I have always been wanting to start a poll like this for months but I just couldn't bring myself to do it. Now I am, this has to be said. I think there should be a rule against bumping up extremely old topics. By extremely old topics, I mean threads that are over six months old. Here's why I think there should be a rule.

1. People don't like to see their old posts. I don't know if everyone feels like this but I cringe whenever I see posts I made a long time ago. I know other members who have made posts in the past that they'd just as soon forget. There have been a few instances where some individuals bumped up an extremely old topic that I had replied in. I didn't like the replies even when I made them. I made some posts that I thought were right but then I later on realized that they were just dumb. Bottom line is, I never like seeing my old posts. When I see them now, it's like seeing posts from a completely different person. People change and I certainly have changed since I first registered. I know there are a lot of others who share that sentiment.

2. Why not start a new thread yourself instead of bumping it? I can see how some people don't like seeing a topic created shortly after a similar one was posted. Notice how I said "shortly." If it is a few days, to a few weeks, to even a month, I myself don't see a problem with people going back five pages to bump it up as opposed to creating a new one. But if it is over that time, especially over a year or two, then that is just pointless. A number of people who once posted at Chit Chat long (two or three years) before everyone today don't post here a lot nowadays or don't even come here at all. And what about the people who have responded to that thread that still post here? They've given their opinion already. I've noticed that whenever an old thread is bumped, there are hardly ever as many new posts made as the replies to the thread before it was bumped. So what's the point?

3. Nothing good comes of it. I've seen it happen every time. Whenever someone bumps up a thread, it only serves to piss other members off. When they see their old posts or find other topics being pushed down, it's going to cause a stir.

This is part of, if not the whole, reason many forums frown upon or have rules against bumping up extremely old topics. There's just some things that will irk other members and one of them is bumping up topics over a year old.

There should be a rule that to bump them they have to be under 1 year old, in my opinion. Yeah because it is dumb to bump up something so old that what the thread was about is no longer an issue.

I think that it could be a good rule as people do that way too often, but it could also be a bad rule as it won't give people a chance to make a worthwhile comment that they didn't get to do.

I just say that as long as the thread isn't too old (like more than 1 year), then I don't see too much wrong with bumping it back up, but only if it's done when absolutely necessary.

edit

Yeah their should. Id say that if the topics are at least a year old, dont bump them up. Maybe the person who bumped it up shouldnt get banned the first time they do it, but if they continue to do it than they would get banned.

Just my thoughts.

Originally posted by Brian
I have always been wanting to start a poll like this for months but I just couldn't bring myself to do it. Now I am, this has to be said. I think there should be a rule against bumping up extremely old topics. By extremely old topics, I mean threads that are over six months old. Here's why I think there should be a rule.

1. People don't like to see their old posts. I don't know if everyone feels like this but I cringe whenever I see posts I made a long time ago. I know other members who have made posts in the past that they'd just as soon forget. There have been a few instances where some individuals bumped up an extremely old topic that I had replied in. I didn't like the replies even when I made them. I made some posts that I thought were right but then I later on realized that they were just dumb. Bottom line is, I never like seeing my old posts. When I see them now, it's like seeing posts from a completely different person. People change and I certainly have changed since I first registered. I know there are a lot of others who share that sentiment.



When I first came here I was a HUGE full house freak. I was like that til about June so any posts from April-June I hate seeing. And ive only been here like 4 months :lol:

I can't believe how obsessed I was with Leave it to Beaver that seeing my old posts on that board makes me feel weird. I lost that obsession.

Yes...that thread that was bumped up that I started pissed me off. She was killed in a car accident 2 months ago, and that divorce joke was completely insensitive. :mad:

Originally posted by dawsongirl
Yes...that thread that was bumped up that I started pissed me off. She was killed in a car accident 2 months ago, and that divorce joke was completely insensitive. :mad:

Sorry about that:( That joke was mean, yeah. I was going to say something but it got closed.

Originally posted by Avril's Sk8er Boi
I can't believe how obsessed I was with Leave it to Beaver that seeing my old posts on that board makes me feel weird. I lost that obsession. So did I. Im obsessed with WTB? now but I was overly obsessed with Full House.

I think it depends on what the thread is.

Originally posted by Avril's Sk8er Boi
Sorry about that:( That joke was mean, yeah. I was going to say something but it got closed.

I suppose I could have laughed at it before, because she did get a divorce (her husband up and decided he didn't want to be married anymore). I even said it before the wedding. But now that she was killed and I miss her, it's not funny at all.

This is a toughy. There have been some bump-ups in the past that I liked because new things were added that were cool... and a new topic could not have been made to allow for those posts, because they tied into the previous ones. On the other hand, most bump-ups are a nuisance or just down-right wrong. Since not everyone is going to feel the same about what should be bumped up and what shouldn't, perhaps a rule should be made. The majority of bump-ups could be avoided by making a new thread on the topic anyhow.

Originally posted by dawsongirl
Yes...that thread that was bumped up that I started pissed me off. She was killed in a car accident 2 months ago, and that divorce joke was completely insensitive. :mad: Gosh, I am sorry Cathy. That bump-up was ridiculous enough, but now that makes it even worse for you.

Well with the I need an idea thread that person had no reason to add something to it because it was useless.

Originally posted by AllIWantIsYourClutch
I think it depends on what the thread is.

My sentiments too.

Originally posted by dawsongirl
Yes...that thread that was bumped up that I started pissed me off. She was killed in a car accident 2 months ago, and that divorce joke was completely insensitive. :mad:
That f-cking pisses me off.

It would be stupid to completely restrict bumping up old threads. it should only be allowed if you have something useful to add to it, not "MY FAVBORITE COLOR IS P9INK!!!!!11111" it's not worth giving everyone else hell by bumping up their posts in the process. and it pisses me off people do it over and over after being told every time to knock it off.

Do you think bumping up extremely old topics should be banned?
Yes
No
Undecided

there should be an "on certain conditions" option, because that's what my vote would be..

Great response in that thread Sarah:lol:

Originally posted by safety pin
there should be an "on certain conditions" option, because that's what my vote would be..

Same here.

No...in fact, I think it's kind of a stupid rule. It's a thread, who cares if it's not on the newest page. If someone sees it and wants torespond, whoopdy ****ing doo...it's no big deal.

No there should not be any rule against bumping up old topics.

Originally posted by dawsongirl
Yes...that thread that was bumped up that I started pissed me off. She was killed in a <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=car&v=56">car</a> accident 2 months ago, and that <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=divorce&v=56">divorce</a> joke was completely insensitive. :mad: Ugh, see, now thread like THAT shouldn't be bumped up, it's just a stupid thing to do -_-...but things just asking questions etc are fine imo...

Originally posted by *A TV People*
<a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=car&v=56">car</a> <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=divorce&v=56">divorce</a>

www.spywarenuker.com

Originally posted by safety pin
there should be an "on certain conditions" option, because that's what my vote would be..

That is true. I mean, that Kmart thread you bumped up was funny, but I didn't get a chance to post. :(

I wanted cashier.

Originally posted by safety pin
www.spywarenuker.com

Wow, Spyware's capable of doing that now? Holy crap. And I thought it was evil two years ago!

no

New people join every single day. Why should they be not allowed to add their 2 cents to a thread from before they joined?

Bumping up old threads? Who would do such a terrible thing? :eek2:

Originally posted by dawsongirl
That is true. I mean, that Kmart thread you bumped up was funny, but I didn't get a chance to post. :(

I wanted cashier.



I wasn't talking about every thread. I should have made it more clear. If it's a thread asking, "What's your favorite..." or something like that, then it would be pointless to bump it up if it was posted a year or more ago.

it depends on the thread...if it's like a "Who is your favorite singer?" thread, then I don't think there should be a rul against it but if it's a "My prom is next week what should I wear?" thread then there should be a rule against it.

Originally posted by dawsongirl
That is true. I mean, that Kmart thread you bumped up was funny, but I didn't get a chance to post. :(

I wanted cashier.
it was a bunch of bull **** that it was closed. i bumped up the kmart in SO and said i wanted to work in the garden shop. boy, we better stop this before the little kids see it.

Originally posted by safety pin
www.spywarenuker.com ahaha, yeah, i noticed something was ****ed up :roller:

I don't think there should be a rule as it's not done very often. It would be too confusing as to what thread is allowed to be bumped and for what reason.

