Have noticed in the past week or two there have been a few threads bumped. I don't see a problem with this as long as there's an update. Mods have now been locking these threads. The most recent being:

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/other-talk/...ction-day.html

And that bump was relevant to the thread and it gets locked???

So what's the deal here? We haven't had a problem with thread bumps before and most never resulted in a lock.

Start new thread, get yelled at for not using search. Bump old thread related to a comment and get moderated. /shrug

It's mostly the bumping of an old thread without commenting on the bump article.

"Someone" previously liked to start threads without commenting on his/her post and got "mod noted" about it. Now he/she bumps old threads instead and does the same thing.

Exactly! Thank you.

Oh. Yeah, this, too.

"Both, and..." situation.

I'm seeing a trend...

I don't have many examples, but I don't think you can say these bumps are relevant. In most cases, it seems as if they're loosely connected at best. The example given in the OP, which was locked, bears that out. A random post about an ebay auction was tacked on to the end of a 2006 thread about another ebay auction. Hardly a reason to resurrect an old thread, in my opinion.

^And it's a pattern with that particular poster, and he was recently warned about it.

It's penguin joe.
Is his name unmentionable or something

+1

It's fun seeing a very old thread getting bumped once in a blue moon, but it becomes tedious when it happens on a weekly basis.

Though to be honest, this entire site isn't a hotbed of fast-paced discussion at the moment, lessening the crime. It would have been a more serious problem during DVDTalk's halcyon days.

Since I locked the thread, I will comment.

Can you point to a recent mod comment, in the Other section of the forum at least, where a poster was "yelled" at for not searching and using an existing thread?

Exactly. These bumps are "related" in name only. The topics are very different in actuality, and are very well deserving of their own threads. And it should be pointed out, that I did split off a few of these unrelated bumped threads into their own threads, but I am not going to keep doing that.


It is more than tedious, it is annoying and doesn't necessarily foster discussion, at least on the intended subject of the bump. Start a new thread and comment on it. Discussion.

Also, since the forum isn't a hotbed of activity, we could use the new threads, comments, and discussion. If it really is the same topic, such as the update on the Amanda Knox case for example, bump it. Otherwise, start a new thread.

I've never understood the outrage at not searching for some old thread from 10 or 15 years ago and bumping it just to add a like comment or issue. When I'm reading through the forums and see a relevant thread I'd like to read thinking it's current then finding out the thread was originally from 2004, it gets frustrating. I can see how an individual who's been around for that long might get a charge out of seeing an old topic get bumped for the nostalgia factor, but it gets tedious when you forget to look at the date of the thread to find out it's not actually current, except for maybe the bumping post, which oftentimes isn't even relevant. So why the outrage at not searching for some antiquated POS thread to bump whenever you want to start a new thread about something? Just so the forum doesn't get overrun with threads? Wowsa...

Agreed.

The converse in this discussion is that he created a Florida Behaving Badly thread and then creates new threads for "Florida man arrested for having sex with pit bull in yard", "FL Woman performs C-section on dog, closes incision with glue (guess the state...FL!)", "Pregnant Florida woman goes on crack binge chews off umbilical cord", and "Florida woman arrested for killing animals in animal torture videos."DVD Talk's Johnny Appleseed he is not.

I wonder if he really does come back to watch his seeds grow. If he did, he'd probably notice the # of threads he starts or bumps that get locked and might understand that he probably shouldn't continue doing the same thing over and over and over.

He probably notices but why should he change? He gets all these mod warnings but no action is taken other than closing an already old thread.

Yep. Frankly I agree with this. Sometimes if I know I've seen a topic before and it's from a long time ago and I'd like to discuss it I'll bump a thread just because. It's either that or get some of the uppity members bitching at you for not using the search function so whatever.

that's 2 down!

I now stand corrected.

x2

Yep...I saw all the locks and was wondering, "Are they locking them because people are bumping old threads?" I, too, thought that was the preferred method. You're damned if you do, damned if you don't around here.

-- Starting a new thread when there is already a thread on the front page: no-no
-- Bumping a 10 year old thread to add a tangentially related comment: no-no

Basic rule of thumb: use common sense.

Also 90% of the "you should have done a search!" comments come from other members, not the moderators.

I think we can agree that Penguin Joe was not fostering discussion regardless of whether he was starting new threads or bumping old ones.

True. I generally just do a merge.

I kind of like reading the old threads he would bump but obviously I'm in the minority in that it never really bothered me.

Yep, as long as it was even remotely related I much prefer thread bumps than new threads. But then, I like living in the past.....