Proposal: monthly "bump"

Based on my experience and observations of the group dynamics here on ATS, I think many members would probably appreciate if they were encouraged (by the administration) to "bump" their favourite threads periodically - let's say once a month - without feeling bad about it.
(You could even introduce a button: "monthly bump". Wouldn't that be spiffy? )

The thing is, there are hundreds - perhaps thousands - of threads that would be highly interesting to many, but they simply don't get around to ever see them. (Yes, you can search for old threads and even resurrect them - but it's not the same, is it?)

If you introduced a "monthly bump", I think we would all see very interesting activity all over the place.

Just a thought, anyway.










[edit on 7-3-2008 by Vanitas]

Members have a way of doing that each day. Threads that the membership as a whole (and that includes the staff) find engaging and interesting get replies and have an ongoing discussion (some go for months and months)

Staff and FSME's do have the ability to bump threads, but the membership really does controll the majority of the content that falls within the terms and conditions.

As much as I agree that there are several hidden gems lurking in the database, I would hate to see the monthly migration of older now ignored threads displace active current threads and the like.

Just my 2 cents worth

reply to post by FredT


I know, Fred. But the thing is, there are many topics and angles that are interesting to anyone of us - too many to keep them in mind. For example, I've seen threads that sparked a lot of interest on my part - a "dormant" interest, if you will - once I saw them, thanks to somebody who resurrected the subject.

In other words, I wouldn't have searched for the subject because it was too far away from my mind at that point. But once I was reminded of it, I was very glad to see it being discussed.
(And, needless to say, that goes for other members, too, as far as I can see.)

I think that would also help considerably keeping the sheer number and volume of threads within reasonable limits.

But, as I said: it's just a thought.