If such a rule were implemented, I would strongly recommend to TJ that no old posts are allowed to be posted in new threads either. Members do that quite often. Perhaps the content of those posts don't sit well with others. Fair is fair.

I'll let you know my opinion on this in a month or two.

Originally posted by GeeBee
I'll let you know my opinion on this in a month or two. :lol:

No. A thread is a thread. Its annoying when someone bumps up 10 topics at once, but honestly who cares if someone bumps up an old thread..

Originally posted by I am Him
Bumping up old threads? Who would do such a terrible thing? :eek2:

**** off.

Originally posted by safety pin
it was a bunch of bull **** that it was closed. i bumped up the kmart in SO and said i wanted to work in the garden shop. boy, we better stop this before the little kids see it.

Maybe garden shop is where the pervs hang out! :eek:

Originally posted by safety pin
That f-cking pisses me off.

It would be stupid to completely restrict bumping up old threads. it should only be allowed if you have something useful to add to it, not "MY FAVBORITE COLOR IS P9INK!!!!!11111" it's not worth giving everyone else hell by bumping up their posts in the process. and it pisses me off people do it over and over after being told every time to knock it off. :cool: That's what I'm sayin'... bumping up old topics is cool at times. But things like "What's your favorite cookie" should be remade.

Actually, scratch what I said before: it shouldn't be hard to figure out the right threads and wrong threads to bump up. If your contribution to an old topic is necessary, and restarting the topic wouldn't make sense, then bumping is okay. Otherwise, make a new thread or shut up.

Originally posted by dawsongirl
**** off.

:yeahthat

BuMp

:lol:

Originally posted by Jen1989
No, there should not be a rule against bumping up threads.
It's easy to say just make a new thread, but that's just as "annoying" as having someone bump up a thread. Why have 5 or 10 threads on the same topic when people can simply reply to an one thread? Why take up more room by creating thread after thread on the same topic? It could just as easily be argued that there should be a rule against creating new threads on the same topic.
BECAUSE EVERYONE IS EMBARRASSED ABOUT THEIR OLD POSTS AND WOULD MUCH RATHER HAVE THEM LEFT ALONE.

Originally posted by I am Him
Bumping up old threads? Who would do such a terrible thing? :eek2:


Uh gee I wonder :rolleyes:

dawsongirl, you said that some lady who got a divorce died in an accident 2 months ago. Now I'm really curious. Who was it?

Originally posted by 2 hyped brothers
dawsongirl, you said that some lady who got a divorce died in an accident 2 months ago. Now I'm really curious. Who was it?

That doesn't tell much.

Originally posted by 2 hyped brothers
That doesn't tell much.
it should've told you something.

Originally posted by 2 hyped brothers
That doesn't tell much.

oh geez ohno: it's called tact

Originally posted by *A TV People*
No...in fact, I think it's kind of a stupid rule. It's a thread, who cares if it's not on the newest page. If someone sees it and wants torespond, whoopdy ****ing doo...it's no big deal.


I AGREE WITH *A TV PEOPLE* 100%

It still doesn't tell me much. Who died in an accident after her divorce?

Originally posted by 2 hyped brothers
It still doesn't tell me much. Who died in an accident after her divorce?


Why do you care? It was her friend. That's all you need to know.

Originally posted by 2 hyped brothers
It still doesn't tell me much. Who died in an accident after her divorce?


that's not anyone's business but her's obviously she's upset by it, and bringing it over and over isn't helping :rolleyes:

Originally posted by 2 hyped brothers
It still doesn't tell me much. Who died in an accident after her divorce? You read the definition of "tact." Now use it.

Originally posted by 2 hyped brothers
It still doesn't tell me much. Who died in an accident after her divorce?

Could you maybe pull your head out of your ass? First of all, it's noone's business and second of all... ever tried putting yourself in someone else's shoes?

Originally posted by 2 hyped brothers
It still doesn't tell me much. Who died in an accident after her divorce?

1. Stop asking questions like this.
2. Sit down.
3. Take out a roll of duct tape and a pair of scissors.
4. Now cut off some duct tape and tape it over your mouth so you can shut up.
5. Now give that roll to me so I can tape your hands together.

Originally posted by 2 hyped brothers
dawsongirl, you said that some lady who got a divorce died in an accident 2 months ago. Now I'm really curious. Who was it? Excuse me, Hypedbro, are you listening? Go Cheney yourself.

I honestly didn't know it was her personal friend. I honestly at first thought it was another female celebrity from Hollywood or wherever who was killed. I didn't know it was just her friend only.
I must not have read it right at first. Sorry I must have been misinformed. Please don't burn me!

Originally posted by 2 hyped brothers
It still doesn't tell me much. Who died in an accident after her divorce?
You don't even have the facts straight so just shut up.

Okay!

Originally posted by safety pin
BECAUSE EVERYONE IS EMBARRASSED ABOUT THEIR OLD POSTS AND WOULD MUCH RATHER HAVE THEM LEFT ALONE.

You mean like this (http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?s=&threadid=55536) or

this (http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?s=&threadid=55618) :lol:

o_O

.

Originally posted by Janice
.
i made a pointless smiley all by myself. see.

Originally posted by safety pin
i made a pointless smiley all by myself. see.
Very good Sarah. I'm impressed. And speaking of pointless.

Originally posted by Janice
Very good Sarah. I'm impressed. And speaking of pointless.


awwww they're cute :D

Originally posted by Angela Micelli
awwww they're cute :D

Sad thing is..they're all gonna die very young.

/internet joke

Originally posted by Dutabi84
Sad thing is..they're all gonna die very young.

/internet joke

It reminded me of this pic. :lol:

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0ggDpAlkq6c07UlbAHSNN20y3T*ODOadHjNE3!RBvdN26WAUrA6bQuELdI2E3lXWKy1qXDY*gXce!zj8HL7rlJk1fEpH!t2XHElDD1KRd5psAzLbuR6qNaTJmp277xU9WWP4XYJ*UZLEYHqicucTi97g0lSxQCmukr!P!X9nVizeLSgrR8KkhS01YoU9sFY9D/Think%20of%20the%20Cats%20-%20Dont%20masturbate.jpg?dc=4675415415942893632

Originally posted by Janice
Very good Sarah. I'm impressed. And speaking of pointless.
awwww kitties!

That didn't take too long. :sheep

Originally posted by Dutabi84
That didn't take too long. :sheep

:schmack: You pulled an Anthony on my post. :mad: Go back and see what I edited...

Originally posted by PZelda
It reminded me of this pic. :lol:

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0ggDpAlkq6c07UlbAHSNN20y3T*ODOadHjNE3!RBvdN26WAUrA6bQuELdI2E3lXWKy1qXDY*gXce!zj8HL7rlJk1fEpH!t2XHElDD1KRd5psAzLbuR6qNaTJmp277xU9WWP4XYJ*UZLEYHqicucTi97g0lSxQCmukr!P!X9nVizeLSgrR8KkhS01YoU9sFY9D/Think%20of%20the%20Cats%20-%20Dont%20masturbate.jpg?dc=4675415415942893632

:(

:p

Originally posted by PZelda
It reminded me of this pic. :lol:

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0ggDpAlkq6c07UlbAHSNN20y3T*ODOadHjNE3!RBvdN26WAUrA6bQuELdI2E3lXWKy1qXDY*gXce!zj8HL7rlJk1fEpH!t2XHElDD1KRd5psAzLbuR6qNaTJmp277xU9WWP4XYJ*UZLEYHqicucTi97g0lSxQCmukr!P!X9nVizeLSgrR8KkhS01YoU9sFY9D/Think%20of%20the%20Cats%20-%20Dont%20masturbate.jpg?dc=4675415415942893632

Those little evil minions make it what it is.

Originally posted by Dutabi84
Sad thing is..they're all gonna die very young.

/internet joke
:rofl:

Originally posted by PZelda
:schmack: You pulled an Anthony on my post. :mad: Go back and see what I edited...

You edit your posts way too often. :grr:

Originally posted by Dutabi84
You edit your posts way too often. :grr:

Maaaaaaaaybe it's because I type too fast. :o

And you reply too fast.

Originally posted by PZelda
:schmack: You pulled an Anthony on my post. :mad: Go back and see what I edited...

:rotflmao:

I caught it after you edited it, that was freaky :eek:

Originally posted by PZelda
Maaaaaaaaybe it's because I type too fast. :o

And you reply too fast.

Gotta love cable. :cool:

Originally posted by PZelda
Maaaaaaaaybe it's because I type too fast. :o

And you reply too fast.

