Should people be able to posts topics previously discussed in the ATS database

I saw a thread where a mod scorned the OP about posting a thread that had previously been posted, however it was about 2 years old. And the subject matter very unique actually. I would have never known about the story had it not been for the re-post.

The thread in question i for one was grateful to see. I would have never thought to search for the specific thread with no knowledge of it what so ever. I couldn't possibly have time to read every single UFO post on ATS ever made either so again unless the OP had "re-posted" the material I would have never known about the subject at hand.

I think we should be able to re-post topics that are of interest so as to engage in real time conversation with a whole new set of ATS'rs I really do.

Does the ATS community share the same sentiment?
If so please star/flag.

Thanks,
FG

p.s. MODS if i have misunderstood the posting rules in any way I will humbly accept your wisdom.

I had that same thing with a recent topic.. Would have never known about it other wise...

Can't we just have a re-post section to put the re-posted topics in or something..

Not Every Journalist has the same appeal, and these forums don't repost themselves. Special consideration and respect needs to be considered to all posters, new and old alike. We "long-time" members have long memories, but at the risk of alienating new members. And the Mental bookmarks of events posted on this site, have a difficult time being indexed in our archives under easy to universally use search features, which do not do well with non-specific search questions. "Remember that post about a ufo in florida 3 years ago" (doesn't search-function well) and not the fault of our readers and members.

My opinion.

I agree. This place is so big, it's got a good 8+ years worth of threads, so I don't see what the problem is if somebody starts a thread that talks about the same thing that was talked about 4 years ago.

Just one man's opinion.

Have a 'Zombie' alert section under new topics, top topics or some such where when someone brings a dusty old thread back to shambling life, it 'get's attention'.

It seems people are more concerned about the attention factor. Who's going to engage with my opinion in an old dead thread?

As far as excuses about "I'd never have known about this old subject if wossname OP hadn't reposted", that's the member's fault for not simply clicking a forum of interest and eye-balling the list of topics available for discussion.

Sure, the old thread is interesting, but, there's tons of old dead threads that are interesting. How badly do you want a zombie army of reposts when there's already a zombie army available for you to play with?

I stand by suggestion to enable a zombie alert type function under new topics and top topics so that if a zombie is noticed shuffling about, people are then aware of it, and can either run, play with it, or, go shoot it in the head.

I alwasye thought the rule of thumb was if you searched it and the thread is months old and there haven't been posts in some time you can post a new thread.
If your new thread also offers a unique take on an old topic and the unique take can be discussed further by itself you can make the new thread as well.

That said I am a moderator on another site(job not volunteer), and mods can have off days.
They have to moderate many things and even on their best days they can't catch it all or realize something is unique.
That doesn't even begin to go into human error, being hungry, being cranky, life getting in the way, foul mood.

I have seen crackdowns on this site, but having been a moderator for some time myself now I do try and give ATS mods the benefit of the doubt when they bring down the Thread Closed Hammer.

Just my .02 on the matter.

reply to post by Druscilla


That would actually be very hard to code.
Not to mention it could be totally overwhelmed if tons of old threads are brought back or if the parameters bumped slightly.
Most people don't know this, but when you update code it can affect all previous code.
I once new people at neo pets, they had a "code vault" a section on their server that you couldn't even read without permission, you couldn't even search the contents.
It was as isolated as possible, they designed it to require a physical key card swipe to get to it.
Anyway they were designing a new game and on it's own the new game assimilated code from the vault and made a royal mess.
They were able to fix the mess, but a month later they still don't know how the new game picked up code that was locked away.

New features are great, but they need to be implemented slowly and only if they really add tremendous value to the over all site experience.

The way you describe your new feature it seems like it would be more hassle than it's worth.
That could just be the way I read it though.

I appreciate this topic being addressed, I was thinking the same thing earlier in reguards to "exactley" how this posting etiquette works?

It seems if a "forum" as been established for a particular subject, it can be discussed repeatedly, and the "angle" or opinion of the OP is given some "wiggle room" for "overlapping subject matter.

This actually works out fine for myself overall, since my interests tend to be geared toward established forums here at ATS.

I do notice overlapping threads , and I guess I tend to think that "several" people have something to say on a certain matter, and each OP brings a new perpective to that subject, and potentially brings an understanding to a "given" subject, that can't be compared to another's post/thread.

