posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 12:28 PM
so i don't get why people get upset about "reposts." i mean, i do in some respects, but in others i do not. let me set up some hypotheticals
a member uses the search function to find threads on "rabid cheese eating canaries from mars" and finds 13 threads, all of which had been posted
more than 3 months prior. after reading through these threads this member posts a new thread about the same topic posing questions or new ideas that
had not been thought of or adressed in the other threads. the member decided not to post these ideas in other said threads because of their age and
because he/she felt it would not get viewed as widely as hoped for. also, some of these members may not even be on ATS anymore, and this member was
sure that newer members since this topic had been discussed may have something to say also. so this member posts his/her information or ideas. then,
upon posting this new thread an older member posts saying that it is a repost and gives links to these older, dead threads.
who's wrong? i would have to say the older member calling it a repost. i mean, if the threads have been dead for more than a while, and if the
information were new or changed then shouldn't this justify a new thread? if not, then there should have only been one thread on "rabid cheese
eating canaries from mars" in the first place.
as of right now there are 2 threads on "koalabears with third nipples" on ATS. someone comes and posts a third and disregards the other two. this,
in my opinion, is rude and annoying. if a thread is new or recent or whatever you would like to call it, then yes a repost is bad.
i just through that in there so people don't get the idea that i'm totally for reposts.