It's all my fault, yep you're right. :rofl:

Originally posted by Dutabi84
It's all my fault, yep you're right. :rofl:

...? That could've been combined into one post. :grr:

Originally posted by PZelda
...? That could've been combined into one post. :grr:

I didn't think of it til after I posted it..could I have edited it and added it in? Yes..but that would have defeated the purpose of me making fun of you. :smurf:

Originally posted by Dutabi84
I didn't think of it til after I posted it..could I have edited it and added it in? Yes..but that would have defeated the purpose of me making fun of you. :smurf:

:fart:

Originally posted by Dutabi84
I didn't think of it til after I posted it..could I have edited it and added it in? Yes..but that would have defeated the purpose of me making fun of you. :smurf:

:lol:

Originally posted by Dutabi84
I didn't think of it til after I posted it..could I have edited it and added it in? Yes..but that would have defeated the purpose of me making fun of you. :smurf:

http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/attachment.php?s=&postid=2005648

Originally posted by PZelda
http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/attachment.php?s=&postid=2005648

Meow.

aww my new picture frame. im leaving the paper thing in it cause the kittys so cute. :D

Stick to the dang topic!

.

Originally posted by *A TV People*
No...in fact, I think it's kind of a stupid rule. It's a thread, who cares if it's not on the newest page. If someone sees it and wants torespond, whoopdy ****ing doo...it's no big deal.


Yea but that person was just being rude and not contributing something useful to the thread.

It's annoying when I click on a topic and start reading it, then it starts making no sense after awhile and then I scroll back up to the top and find out it's from 2002. Some topics that are bumped up are so old that they are not relevant anymore. I say that all old posts older than 6 months should be closed so they can't be bumped up anymore. I wonder if this board system has an auto-close feature after so many months.

I don't think there should be rules against it but common courtesy would be for the person bumping old threads to state "bump" at the end of their reply so that nobody is confused. Sometimes old topics are fun. :)

I know I recently returned after being gone 8+ years so I might not have a leg to stand on, but I’m kind of annoyed that a certain member keeps bumping up long dormant threads that are up to 20 years old, which is apparently his modus operandi across the web (https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/the-lounge/310246-dude111-please-stop-continually-reviving-dead-threads.html). It clogs up the board, making new threads less likely to be seen.

Sometimes there’s a very good reason to bump up a thread — even one that’s 20 years old — but I believe that’s the exception and not the rule. Bumping up a thread about Real Player, in 2021? (Has anyone used Real Player since the advent of YouTube 16 years ago?) Or a thread about Clay Aiken fans vs. Raven-Symone fans… again, in 2021? Or a poll asking “how old r u?” (Incidentally, I can’t vote in said poll, because I already answered “21-30” — when I was 22. I’m 41 now.) It seems to me someone is just trying to get their post count up.

Looking forward to the triumphant return of “Who do you think will win the 2004 presidential election?”, “How often do you watch UPN?”, and “I think the Montreal Expos are going to win it all this year!”

There are many things that bother me worse, fwiw.

Some of the old threads are interesting, and the other poster digging them up saves me the bother.

I really don't see it as the "struggle for headline prominence" that you seem to see it as.

What I find annoying is when there is a good thread having a highly divisive subject that get's "driven down" by the bumping of numerous "kitty cats and hot co-co" type bland subjects.

It usually seems like someone has taken it upon themselves to tend the litter box when that happens.

What I find annoying is when there is a good thread having a highly divisive subject that get's "driven down" by the bumping of numerous "kitty cats and hot co-co" type bland subjects. Hey now, kitty cats are not bland!
:nonono: :grr: :cat: :kitties:

Some of the thread bumps seem valid: continuing an old conversation. I even participated in a few because they seemed like fun. Some of those thread bumps clearly are not; I'm not even sure why a few 15 or 20-year-old threads are being bumped with comments like, "Right on! or "Ah man!". But I'm not fussed, and I definitely prefer old thread bumps to "the Covid vaccine will control your mind, make you magnetic, and kill you!" threads.

Im sorry Brad...... Im trying to calm things down around here buddy.... Its been quite hot lately........ This is quite stupid to worry about..... The threads are interesting and add life here.....

You dont have to worry though,I have just about scanned this whole base... There isnt much more worth replying to..... (I have a little left)

Its not a big deal buddy -- THINGS ARE OK!!!!!!!

Hey now, kitty cats are not bland!
:nonono: :grr: :cat: :kitties:

I was too lazy to look up the correct spelling of "innocuous" :D

When you have one poster bumping like 8-10 threads within just 2 or 3 minutes and they are all mindless "I like soap" type threads, that is what seems like a waste of electrons, to me.

Some of the thread bumps seem valid: continuing an old conversation. I even participated in a few because they seemed like fun. Some of those thread bumps clearly are not; I'm not even sure why a few 15 or 20-year-old threads are being bumped with comments like, "Right on! or "Ah man!". But I'm not fussed, and I definitely prefer old thread bumps to "the Covid vaccine will control your mind, make you magnetic, and kill you!" threads.

Good point. Glass half full.

Im glad the replying to these threads brought you back Brad,you must have been notified :)

Its good seeing you!!!!!!!

Not necessarily, but it depends. Who wants to do another thread and do over a previous topic brought up in an older thread they stumbled upon? I kinda like to see older threads resurrected.

I don't feel bothered, I read what I want to anyway. Some old threads have some interest, some new ones, not so much.

But I'm not fussed, and I definitely prefer old thread bumps to "the Covid vaccine will control your mind, make you magnetic, and kill you!" threads.

As bizarre as those threads were, I actually kind of liked how they crowded out the regular nonsense in the politics board... :D

You're not alone, Brad. I find it annoying as hell.

Innocuous posts from people who left this site by choice, or were banned over a decade ago, just clutter up the site. I don't know if someone wants to increase their post count (really? Like it's important?) or just wants the site to look like it has more traffic.

Sometimes there’s a very good reason to bump up a thread — even one that’s 20 years old — but I believe that’s the exception and not the rule.

I remember there was a rule here back in the early 2000's that we weren't supposed to bump up old threads. It was getting on a lot of member's nerves. Like you though I took a break from online so things must have changed during that time to where bumping up 20 year old threads is acceptable now. I don't care for it because all it does is remind me of the members who used to post here that permanently left. I see members today respond to them and it's like what's the point? They've been gone for over a decade. They're not going to come back and have a conversation with you. I think it's better to just start a new thread on the topic you're interested in with the members here today.

Looking forward to the triumphant return of “How often do you watch UPN?”

If there is a thread about that, I'm sure I responded and posted only Buffy since that was my huge obsession in the early 2000's :lol:

As bizarre as those threads were, I actually kind of liked how they crowded out the regular nonsense in the politics board... :D

What, this Chit Chat area is NOT politics.

You're not alone, Brad. I find it annoying as hell.

Innocuous posts from people who left this site by choice, or were banned over a decade ago, just clutter up the site. I don't know if someone wants to increase their post count (really? Like it's important?) or just wants the site to look like it has more traffic.Yeah, I can only speculate as to what the motivation is, but it seems desperate and pointless.

And, as Christopher said upthread, there used to be a rule against bumping old threads. Dude111 isn’t the first serial bumper this forum has seen, and he probably isn’t the second, third or tenth, which is why said rule was enacted.

I don't care for it because all it does is remind me of the members who used to post here that permanently left. I see members today respond to them and it's like what's the point? They've been gone for over a decade. They're not going to come back and have a conversation with you. I think it's better to just start a new thread on the topic you're interested in with the members here today.Exactly. Spot on. You’re responding to a post someone now in their mid-thirties made when they were a teenager as if they just posted it this morning. Not only is that person 20 years older now; they’re long gone and probably don’t remember they used to post on a site called Sitcoms Online when they were in middle school. It’s like talking to a ghost.

If there is a thread about that, I'm sure I responded and posted only Buffy since that was my huge obsession in the early 2000's :lol::lol: I honestly have no idea; I was just trying to think of a long-defunct TV network that existed 20 years ago, and UPN was the first one that popped into my head.

There is no rule against bumping old threads, hasn't been since I became a member here almost 15 years ago. So what if old threads are revived with members who aren't here anymore? There is nothing wrong with seeing blasts from the past. And to make a new thread on the same topic would just take up more of the space here with the thousands of threads that already exist.