LOL, I recently came across a guy named Eustice Mullins, historian and reasercher, I'm still pretty green, and learning, so this guy blew my mind....anyways, decided I had to make a thread about this guy, did search and found some other older threads about him and infact linked my favorite one to my thread, well it seems not many people back then or now are very interested.... I learned alot though, and was inspired to share...just didn't turn out to be a popular topic for others.

Anyways...know us new folks appreciate "real time" discussions that may seem "old news" to more seasoned members, it's somewhat "intimidating to to explore ideas in a forum such as ATS to begin with, lol, smart enough to know ,I don't know much, kinda thing....

Originally posted by Pigraphia
reply to post by Druscilla

 

That would actually be very hard to code.
Not to mention it could be totally overwhelmed if tons of old threads are brought back or if the parameters bumped slightly.
...

Understandably as I initially proposed, coding would perhaps indeed be an issue.

As a concession however, please consider this: There's a Top Topics section and a New Topics section where values populated behind the scenes automatically populate these sections with relevant material described by the values of age, popularity, last post added, etc.
With that system already in place, adding a 'Zombie' section where the values of old threads are already in place, these older threads could then auto-populate the 'Zombie' section based on those very same values that at one time put them in the New and/or Popular Topic sections, but now newly revived in the 'Zombie' Topic section.

In such a way, these old threads will have a more visible face, or presence based on popularity and most recent posting under a new section that's just a click away.
Based on how the value system already in place works, these Zombie threads then have a chance to even make it back onto the Popular Topic page based on renewed interest and debate of the established thread.

This would satisfy the concern for visibility and any entitlement concern where a user feels a need for active engagement for their important opinion.

Originally posted by Pigraphia
I alwasye thought the rule of thumb was if you searched it and the thread is months old and there haven't been posts in some time you can post a new thread.
If your new thread also offers a unique take on an old topic and the unique take can be discussed further by itself you can make the new thread as well.

^^^ This^^^

We'd prefer to not have multiple active threads for the same topic, but there are exceptions to that, as well. We permit one current thread in a News forum and one current thread in a topical forum on the same topic, for example. It's especially helpful and appreciated when starting a new thread, if you can link older relevant threads on the topic in your opening post.

There's nothing wrong with starting a thread on a topic that's sat dormant for months, or reviving an old thread with a new post for that matter. What we try to minimize, are several current threads on the same topic.

Just my opinion.. I like it when something I missed that my be old is brought up again. Maybe the OP should search, check to see how old the topic is, if older and dormant, include the previous discussion link in the original post. I dont mind rehashing old topics.. unless its Obamas birth certificate... AGAIN.

Originally posted by Advantage
Just my opinion.. I like it when something I missed that my be old is brought up again. Maybe the OP should search, check to see how old the topic is, if older and dormant, include the previous discussion link in the original post. I dont mind rehashing old topics.. unless its Obamas birth certificate... AGAIN.

I actually appreciate the "soft-kills" of threads that have explanations at the end of them (more than threads vanishing).

And like posted above about searching for a 3 year old thread about some UFO in some FL town... the search-function won't catch all of the conversation duplications either.

Also, I'd suggest that:
When the "other thread" is old that the older thread be the one closed and linked to the new one (by default unless the 'old thread' is still not that old). Often a newer article or interested contributor posting a thread has something new to add complete with a rational to START a new conversation.

Originally posted by firegoggles
I saw a thread where a mod scorned the OP about posting a thread that had previously been posted, however it was about 2 years old. And the subject matter very unique actually. I would have never known about the story had it not been for the re-post.

The thread in question i for one was grateful to see. I would have never thought to search for the specific thread with no knowledge of it what so ever. I couldn't possibly have time to read every single UFO post on ATS ever made either so again unless the OP had "re-posted" the material I would have never known about the subject at hand.

I think we should be able to re-post topics that are of interest so as to engage in real time conversation with a whole new set of ATS'rs I really do.

Does the ATS community share the same sentiment?
If so please star/flag.

Thanks,
FG

p.s. MODS if i have misunderstood the posting rules in any way I will humbly accept your wisdom.

i'm sure there's been a thread on this already, close this thread!!!!!

I think people should absolutely be able to post links to previous topics.It helps people in future searches see a thread they might have missed. I don't support the posts that just post a link and say it has been already discussed before. People should post links as a helpful way to make a thread better not to end it.

reply to post by firegoggles

Should people be able to posts topics previously discussed in the ATS database,

In my opinion, people should be able to post topics previously discussed, but only if they have some new information to present. If there is no new info presented, then it´s simply a rehash of an old topic and nothing more.

