argument" you didn't understand in my last post!

Then your example is irrelevant because the thread was revived with a fine argument. Too bad the case was closed in there anyway.

Geisha --- is it art? <---- The main question the OP asked.

Yeah, you're right, that is relevent. How could I even doubt, it really explains are geisha's art or not.

The argue was finished, AlphaDucky banned. Like I said that thread can't be taken as a normal example. I can't add anything anymore there because there is NO AlphaDucky [original poster] to reply to. Sorry but this is the worst case to be taken as an example.

I trying to explain it you at any way as posible, but you're to stuborn to listen.

I'm still here trying to figure out why should people necropost to revive threads instead of giving full arguments. Your reply was 'I don't care how it is done'... you went down to personal preference, I'm judging it as a whole matter for the forum.

[Suki]

ROFL~!

"Necroposting".

You guys make up the funniest words.

(yeah thanks, I know what 'necro' means and how it's supposedly related to the cause).

But still, why is it wrong to bring dead threads back to life as long as they're interesting and there's people who still wanna debate that one particular topic? I think that's way better than making threads that were already made *cough*countries you would like to visit*cough*

[iPhantom]

Originally Posted by Suki

But still, why is it wrong to bring dead threads back to life as long as they're interesting and there's people who still wanna debate that one particular topic? I think that's way better than making threads that were already made *cough*countries you would like to visit*cough*

There's nothing wrong in that. But it's wrong using necroposting to revive them. I'm not against reviving threads, I'm against the adding of pointless posts to dead threads.

And there are other ways to revive a thread rather than necropost, I mentioned before.

[Suki]

Originally Posted by iPhantom

There's nothing wrong in that. But it's wrong using necroposting to revive them. I'm not against reviving threads, I'm against the adding of pointless posts to dead threads.

And there are other ways to revive a thread rather than necropost, I mentioned before.

Why would anyone bother to search through old threads not looking for any in particular just for the sake of posting?

[MMM]

Originally Posted by Suki

Why would anyone bother to search through old threads not looking for any in particular just for the sake of posting?

1) Boredom
2) Increase post count