Hell, I even remember that yes, at one time you'd get "in trouble" if you went bumping up tons of old posts. I was young and fully-brunette at the time, so I'm sure the rules from the dark ages went the way of the dinosaurs just like the youthfulness of my hair.

I remember there was a rule here back in the early 2000's that we weren't supposed to bump up old threads.Im glad that isnt enforced anymore..... The only one who makes a big deal about it is Jimmy,but I usually dont find anything worth replying to that far back on his bases anyway...... (I did find one the other day but he deleted my reply :()



Totally stupid to worry about it......

Exactly. Spot on. You’re responding to a post someone now in their mid-thirties made when they were a teenager as if they just posted it this morning. Not only is that person 20 years older now; they’re long gone and probably don’t remember they used to post on a site called Sitcoms Online when they were in middle school. It’s like talking to a ghost.

I can't believe it's been that long. You are right. Most of them were in their teen years like me when I first started posting here. I came back when The Facts of Life was finally being released completely on DVD and I wanted to chat with fans about it. That board was always crazy back in the day so I figured it still would back in 2015 or 2016 when I returned. I'm sure most of the ones who left remember SO. There just has to be a reason like there was for me to make them want to return.


There is no rule against bumping old threads, hasn't been since I became a member here almost 15 years ago. So what if old threads are revived with members who aren't here anymore? There is nothing wrong with seeing blasts from the past. And to make a new thread on the same topic would just take up more of the space here with the thousands of threads that already exist.

When Brad mentioned upping their post count, that was one way some members did back in the early days. Post counts were HUGE. I remember there were members who would have conversations with themselves on the random board posting one useless post after another. It was bizarre how much post counts meant to some. Another way members would bump their post count was posting in old threads even though there may have been a thread similar to it already on the first page. This irritated a lot of members because one: there was a thread similar to it already; and two: it was pushing current topics down to the second page. There was a rule we were supposed to start a new thread on the topic instead of bumping up threads from years ago. Personally, I would love to see old threads get deleted and post counts go away. There's been so many times when SO is too slow to get to. I'm sure having all these 20 year threads is taking up space that could help SO run faster if they were gone.


Hell, I even remember that yes, at one time you'd get "in trouble" if you went bumping up tons of old posts. I was young and fully-brunette at the time, so I'm sure the rules from the dark ages went the way of the dinosaurs just like the youthfulness of my hair.

Cathy, I didn't know you still posted here :bighug: IMO we're all still young, just not the kind of young 20 years ago :lol:

Or a thread about Clay Aiken fans vs. Raven-Symone fans… again, in 2021?

I could not agree more, especially with that particular thread. No offense to the artists/actors, but those people are NOT relevant enough anymore for their fans to be an issue for anyone. I was more than a bit dumbfounded at that one.

Hell, I even remember that yes, at one time you'd get "in trouble" if you went bumping up tons of old posts. I was young and fully-brunette at the time, so I'm sure the rules from the dark ages went the way of the dinosaurs just like the youthfulness of my hair.

So nice to see one of the original SO members post again! :wave:

Im glad that isnt enforced anymore..... The only one who makes a big deal about it is Jimmy,but I usually dont find anything worth replying to that far back on his bases anyway...... (I did find one the other day but he deleted my reply :()



Totally stupid to worry about it......


More stupid to do it over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. :rolleyes:

*bump*

*bump*
LOL.

Can this thread be closed? :lol:

More stupid to do it over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. :rolleyes:
Thank you. I don’t mind a little bump here and there, but when you’re resurrecting irrelevant old threads five to six times a day for the hell of it, that’s going overboard.

As bizarre as those threads were, I actually kind of liked how they crowded out the regular nonsense in the politics board... :D

:lol::lol::lol::lol:

LOL.

Can this thread be closed? :lol:Maybe MA can close her down :)

Thank you. I don’t mind a little bump here and there, but when you’re resurrecting irrelevant old threads five to six times a day for the hell of it, that’s going overboard.

Agreed! Once in a while an old interesting thread to resurface is cool, but too many and ones that weren't even interesting in the first place is annoying ! :confused:

Agreed! Once in a while an old interesting thread to resurface is cool, but too many and ones that weren't even interesting in the first place is annoying ! :confused:
Some of it bored me to tears. I wouldn’t have mind if some of them had stayed where they were.

I've had a couple of my older threads bumped up. It didn't bother me. I know sometimes if you want to post on a topic, it would make sense to look through a couple of previous pages to see if there's already a thread started and just add to it. But I guess not everyone wants to read the older threads.

Cathy, I didn't know you still posted here :bighug: IMO we're all still young, just not the kind of young 20 years ago :lol:

I sort of pop in and out :lol::crazy::wave:

You mean the young us that was naive.

So nice to see one of the original SO members post again! :wave:

Thanks! :wave:

Bumping is cool if there's a purpose to it, and someone is adding something new and insightful to the discussion. But if a thread has lost its relevance I think it's better for it to stay buried.

You can always just browse old threads, which is something I used to do a lot.

When there are no more posts left, I just browse the old threads.

Bumping up old posts is NOTHING to be annoyed about with all of the horrible STUFF going on in the world. There is so much more to be annoyed/angry about.

Indeed its quite stupid and bizarre.......

Actually there is an exploit that I've heard of where people embed 1x1 transparent images in their posts, and then dredge up old threads and post in them just so they can compare responses to ip addresses in their server's log file, to get the ip address of all who respond to the thread and associate a member name with the address.

That's why I always wait at least an hour after opening such a tread, before responding to it. Hopefully everyone else is taking precautions too.

I’m glad that 20+ years of threads exist on this board, and hope the old posts don’t go away. They’re valuable as snapshots in time and even markers of history.

And, like I said, sometimes bumping an old thread is a good idea, but more often than not it isn’t. Like a 17-year-old thread of someone asking for a free clip-art website, or someone 20 years ago asking if the membership of this site prefers DVD or the then-still-in-production VHS, or a poll from 19 years ago about cartoon characters, or, again, a thread from 20 years ago about media software no one has used in 15 years.

And Dude111, you can keep calling me “stupid” to your heart’s content; I have thick skin and can take it. But how do you know whether this is what I truly believe about thread-bumping, or if my DNA-altering COVID vaccine is making me feel this way? All hail our dark lord, Bill Gates. Must find 5G tower for further instruction.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but one reason for this thread was dislike of the poster who bumped the threads. And for certain posters to gang up and agree.

While I've noticed the bumping, I can't say I find it annoying--just ignore it if it's ruining your day.

One thing I would say is annoying, I agree with a poster that said it's silly to bring back a 20 year old thread to add Ah man. Maybe use some restraint on that.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but one reason for this thread was dislike of the poster who bumped the threads. And for certain posters to gang up and agree.

While I've noticed the bumping, I can't say I find it annoying--just ignore it if it's ruining your day.

One thing I would say is annoying, I agree with a poster that said it's silly to bring back a 20 year old thread to add Ah man. Maybe use some restraint on that.No, the clogging of the page with old, irrelevant content is the purpose behind this thread.

OK, I was wrong about the reason for the original post, but I'm not wrong about the ganging up by a few other posters.

I've seen enough of it to know. And really, THAT is annoying.

One thing I would say is annoying, I agree with a poster that said it's silly to bring back a 20 year old thread to add Ah man. Maybe use some restraint on that.


The "ah man" replies, free standing and on their own, ARE annoying. Good observation!

No, the clogging of the page with old, irrelevant content is the purpose behind this thread.

Who's to say what's relevant?

The "ah man" replies, free standing and on their own, ARE annoying. Good observation!

So are ANY pointless replies, like (in essence) the poster belongs in a mental hospital (a clear rule violation). And "Parler is garbage". "Twitter is a cesspool." etc.

Honestly, I wish I could just delete this thread. I just tried, and it looks like that's not an option when you start a thread.

Right, only whoever moderates Chit Chat could remove it (in this case TJ). You could always go into User CP and remove your email notifications on it.

Honestly, I wish I could just delete this thread. I just tried, and it looks like that's not an option when you start a thread.

That would delete the posts of everyone who replied. You can PM TJ if you want it locked though.

Hey, a thought, all those annoyed with bumping up old threads, how about starting an Interesting Thread of your own.. I would comment, and I've commented on most here in recent times.