Peace

I remember an "endless loop" of closed threads. All were closed for duplication reasons (supposedly). Each one closed with a referral link to ANOTHER closed thread and so on.

I've done searches on VERY popular topics with one keyword and came up with only TWO answers before.

I've done searches where you got a lifetime's worth of links to read and none of them "seem" the same as the query's boolean logic.

I have better luck using an Internet search engine for an ATS thread.

Some boards limit replies to 100 and if the subject is still of interest ... people write a new thread (continuation X,Y,Z #2). I really prefer that!

Another alternative wouldn't fly on ATS - some boards require approval of each submission and the mods place the threads within the topics they apply to.

Originally posted by Seed76
reply to post by firegoggles

 

Should people be able to posts topics previously discussed in the ATS database,

In my opinion, people should be able to post topics previously discussed, but only if they have some new information to present. If there is no new info presented, then it´s simply a rehash of an old topic and nothing more.

Peace

Not all of us can be on here 24/7 though... I had no internet for 8 months for example, and missed a TON of stuff... if it weren't for people starting new threads latley on"old" topics, I would have missed a lot of Gems.... plus. 99% of the stuff on here are old topics... some are super old, but so interesting they have their own forums, like 911 etc... I agree having 20 earthquake threads when one strikes can be annoying, but if it is some neat topic from months or years ago, I don't wanna read through 5000 pages. It is nice to start fresh, with new people and new thoughts etc.... if someone recognized it as old, just leave it if it is old for YOU, but to some of us it is a brand new prize.

reply to post by mellisamouse

Not all of us can be on here 24/7 though... I had no internet for 8 months for example, and missed a TON of stuff... if it weren't for people starting new threads latley on"old" topics, I would have missed a lot of Gems.... plus.

That´s why the ATS-Search function is useful. I am also not 24/7 online, but if i am looking for a subject, then i use the search function, to see what´s going on with the topics i am interested to.

99% of the stuff on here are old topics... some are super old, but so interesting they have their own forums, like 911 etc...

And rightly so, if i may add. Otherwise would be a complete nightmare to search for those discussions.

I agree having 20 earthquake threads when one strikes can be annoying, but if it is some neat topic from months or years ago, I don't wanna read through 5000 pages.

Yes, indeed. No one wants to read through 5000 pages of opinions. : ) On a serious note however, you have to read all of the info that the OP presented, on the subject which you are interested to present. When you gone through that process, then you will see what info been presented, and if that info is the same as yours. By doing that you presenting an old gem, with some new info that you gathered. But that´s my opinion.

It is nice to start fresh, with new people and new thoughts etc.... if someone recognized it as old, just leave it if it is old for YOU, but to some of us it is a brand new prize.

Yes, but what good is that fresh start of an old topic, when you are presenting the same info that was presented before. It´s like someone wrote in 2005 that cars are green, in 2008 another wrote that cars are green, in 2012 someone else wrote the cars are green. A fresh start, would be if someone took the info of 2005 that the cars are green, and actually presented a new info, that the cars are red. That in my opinion would be a fresh start of an old topic.
Further, even if you do not have, new info to present, then maybe you could present an old topic from a different angle. That essentially would be the old info but from a different perspective, which in turn will spark some new thoughts on the subject.


Peace

reply to post by Seed76


New people give new opinions and see things at a different angle, and some may have new info...

If it is a beaten horse for some, they should just stay out of the threads instead of derailing the new threads, and taking up room in them the way they claim the new threads are doing. I see threads with 70% people telling other people to stop talking about something instead of adding ANYTHING to the subject... they just gotta sit on their hands and pick other threads.... that is all the waisted bandwidth...\

For example, a thread was asking if certain people have had new experiences at something, and instead of sharing new experiences, a bunch of people jumped in debating if the topic was real or not... Well, if they want a debate on something being real, start a thread on it.... if they have new experiences of their own to share, then chime in.... There needs to be seperate debate sections or something, and some free speach sections maybe?

reply to post by mellisamouse


... and these new experiences from new members can't be added to an older thread, thereby enriching a seasoned topic with new flavor and viewpoints?

Adding to an established thread you could then time-line through the evolving conversation, see the pitfalls in argument and debate, and even LEARN something old, but also NEW because you haven't seen it and won't see it unless you followed the progression of maturation the thread follows over time.