PSA: Beware of the Necro Threads

[Shurrikhan]

With so many threads from 2003 - 2008 being dug up from the grave...

That's not necro'ing; that's time travel.

<--Been on the forums since exactly a year after the game's launch... which was in 2010.

On topic:

Titanmen/Brofists are kind of the exception here. Most necro'ing is done because the post is still in some way as relevant now as then.

[MsQi]

5 years from now I hope to enjoy the irony of this thread being necro'd.

[Gula]

Who cares, whole game is necro

Is that why you keep paying a sub?

[Burmecia]

The more things change, the more they stay the same, I guess.

[Edax]

<--Been on the forums since exactly a year after the game's launch... which was in 2010.

Oops I forgot to add a "1". Fixed.

[ElazulHP]

It's really annoying I have to admit. The people doing it know people are blocking them. So logically the next step of annoyance to bypass the fact that people can't see them is necro threads. Those can't be blocked from being seen. Really they should be banned imo.

[Theodric]

I'd be surprised if anything is done about the situation since the moderators stick to a very strict set of rules that they always enforce in a specific way. If something isn't technically against the rules then it isn't likely to result in a ban even if it's annoying for other players to deal with.

Just look at how they've opted to handle the abuse of the housing system. Some players own entire wards, though as it isn't technically against the rules no efforts have been made to remedy the situation. I suspect we're dealing with something similar when it comes to threads being revived.

[Arngrim_Greyashe]

I'd be surprised if anything is done about the situation since the moderators stick to a very strict set of rules that they always enforce in a specific way. If something isn't technically against the rules then it isn't likely to result in a ban even if it's annoying for other players to deal with.

Just look at how they've opted to handle the abuse of the housing system. Some players own entire wards, though as it isn't technically against the rules no efforts have been made to remedy the situation. I suspect we're dealing with something similar when it comes to threads being revived.

The two are nowhere close to related. When it comes to housing, they've updated the system to prevent it from happening again but they're also not going to rip away what people worked hard to get. That honestly wouldn't be fair. I'm not saying that owning an entire district is right, but they earned it fairly. Meanwhile this spamlord is technically going against the rules by adding nothing to conversation on these threads and spamming.

[SturmChurro]

The two are nowhere close to related. When it comes to housing, they've updated the system to prevent it from happening again but they're also not going to rip away what people worked hard to get. That honestly wouldn't be fair. I'm not saying that owning an entire district is right, but they earned it fairly. Meanwhile this spamlord is technically going against the rules by adding nothing to conversation on these threads and spamming.

I've read the ToS many times. There is nothing in it that states you can be banned for reviving old threads, or reviving multiple old threads - as long as said posts have to do with the thread's topic, doesn't contain "profanity", or attacks users, etc. I think it is a big stretch to call it spamming, if I am feeling talkative, I have gone back 3-4 pages and posted in older threads, that pushed back multiple threads from the front page. What makes a thread at the bottom of the 1st page more important than something else if someone wants to have discussion? Personally, I will search for an old thread on a topic I would want to create a topic about, before I create a topic. We already have a daily limit to our posts as well.

[Arngrim_Greyashe]

I've read the ToS many times. There is nothing in it that states you can be banned for reviving old threads, or reviving multiple old threads - as long as said posts have to do with the thread's topic, doesn't contain "profanity", or attacks users, etc. I think it is a big stretch to call it spamming, if I am feeling talkative, I have gone back 3-4 pages and posted in older threads, that pushed back multiple threads from the front page. What makes a thread at the bottom of the 1st page more important than something else if someone wants to have discussion? Personally, I will search for an old thread on a topic I would want to create a topic about, before I create a topic. We already have a daily limit to our posts as well.

The difference between you and the current situation is that you didn't go back to several year old posts every single day, write a comment that had nothing to really add to the topic, and then continue on to other old posts to repeat.

I have nothing against returning to an old post to search for answers or inquire further. To do things of substance. What I have an issue with is someone reviving old threads on an attempt to cover the first few pages of general discussion, or to bring up what were obviously heated threads in an attempt to cause arguments to resurface for no reason.