It's interesting that the poster doing the serial bumping states that he started doing so as a means to distract from newer threads that he (apparently) disliked. (trying to "lighten up the mood", or however he explained it)

It's interesting that the poster doing the serial bumping states that he started doing so as a means to distract from newer threads that he (apparently) disliked. (trying to "lighten up the mood", or however he explained it)

Didn't notice that, not a bad idea to "let it go", to go on and on about it. :)

Didn't notice that, not a bad idea to "let it go", to go on and on about it. :)

Well If you look at my initial reply to this thread, I stated that I have no problem with the resurrections.

I just thought it was noteworthy that you were saying that new threads needed to be started (I guess as the alternative to reviving old threads) When the perp's first post in this thread implies that he thought it was kinda "hot" here lately, and he was trying to disrupt that with the bumps.

Seems as though the two thought processes are at odds..(?)

Well If you look at my initial reply to this thread, I stated that I have no problem with the resurrections.

I just thought it was noteworthy that you were saying that new threads needed to be started (I guess as the alternative to reviving old threads) When the perp's first post in this thread implies that he thought it was kinda "hot" here lately, and he was trying to disrupt that with the bumps.

Seems as though the two thought processes are at odds..(?)


;):cool:

Well If you look at my initial reply to this thread, I stated that I have no problem with the resurrections.

I just thought it was noteworthy that you were saying that new threads needed to be started (I guess as the alternative to reviving old threads) When the perp's first post in this thread implies that he thought it was kinda "hot" here lately, and he was trying to disrupt that with the bumps.

Seems as though the two thought processes are at odds..(?)

Jim, what I was implying was "let go of the ones being bumped or address them if one wants to, but I am simply saying others can post New Interesting Posts....hence I posted the Homeless one which I've thought about doing for some time but never have.

How so much is lost in translations so often.

But what if somebody is irritated by my new posts, and it inspires them to gang- bump large numbers of old posts because they believe they are the internet police with the right to "direct traffic" to their personal whim...you know ...just to "cool things off"?? Then we'll all really be in a mess.

Maybe it's safer just to wait on other people to start threads, and then jump on them for being wrong...or dumb....or...whatever?
AnYONE can be a critic......it takes no creative talent whatsoever to criticize the work of others.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but one reason for this thread was dislike of the poster who bumped the threads. And for certain posters to gang up and agree.Yes its stupid...... They dont like how I scan the bases and find GOOD threads to reply to....

Totally bizarre.....

Ahh, man....

I know I recently returned after being gone 8+ years so I might not have a leg to stand on, but I’m kind of annoyed that a certain member keeps bumping up long dormant threads that are up to 20 years old, which is apparently his modus operandi across the web (https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/the-lounge/310246-dude111-please-stop-continually-reviving-dead-threads.html). It clogs up the board, making new threads less likely to be seen.

Sometimes there’s a very good reason to bump up a thread — even one that’s 20 years old — but I believe that’s the exception and not the rule. Bumping up a thread about Real Player, in 2021? (Has anyone used Real Player since the advent of YouTube 16 years ago?) Or a thread about Clay Aiken fans vs. Raven-Symone fans… again, in 2021? Or a poll asking “how old r u?” (Incidentally, I can’t vote in said poll, because I already answered “21-30” — when I was 22. I’m 41 now.) It seems to me someone is just trying to get their post count up.

Looking forward to the triumphant return of “Who do you think will win the 2004 presidential election?”, “How often do you watch UPN?”, and “I think the Montreal Expos are going to win it all this year!”


If the person is New and bumps up an old TV topic thread with something to say besides......"i agree" then I dont mind at all. Its one stupid member on here whose username starts with an F who keeps responding to old TV threads to say nothing.

I am going to be Honest, if someone who was 9 years in 2002 discovered this site and happens to be a new fan of Three;s company, the Jeffersons and Good Times with lots of questions, they could bump up as many threads as they want:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

And Dude111, you can keep calling me “stupid” to your heart’s content; I have thick skin and can take it. But how do you know whether this is what I truly believe about thread-bumping, or if my DNA-altering COVID vaccine is making me feel this way? All hail our dark lord, Bill Gates. Must find 5G tower for further instruction.

:yourock:

Thanks, Brad. I'm so glad you are back. You've always been a voice of sanity on this board.

Well If you look at my initial reply to this thread, I stated that I have no problem with the resurrections.

I just thought it was noteworthy that you were saying that new threads needed to be started (I guess as the alternative to reviving old threads) When the perp's first post in this thread implies that he thought it was kinda "hot" here lately, and he was trying to disrupt that with the bumps.

Seems as though the two thought processes are at odds..(?)

Hardly surprising considering the OP.

Ahh, man....

:lol::lol:

:yourock:

Thanks, Brad. I'm so glad you are back. You've always been a voice of sanity on this board.

:heart:

Ahh, man....
Come on, Genty Gent, I don’t mean to make you mad…

It's so funny almost and I've said it on other threads, so many seem to enjoy making mountains out of mole hills. And all this stuff are mole hills.

We don't have a rule against bumping old threads. We had a Chit Chat archive before, but I moved them back to the main Chit Chat section a few months ago. Those posts weren't counted in the totals.

There shouldn't be 15-20 old threads bumped up every day. That's an excessive amount. That bumps all the other active threads down list and off the first page. We really don't need more than 4-5 threads bumped up by one individual every day. They only should be bumped if you have something to add to the discussion. They shouldn't be bumped up just for the sake of it.

No if I reply to stuff I always have something good to add,not just "I AGREE" which is stupid...

Im sorry Brad I didnt mean to make it sound like you were stupid,Im sorry buddy......

Its one stupid member on here whose username starts with an F who keeps responding to old TV threads to say nothing.Ah man!!

No if I reply to stuff I always have something good to add,not just "I AGREE" which is stupid...

Im sorry Brad I didnt mean to make it sound like you were stupid,Im sorry buddy......

Ah man!!

And I keep trying to get the person to elaborate on why they like a certain season but they dont respond. so the next post that poster will get roasted by me:lol:

I don't know why but I was REALLY hoping I was gonna click this thread and see it was started in 2003.

I don't know why but I was REALLY hoping I was gonna click this thread and see it was started in 2003.

Ha! Someone should program their calendar and bump this thread in 2039.

EDIT: This is a joke. Please don’t actually bump this thread in 2039.

I think if it's within 5 years maybe, it's ok. But when we're talking 10-15 years ago, maybe not, as the ppl who were involved in those discussions may not even be here now. I hate it when ppl revive old fights from 10 or so years ago.

But what's really annoying is when someone revives a super old thread just to comment, "yeah" or "I agree", etc... :mad:

I remember once here someone revived a thread from like 2001 just to say, "I agree" lol

Ha! Someone should program their calendar and bump this thread in 2039.

EDIT: This is a joke. Please don’t actually bump this thread in 2039.

i'll consider not doing it.

i'll consider not doing it.[Facebook angry reaction.]

And I keep trying to get the person to elaborate on why they like a certain season but they dont respond. so the next post that poster will get roasted by me:lol:Im sorry buddy,I hope it wasnt me who did that!!

I don't feel that it should matter how old a thread is.

I don't feel that it should matter how old a thread is.

I agree and so many just seem to enjoy going on and on and on finding faults where they can. :)

I had a thread I started in 2004 bumped up recently. About how funny a sign saying,"T shirt. Regular price. . $12.99. Sale price. $17.99" is. :lol: I had completely forgotten about that thread I started.... 17 years ago!

Im sorry buddy,I hope it wasnt me who did that!!

I said the member name start with an F:lol:

Ah man!!

I said the member name start with an F:lol:

You got me stumped ? :confused: What poster name starts with H? :D

I had a thread I started in 2004 bumped up recently. About how funny a sign saying,"T shirt. Regular price. . $12.99. Sale price. $17.99" is. :lol: I had completely forgotten about that thread I started.... 17 years ago!

You got Duded!

I had a thread I started in 2004 bumped up recently. About how funny a sign saying,"T shirt. Regular price. . $12.99. Sale price. $17.99" is. :lol: I had completely forgotten about that thread I started.... 17 years ago!

Im glad I helped ya remember it sweetie :)

Dude just bumped up another thread from 19 years ago. He must really be bored.

Well trying to liven things up :)

Well trying to liven things up :)

Yes, good to liven things up, how about posting new interesting topics Members????

