New Threads vs. Old Threads., Which takes precedence ?

Being a fairly new member , I am confused .

If I choose to discuss a topic that I don't find listed in the 'recent posts' board am I obligated to do a search to see if it has EVER been discussed on ATS ?

If I find that it has , then am I obligated to post under that thread , even tho it has been lying dormant for several years ?

There are topics that I run across on the web that I feel a need to discuss and when I do a search on ATS I find that they were already discussed and put to bed , in some cases 3 , 4 , or 5 years ago .

I have posted a thread or two , only to have someone come along and insert a post telling me this has been posted here already and is 'old' news . I go and check this out , only to find that this topic was discussed in some thread that has been dormant for several years .

Then I see others , who come along and 'highjack' someone's thread by posting a similar , if not identical thread that contains verbatim material that is being discussed in a currently posted thread on the recent posts board .

I feel that if a thread has been dormant for a considerable length of time , then the topic should be fair game for a new thread . What incentive would a person have for posting under a thread that has been dead for years , only to have his opinion swallowed up by a thread which may already contain 2-300 posts ?

Also , I bet most people , if they are like myself , are not going to read thru 2-300 individual posts on any given thread to see if their point has been made and swallowed up by this thread already .

Then there are the times when you point out to the OP of a new thread that 'this' is being discussed here on the recent posts currently , but you get ignored and the duplicate thread continues to roll right along . You message the staff , but get no response .

So , could someone please clue me in as to the protocols dealing with this dilema ?

Originally posted by okbmd
I feel that if a thread has been dormant for a considerable length of time , then the topic should be fair game for a new thread . What incentive would a person have for posting under a thread that has been dead for years , only to have his opinion swallowed up by a thread which may already contain 2-300 posts ?

I think your view of this is the view that current ATS policy reflects. However, I can't find it right now to post it. I'm sure a mod can. Mods?

Its best to post any continuation on a old thread (it also bumps the old thread).

If you however have new information on a old subject, then thats when to start a new thread...but it should be new stuff to begin with.

If you insist on starting a new thread for a old topic, its best to at least link back to a old thread to begin with and say its a continuation of that but with a new look or whatever..

You'd be hard pressed to find a topic that hasn't been discussed here at some point, so I wouldn't worry too much about starting threads on topics that have already been discussed. You can always stick a link to the old thread in your new one along with a quick line about it being discussed before in that one but that you want to focus on whatever the topic of yours is or something like that. Basically just acknowledging that yeah it's been talked about before, but that was years ago and fresh eyes can sometimes see things that were missed before.

It's considered polite to search for threads that have already been started on your topic, but I don't see it as a requirement. ATS search leaves something to be desired and if your search terms are even slightly off from the way someone else worded their title you may inadvertently create a duplicate thread. That's part of the reason I rarely start threads, and when I do I use article titles for the thread titles. Makes it easier to find them as long as someone searches for the keywords in the article title.

For threads that haven't been touched in years, you are not obligated to post in them and bump them back up to the recent posts list. You can, but you don't have to. I've seen just as many people complain about that as I have seen complain about people not reviving long dead threads.

As far as multiple threads on the same topic, the mods and owners generally don't care as long as one is in Breaking News and one is in whichever section it best fits. No one likes to be told that they've started a duplicate thread, and regardless of how long you're here you'll still get ignored by many people if you point it out. You can report it to the mods, but they may not get to it right away.

If you find you've created a duplicate of a recent thread, try not to take others pointing it out personally cause it's probably not meant that way. If they're being rude, just ignore it. Some people seem to have a chip on their shoulder and make it their personal mission to be jerks to new posters. Just don't let them drag you down to their level and you'll be fine.

Threads started on the same topic have a tendency to evolve in different ways, so even if the first posts are similar later posters may take the thread in completely different directions. Personally, I don't mind multiple threads on the same topic for that very reason.

Hi

visit these links for some more answers on the subject.

Responding to a thread re-post !
Still fresh from the press. I posted it yesterday evening or night...

ABOUT ATS: All about repeat topics and what to do about them.
The way TPTB like to see it