12/18/2012 03:44 PM
Posted by Snowfox
Absolutely wrong. The general forum goes by pretty fast and most people don't tend to look at page 2 of the topics. So if you're not in the front page then your topic won't get any more views. Even if it's a deep insightful topic that warrants extra discussion. As long as someone is bumping once every few hours to get his topic out to a new "audience" that browses the forum at a different time than the last audience that's fine. But yeah bumping it every 5 minutes on the other hand is a little different.
There's a difference between a post bumping a thread and making a bump post.
A bump post is useless information. It's noise, a tee-hee wink that pushes the thread to the top.
A post bumping a thread should have actual information added... something new brought to the discussion.
If people want to bump threads, then add information to that post. Reply to someone in the thread, address their statement. That's fine.
DON'T just say "bump" and think you are anything but an attention-starved child.
This is ironic to me, considering that some of the stickies on this site were "bumped" by the OP prior to becoming stickies.
Sometimes, people bump well-thought out and well-written threads, because as the other person said, they want a new "audience." Some people only read the forums at certain times. Posts pushed to the second+ page after an hour of spam from stupid and irrelevant threads sometimes need a "bump" to get some intelligent discussion going on.
YES. YES That is accurate. Yes is the answer to the question. The answer is "YES".
Please stop rehashing that question.
I wouldn't have had to have rehashed it if you would have just given that answer from the very beginning, instead of beating around the bush when I asked it every other time. It was a yes or no question, yet in every other post, you've said, "Yes, but" type of responses with other things strewn in that were irrelevant to the question.
If you're supporting spam over bumping an unanswered question, which is still relevant, then I realize I need to bow out of this thread at this point, as there is no way we're going to see eye-to-eye on this issue.