You got me stumped ? :confused: What poster name starts with H? :D

Poster name starts with Fa

Hmmmmmmmmm I still am stumped :D

I know I recently returned after being gone 8+ years so I might not have a leg to stand on, but I’m kind of annoyed that a certain member keeps bumping up long dormant threads that are up to 20 years old,

Personally, I find it far less annoying to see older threads that are actually interesting bumped, than to see the same block of bland vanilla threads GANG bumped everyday, day after day,.... that say nothing of value. "Was the last pickle you ate dill or sweet?" stuff like that.

Poster name starts with Fa
can I buy an "O" Solomon?

They don't annoy me, I ignore if I don't want to read, some love to complain about things like this. Really important stuff!!!!

Yes really!!!!

No there should not be any rule against bumping up old topics.

Disagree. Anyone in the year 2025 who bumps up a six page thread from 2004 and quotes and talks to someone who hasn’t posted since 2005 should be banned immediately. If not sooner.

It's funny how people thought of 4 year old threads as being extremely old when we now have 20+ year old threads being bumped up.

The only threads that shouldn't be bumped up are time sensitive topics. The number should also be limited to 5 or so per section per day.

I don't think the dates are very important. I wonder how many even look at them. The subject matter is more important. We need all of the views and replies possible. People are more likely to respond to active topics.

I'm going to eventually start archiving some of the older threads in the main Chit Chat section.

The people have spoken:

Yes 17 39.53%
No 22 51.16%
Undecided 4 9.30%

I have always been wanting to start a poll like this for months but I just couldn't bring myself to do it. Now I am, this has to be said. I think there should be a rule against bumping up extremely old topics. By extremely old topics, I mean threads that are over six months old. Here's why I think there should be a rule.

1. People don't like to see their old posts. I don't know if everyone feels like this but I cringe whenever I see posts I made a long time ago. I know other members who have made posts in the past that they'd just as soon forget. There have been a few instances where some individuals bumped up an extremely old topic that I had replied in. I didn't like the replies even when I made them. I made some posts that I thought were right but then I later on realized that they were just dumb. Bottom line is, I never like seeing my old posts. When I see them now, it's like seeing posts from a completely different person. People change and I certainly have changed since I first registered. I know there are a lot of others who share that sentiment.

2. Why not start a new thread yourself instead of bumping it? I can see how some people don't like seeing a topic created shortly after a similar one was posted. Notice how I said "shortly." If it is a few days, to a few weeks, to even a month, I myself don't see a problem with people going back five pages to bump it up as opposed to creating a new one. But if it is over that time, especially over a year or two, then that is just pointless. A number of people who once posted at Chit Chat long (two or three years) before everyone today don't post here a lot nowadays or don't even come here at all. And what about the people who have responded to that thread that still post here? They've given their opinion already. I've noticed that whenever an old thread is bumped, there are hardly ever as many new posts made as the replies to the thread before it was bumped. So what's the point?

3. Nothing good comes of it. I've seen it happen every time. Whenever someone bumps up a thread, it only serves to piss other members off. When they see their old posts or find other topics being pushed down, it's going to cause a stir.

This is part of, if not the whole, reason many forums frown upon or have rules against bumping up extremely old topics. There's just some things that will irk other members and one of them is bumping up topics over a year old.




I think these are very, very great points!!! :)



I didn't even know of this THREAD when I posted my thread:
https://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=476581

As you can see people don't like having "old threads" brought back up even in 2004.
Now, if we add the two polls together....
(I know we can't, because some might have voted in 2004 that also voted in my)
But, if we did, it would be YES - 30 and NO - 24 and undecided - 4 :D

I still feel that 5 per week is plenty per each board, not 5 per day .....

No there should not be any rule against bumping up old topics.

Disagree. Anyone in the year 2025 who bumps up a six page thread from 2004 and quotes and talks to someone who hasn’t posted since 2005 should be banned immediately. If not sooner.


OK??? I guess we will miss you ----
Just remember, it was YOU that thought you should be BANNED!!!! :lol:
:lol: :lol:

The polls are different. One talks about a rule against bumping them up. The other says there should be a limit on how many can be brought back at a time.

I would agree with a reasonable limit. I don't know how I could enforce it. There's no option available to limit the number of new threads or posts per day.

Dude111 needs to use better judgment on which threads to bump up. We don't need 10-15 bumped in the main Chit Chat section in a day. It pushes other threads off the main page too quickly.

They need to spread out among the different bases. 5 in Chit Chat, 5 in Music, 5 in Movies, 5 in General TV, etc.

The polls are different. One talks about a rule against bumping them up. The other says there should be a limit on how many can be brought back at a time.

I guess it won't matter because it is CLOSED! :D :wave:

The people have spoken:

Yes 17 39.53%
No 22 51.16%
Undecided 4 9.30%

We can't be listening to people from the prehistoric days of 2004 when folks still had to go out and hunt for their food.

OK??? I guess we will miss you ----
Just remember, it was YOU that thought you should be BANNED!!!! :lol:
:lol: :lol:

Guess?

JLester (page six) was banned after just one post. :eek: :lol:

I don't think occasionally bumping an old topic is objectionable.

I think bumping 50 old topics a week, every week, just for the sake of doing it, and beating your chest about it is extremely objectionable.

OK??? I guess we will miss you ----
Just remember, it was YOU that thought you should be BANNED!!!! :lol:
:lol: :lol:

Guess?


Did I say GUESS? :eek:
I meant .... I meant ... :( we would be :( :( to see you go!!
But. but ... you are the one who wanted to be BANNED so ....! :crazy: :p

Did I say GUESS? :eek:
I meant .... I meant ... :( we would be :( :( to see you go!!
But. but ... you are the one who wanted to be BANNED so ....! :crazy: :p

I didn't say me, I said someone in 2025 who bumped up a 2004 thread and quoted and talked to someone who hasn't been here since 2005 should be banne.......Oh, I see the irony now. I have tasted my own medicine and it is bitter.

I didn't say me, I said someone in 2025 who bumped up a 2004 thread and quoted and talked to someone who hasn't been here since 2005 should be banne.......Oh, I see the irony now. I have tasted my own medicine and it is bitter.


I thought if I pointed it out, that you would see it!! :wave:

Opus ---Of course, we could overlook it and do what EmoJoe said in 2004:

Maybe the person who bumped it up shouldnt get banned the first time they do it,
but if they continue to do it than they would get banned.

That sounds FAIR! RIGHT??

No, it should stayed unbanned

I'd like to see NEW posts with some good Nitty Gritty topics on Life, but the nitty gritty isn't permitted here....Some here think pizza cereal is nitty gritty, what a joke.


I'm banned from starting a thread as my stuff gets too hot for the kids here.

Dude has bumped up some good things.....some stuff is good no matter the age.

Yes I have found tons of Gold on this base alone!

Should it all go unseen just because of a date??

Rubbish!

It needs to be stopped. It seems malicious, it may not be intended that way, but that's the way it comes across.

Thats insane!!

YOU CANT ERASE THE PAST!!!

I don't really mind it, BUT what's annoying is, is when someone bumps a post from 20 years ago just to say, "I agree", or "Yeah!" or ONE WORD something that doesn't really contribute anything to the conversation. I saw a post not long ago bumped from 2001!!!!!!!!!!! And it was just someone replying, "I agree!" lol

I've been seeing old posts brought back, some of mine from 2003, when I first joined before I was Little Fairy lol, And I replied to someone without checking the date and the person's comment I replied to was from like 2006! I'm guessing they were long gone lol

Yes I have found tons of Gold on this base alone!

Should it all go unseen just because of a date??

Rubbish!


Out of ALL the 100's and 100's of threads that YOU have BUMPED UP.
ALL that you THINK are "GOLD," just how many have gotten "ZERO, the big "0" comments?
The answer is the MAJORITY of them.

It is one thing to get "0" comments on a "NEW THREAD"
(which I have made many threads that have gotten "0")

But it is another to bump them up and get "0."
The reason is because 20 years ago it may have been more worthy to talk about with the people then, but TODAY, it is IRRELEVANT to those that are here.

This is just something that YOU DO NOT understand!!!! :wave:

I'd like to see NEW posts with some good Nitty Gritty topics on Life, but the nitty gritty isn't permitted here....Some here think pizza cereal is nitty gritty, what a joke.

SO WHY do you stay here?


I'm banned from starting a thread as my stuff gets too hot for the kids here.

Trust me Caroline, everyone here who knows me, knows I'm the BIGGEST POLITICAL and CONTROVERSIAL person on this site. :nod:

The person that owns this site, doesn't want the DRAMA!!
Again,
SO WHY do you stay here?
Just to complain????


Dude has bumped up some good things.....some stuff is good no matter the age.

Very few he has bumped up today have been good stuff, but the most have been irrelevant threads.

Thats insane!!

YOU CANT ERASE THE PAST!!!


Nor should you continue to live in the past.
Get into reality.

I don't really mind it, BUT what's annoying is, is when someone bumps a post from 20 years ago just to say, "I agree", or "Yeah!" or ONE WORD something that doesn't really contribute anything to the conversation. I saw a post not long ago bumped from 2001!!!!!!!!!!! And it was just someone replying, "I agree!" lol

I've been seeing old posts brought back, some of mine from 2003, when I first joined before I was Little Fairy lol, And I replied to someone without checking the date and the person's comment I replied to was from like 2006! I'm guessing they were long gone lol

This is the same thing that the MAJORITY on this board feel!!!!!!

I'd like to see NEW posts with some good Nitty Gritty topics on Life, but the nitty gritty isn't permitted here....Some here think pizza cereal is nitty gritty, what a joke.

Why are you such a bitter, angry, entitled old crank? You come to a message board that’s been doing things one way without you for 25 years and expect everything to suddenly change and begin catering to your tastes because, why? Because you, the great and mighty Caroline13, are here now? That’s textbook narcissism. You are not the main character, ma’am.

This is a website about sitcoms — situation comedies — which you’ve stated multiple times is a medium you’re too good for and are above, so why register here in the first place? I don’t like clam chowder, so you’ll never see me posting on chowderonline.com telling everyone how much better I am than all the members there (and by the way, you should totally bleach your fingernails and something something grapeseed something something).

And so what if someone wants to post about a topic you find frivolous? I think Crispix shortages and weird cereal flavors are an interesting topic; the things I don’t find interesting I just skip and live and let live.

I get it. You’re better than everyone who posts here, your **** doesn’t stink, and you’re just above it all. So why slum it here with us riffraff? I’m sure there are message boards filled with enlightened people such as yourself who wouldn’t be caught dead watching “Three’s Company” or discussing something as pedestrian as dry cereal.

Stop burdening yourself with us lowly sitcom watchers. Let us eat cake (or cereal).

I'd like to see NEW posts with some good Nitty Gritty topics on Life, but the nitty gritty isn't permitted here....Some here think pizza cereal is nitty gritty, what a joke.


I'm banned from starting a thread as my stuff gets too hot for the kids here.

Dude has bumped up some good things.....some stuff is good no matter the age.

Good idea. Let's talk about Life cereal. Let's see if Mikey likes it--he won't! Hey, Mikey! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZYIQYmWbI8

I voted undecided. Todd might consider archiving some of the older stuff. I just don't know how much trouble that would be, though.

This thread is awesome!!

Nor should you continue to live in the past.
Get into reality.I cant... The past was MUCH BETTER!! (In most ways)

Out of ALL the 100's and 100's of threads that YOU have BUMPED UP.
ALL that you THINK are "GOLD," just how many have gotten "ZERO, the big "0" comments?
The answer is the MAJORITY of them.Ah man!!

Nor should you continue to live in the past.
Get into reality.

I cant... The past was MUCH BETTER!! (In most ways)


You do live in miserable, pitiful, unrealistic fantasy life! :nod:

Hehe I love ya buddy!

Originally posted by JLester
.I agree totally my friend!

Good idea. Let's talk about Life cereal.

I would rather talk about "Freakies" -- cereal that is!! :lol:


I voted undecided. Todd might consider archiving some of the older stuff. I just don't know how much trouble that would be, though.
I'm sure it would be a very time consuming big chore.

There are so many threads that are not on this base right now buddy.. (They are on the archive base) .. Yes it would indeed be time comsuming..And un-needed I must say...

It needs to be stopped. It seems malicious, it may not be intended that way, but that's the way it comes across.

Malicious????? do you know what malicious means, I see Zero malicious......and Dude who bumps up a lot does NOT hVE A MALICIOUS BOnE/

SO WHY do you stay here?




Trust me Caroline, everyone here who knows me, knows I'm the BIGGEST POLITICAL and CONTROVERSIAL person on this site. :nod:

The person that owns this site, doesn't want the DRAMA!!
Again,
SO WHY do you stay here?
Just to complain????




Very few he has bumped up today have been good stuff, but the most have been irrelevant threads.

WHY???? I have lots of time a like this board enough...Figgy why do you belly ache about dUDE'S BUMPS

I think everyone knows Dude isn't being malicious in bumping old threads because there's nothing honestly "malicious" about it. It's more along the lines of asking why people are posting in threads from 2003 that say for example "look at what I bought at this point in time" etc that have no replies whatsoever.

A. the person who posted that probably is no longer on the forum and
B. the thing they bought then, they probably no longer have or remember buying.

From that viewpoint, what would be the logical reason of keeping that conversation going, especially if it gained no interest at the time of the posting? If the complaint is that this part of the forum isn't as active, then by all means, create your own spin on things to freshen things up. Any other forum would have locked the post by now on the grounds that they're 20 years old in general.

I was gonna give everyone a present for being silly but I guess I wont :D

I like presents.

Does anyone else find it funny that one of the more currently active threads is a bumped up 20 year old thread debating the merits of bumping up old threads?

Does anyone else find it funny that one of the more currently active threads is a bumped up 20 year old thread debating the merits of bumping up old threads?

Yep!:D And talking about TV shows threads are really on the back burner now! :confused:

Does anyone else find it funny that one of the more currently active threads is a bumped up 20 year old thread debating the merits of bumping up old threads?

Have you also noticed that this thread you BUMPED UP has had MORE views and replies than 100's and 100's and 100's combined than any of Dude111's bumped up threads? :lol: :lol: :lol:


It only proves that Dude111 doesn't know what a good thread really is or "gold" as he thinks!! :lol: :lol:

Yep!:D And talking about TV shows threads are really on the back burner now! :confused:

Probably because he has "polluted" all the tv boards with also bumping up "old threads!"

I was gonna give everyone a present for being silly but I guess I wont :D


Wait .... you want to give us a present: ?

How long of a present: will you give us?

You going to take a vacation from here? :nod: :nod:
One week, two weeks, a month, two or more months...

Anyone else on here thinks this would be the BEST GIFT on Sitcom Online from Dude111? :D

Yep!:D And talking about TV shows threads are really on the back burner now! :confused:

Silly rabbit. Why would we talk about sitcoms at sitcomsonline?

Silly rabbit. Why would we talk about sitcoms at sitcomsonline?

I like to talk about video games on sitcomsonline, thank you.

Wait .... you want to give us a present: ?

How long of a present: will you give us?

You going to take a vacation from here? :nod: :nod:
One week, two weeks, a month, two or more months...

Anyone else on here thinks this would be the BEST GIFT on Sitcom Online from Dude111? :D

Thats a little harsh...

Silly rabbit. Why would we talk about sitcoms at sitcomsonline?


That would be like going to https://www.movieforums.com/community/ to talk about movies. :)

I like to talk about video games on sitcomsonline, thank you.

Waiting for the Switch 2 reboot….

316326

Thats a little harsh...:yeahthat Dude shouldn't go overboard on the amount of threads he bumps. But I also wouldn't pressure him to take a vacation from here or say him leaving is a gift to us.

Thats a little harsh...

Not as harsh from a poster in 2004 that said this: (in this thread)

Yeah their should. Id say that if the topics are at least a year old, dont bump them up.
Maybe the person who bumped it up shouldnt get banned the first time they do it,
but if they continue to do it than they would get banned.

Just my thoughts.

There has to be a warning system in place first and that person has to be warned multiple times for a ban to take effect, though.

Now threads that should be banned are ones that could be answered with a simple google search.

Now threads that should be banned are ones that could be answered with a simple google search.


Many threads on here that have got locked(no longer allows new posts) are in Closed/Archived Boards in the site.

Have you also noticed that this thread you BUMPED UP has had MORE views and replies than 100's and 100's and 100's combined than any of Dude111's bumped up threads? :lol: :lol: :lol:Ah man <<>> I guess you know it all Foggy :)

Now threads that should be banned are ones that could be answered with a simple google search.

Seriously, that kind of thing can't be done. We think of everyone having the same capabilities we do, but they don't.

Malicious????? do you know what malicious means, I see Zero malicious......and Dude who bumps up a lot does NOT hVE A MALICIOUS BOnE/

This is what I actually said:

"It needs to be stopped. It seems malicious, it may not be intended that way, but that's the way it comes across".

You obviously posted without doing any research into the complaint I and others have with his conduct. I suggest you go back to early October and review the blizzard of threads he bumped up one right after another. Over one 45 minute period he bumped 6 items up. To illustrate this point, one he bumped up was a discussion of a new movie in 2001 Rush Hour 2! Of course all the comments were from 2001. A few days later he's posted 16 items in a row, one titled DVD vs. VCR from 2002 posted by an individual who hasn't posted on this site in over 20 years. I can go and on about this but it's up to you to educate yourself on his conduct, you look foolish commenting on something you know nothing about.

If you are a friend of his you might take some time to review the issue (I've given you a start point) and then try to talk some sense into him.

Malicious????? do you know what malicious means, I see Zero malicious......and Dude who bumps up a lot does NOT hVE A MALICIOUS BOnE/

This threat he made directly towards you seems pretty malicious

https://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showpost.php?p=6344377&postcount=32

This is what I actually said:

"It needs to be stopped. It seems malicious, it may not be intended that way, but that's the way it comes across".
Malicious means intent to do harm, like this definition. "the transmission of malicious software such as computer viruses"
Dude's mass bumping of threads can be annoying but it certainly isn't malicious. He isn't giving any of us viruses or harming us.

No I love you guys,why would I wanna hurt you??

This threat he made directly towards you seems pretty malicious I am going thru hell Opus,I didnt mean what I said to her and I think she knows that....She is havng a hard time also and I feel bad and im trying to work it out with her as I care about her alot :)

This is what I actually said:

"It needs to be stopped. It seems malicious, it may not be intended that way, but that's the way it comes across".

You obviously posted without doing any research into the complaint I and others have with his conduct. I suggest you go back to early October and review the blizzard of threads he bumped up one right after another. Over one 45 minute period he bumped 6 items up. To illustrate this point, one he bumped up was a discussion of a new movie in 2001 Rush Hour 2! Of course all the comments were from 2001. A few days later he's posted 16 items in a row, one titled DVD vs. VCR from 2002 posted by an individual who hasn't posted on this site in over 20 years. I can go and on about this but it's up to you to educate yourself on his conduct, you look foolish commenting on something you know nothing about.

If you are a friend of his you might take some time to review the issue (I've given you a start point) and then try to talk some sense into him.

That still isnt malicious though

Everything is just TEXT,what is so malicious about Text :D

Everything is just TEXT,what is so malicious about Text :D

The bottom line on this is pretty straight forward, you've been asked by numerous people here not to do it.

I think there needs to be an official rule put in place to end this once and for all.

What counts as "interesting" is up to interpretation and what is considered "old" is up to interpretation.



Let's say a movie production halts in 2015, but then again plans come around in 2025 to resume. A thread like that could be updated as there was a relevant update to report on.

A poll on who is the best between Clay Aiken and Ruben Studdard from American Idol back in 2003 has no purpose in being revived today (example).

TJ has said a few times he doesn't want to make this a rule. It would make too much extra work for him. Some people are making a mountain out of some molehills. Dude shouldn't go overboard, but I don't have a problem with old threads being bumped. It is nice to see some of the former regulars again.

Well you all notice I havent been scanning much lately as I have pretty much outscanned this base.. There is nothing worth really replying to anymore from far back...

Now I could pi$$ people off and just start replying like crazy to just any older thread (even if its not good) but that WOULD BE MALICIOUS and im not like that..


You people should be ashamed of yourselfs for complaining about such stupid stuff!!

It shows you have nothing in your lives going on so you pick on my fun...

Todd could lash out and move all the other threads from the archive base to here,then I could have more fun and discovery... You guys are ruining this site!!!


Congrats!!

Well you all notice I havent been scanning much lately as I have pretty much outscanned this base.. There is nothing worth really replying to anymore from far back...

Now I could pi$$ people off and just start replying like crazy to just any older thread (even if its not good) but that WOULD BE MALICIOUS and im not like that..


You people should be ashamed of yourselfs for complaining about such stupid stuff!!

It shows you have nothing in your lives going on so you pick on my fun...

Todd could lash out and move all the other threads from the archive base to here,then I could have more fun and discovery... You guys are ruining this site!!!


Congrats!!


You're wanted here :) Bump all the old threads you want! If ppl don't wanna read them they can keep scanning

Thank you..

It would be nice if Todd made the archive base replyable,then I can scan and reply over there also...

Thats how it is on hipforums..

www.hipforums.com/forum/forum/516-archived-forums (Login to see it)

There are several bases in that section and you can reply on all of them :)


Thank you for your kind words!!!

I think there needs to be an official rule put in place to end this once and for all.

What counts as "interesting" is up to interpretation and what is considered "old" is up to interpretation.



Let's say a movie production halts in 2015, but then again plans come around in 2025 to resume. A thread like that could be updated as there was a relevant update to report on.

A poll on who is the best between Clay Aiken and Ruben Studdard from American Idol back in 2003 has no purpose in being revived today (example).

There isn't going to be any official rule against it. We've never had such a sitewide rule in our history. It would be impossible to enforce.

The only threads that can't be replied to are ones that are locked or moved to an Archive section. Any other threads are still open for replies. We aren't Reddit. We don't have their level of traffic and active membership. They can automatically close inactive threads after two years.

You are the only who created this rule as a moderator of the Movies board. You deleted any posts that bumped up any threads which were two years or older. It honestly killed a lot of the potential activity. I thought the movies section would be a lot more popular when IMdB closed their boards.

Movies, music and television shows are generally timeless. Many of the general chit chat topics such as food or video games are timeless. The only threads which shouldn't be bumped up are time sensitive topics.

Dude111 just wants to get some activity going. I thank him for that. People are more inclined to reply to active threads. I feel like we need all of the possible pageviews and replies as possible at this point due to a declining amount of active members.

He just needs to limit the amount of threads he's replying to per board on a daily basis. There should be a decent number of active theads on the main Chit Chat section, but we don't want an overwhelming amount. I don't think people are going back to the second and third pages often to read threads.

You are the only who created this rule as a moderator of the Movies board. You deleted any posts that bumped up any threads which were two years or older. It honestly killed a lot of the potential activity. I thought the movies section would be a lot more popular when IMdB closed their boards.

It wasn’t me alone as I had the OK from Janice who allowed me to do it because she didn’t like seeing old threads revived. The 2 year limit was her call.

The IMDb boards had no moderation at all where members could say whatever they wanted. I miss that board.

It wasn’t me alone as I had the OK from Janice who allowed me to do it because she didn’t like seeing old threads revived. The 2 year limit was her call.

The IMDb boards had no moderation at all where members could say whatever they wanted. I miss that board.

It was your idea. It seemed like kind of a silly rule to me when movies are timeless. None of the other boards on here had any such restrictions. The reality is that you deleted hundreds/thousands of posts which could have generated views and replies.

I don't think boards without any rules or moderation can be very successful. I know the Something Awful forums are still popular, but they have many pages of rules. They also make you pay to register and post. I guess that would eliminate some of the trolls.

It was your idea. It seemed like kind of a silly rule to me when movies are timeless. None of the other boards on here had any such restrictions. The reality is that you deleted hundreds/thousands of posts which could have generated views and replies.

I don't think boards without any rules or moderation can be very successful. I know the Something Awful forums are still popular, but they have many pages of rules. They also make you pay to register and post. I guess that would eliminate some of the trolls.

It was my idea, but Janice OK’d it and she said at the time that she would make it a site wide rule if she could have.

I would agree sites need rules to keep it going and IMDb was a place to go to escape that. A paywall would definitely keep trolls away. Other sites were even more strict on no political or religious discussions when SO had allowed it. For example, Blu-ray.com would lock and close threads at even the slightest bit of political discussions.

It was my idea, but Janice OK’d it and she said at the time that she would make it a site wide rule if she could have.

I would agree sites need rules to keep it going and IMDb was a place to go to escape that. A paywall would definitely keep trolls away. Other sites were even more strict on no political or religious discussions when SO had allowed it. For example, Blu-ray.com would lock and close threads at even the slightest bit of political discussions.

I have a hard time believing that IMDb had no rules at all. They probably lacked moderators to fully enforce them.

Was there a report posts feature? Did they censor profanity? They had to have deleted certain posts and threads.

Their boards were never profitable to them. That's one of the reasons they closed them besides the rise of social media.