Why is Necroing/Bumping bad?

General Discussion
Prev 1 2 3 7 Next
12/18/2012 02:43 PMPosted by Karat
These forums have not been around for four years. Posts from the old forums were not transferred over to these forums. There's no way you can find a four year old question or something that's four years out of date on the new forums. I believe these new forums came into existence a little over 2 years ago. For a green texter, your knowledge of the rather recent history of the forums seems a bit lacking.

I'm thinking she just picked 4 years as an example...


It is accurate that -these- forums have only been around since 2010. However the questions can be much older (although not necro'd). The 4 years thing WAS just an example though. In 2 years we still shouldn't be necro'ing 2010 posts, and if the old posts were still around - we would certainly have people necroing back from 2006 and before.
12/18/2012 02:38 PMPosted by Ïrresistible
but I don't see why bumping the thread for the sake of sparking further discussion on the topic is bad.


because it gets confusing and if the thread is really old the information contained is often incorrect.

if you read a post about say issues in hellfire and Ramps and you have some questions about it ; it is best to make your own thread so people can address your questions not those of the poster who posted the thread 2 yrs ago


Except threads like, "Where is <x> NPC in Hellfire Peninsula," aren't irrelevant, even if they were created back when BC was current. Threads asking about lore questions from 2+ years ago aren't irrelevant. What happens when someone asks a related question in those threads?

"Nice Necro."

What happens if someone makes a new thread about that question?

"Use the search function."

It's no win, either way, and people need to stop assuming that every necro is no longer relevant.

Sometimes you just gotta let go of a discussion. When to do so... Well, there aren't any clear-cut rules on that. Refusing to do so can make you seem stubborn, though. It's largely a perception issue.


Imho a thread is dead when new arguments have stopped being presented.. and it has lapsed into personal attacks, debating the definitions of words, playing analogy-warfare, or people are literally saying "guh this thread is dead."


Sooooo.....any thread with more than 5 pages?

:P
12/18/2012 02:47 PMPosted by Elementaru


because it gets confusing and if the thread is really old the information contained is often incorrect.

if you read a post about say issues in hellfire and Ramps and you have some questions about it ; it is best to make your own thread so people can address your questions not those of the poster who posted the thread 2 yrs ago


Except threads like, "Where is <x> NPC in Hellfire Peninsula," aren't irrelevant, even if they were created back when BC was current. Threads asking about lore questions from 2+ years ago aren't irrelevant. What happens when someone asks a related question in those threads?

"Nice Necro."

What happens if someone makes a new thread about that question?

"Use the search function."

It's no win, either way, and people need to stop assuming that every necro is no longer relevant.


They are right though - USE the search function before creating a thread.

Necro should not happen, EVER.

If the answer exists, use the supercomputing facilities our modern age has to find it in seconds. If it does not, then ask it. If the thread doesn't have it, don't necro it - ask the question fresh.

There's no reason to necro a post if you are seeking information.
Except threads like, "Where is <x> NPC in Hellfire Peninsula," aren't irrelevant, even if they were created back when BC was current. Threads asking about lore questions from 2+ years ago aren't irrelevant. What happens when someone asks a related question in those threads?

"Nice Necro."

What happens if someone makes a new thread about that question?

"Use the search function."

It's no win, either way, and people need to stop assuming that every necro is no longer relevant.


Once again not every question that's ever been asked that is still relevant can have a thread on the first page of the forums bumping topics just to bump them isn't helpful, and that is what the search function is for.


Except threads like, "Where is <x> NPC in Hellfire Peninsula," aren't irrelevant, even if they were created back when BC was current. Threads asking about lore questions from 2+ years ago aren't irrelevant. What happens when someone asks a related question in those threads?

"Nice Necro."

What happens if someone makes a new thread about that question?

"Use the search function."

It's no win, either way, and people need to stop assuming that every necro is no longer relevant.


They are right though - USE the search function before creating a thread.

Necro should not happen, EVER.

If the answer exists, use the supercomputing facilities our modern age has to find it in seconds. If it does not, then ask it. If the thread doesn't have it, don't necro it - ask the question fresh.

There's no reason to necro a post if you are seeking information.

So you'd rather we add yet one more thread to the forums, instead of bumping an older thread, asking THE EXACT SAME QUESTION, which was never answered?

Sorry, but that's not logical. All that does is just adds even more clutter to the forums.


Once again not every question that's ever been asked that is still relevant can have a thread on the first page of the forums bumping topics just to bump them isn't helpful, and that is what the search function is for.

Once again, I was talking about threads which are 2+ years old which ARE still relevant.

You would have known this had you actually read my post. You know, this specific part:


Except threads like, "Where is <x> NPC in Hellfire Peninsula," aren't irrelevant, even if they were created back when BC was current. Threads asking about lore questions from 2+ years ago aren't irrelevant.

So you'd rather we add yet one more thread to the forums, instead of bumping an older thread, asking THE EXACT SAME QUESTION, which was never answered?

Sorry, but that's not logical. All that does is just adds even more clutter to the forums.


It makes more sense to ask the question fresh, in current context - than to just bump a thread that was clearly unsuccessful in getting the question answered. Necro'd threads create a lot of needless noise and confusion. Also what you describe is purely theoretical. I've never seen it happen in practice. Every necro I've ever seen was little more than a random comment bumping the thread. It was not a refreshing of the question.

I'm sorry if you disagree with the blues on that, but necros are not good things.

We are not starving for space to post. We are starved for context. We are starved for data over the noise.
Once again, I was talking about threads which are 2+ years old which ARE still relevant.

You would have known this had you actually read my post. You know, this specific part:


That's irrelevant, the information is available on google still. Bumping an old thread for information that would have been readily available through a quick search without cluttering the forums is the point.
Am I the only one that came into this thread, hoping it was actually a necro itself?

So you'd rather we add yet one more thread to the forums, instead of bumping an older thread, asking THE EXACT SAME QUESTION, which was never answered?

Sorry, but that's not logical. All that does is just adds even more clutter to the forums.


It makes more sense to ask the question fresh, in current context - than to just bump a thread that was clearly unsuccessful in getting the question answered. Necro'd threads create a lot of needless noise and confusion. Also what you describe is purely theoretical. I've never seen it happen in practice. Every necro I've ever seen was little more than a random comment bumping the thread. It was not a refreshing of the question.

I'm sorry if you disagree with the blues on that, but necros are not good things.

We are not starving for space to post. We are starved for context. We are starved for data over the noise.


I don't really care about the appeal to authority argument. Blues aren't gods who are all-knowing or think of everything.

Normally, I agree with not necroing or bumping. However, there are valid instances as to when it is fine. The issue is, it's better to make a one-size fits all rule than to specify that it's okay in certain situations, because then everyone who gets in trouble for necroing will contest it.

There is literally no different context as to where <x> NPC is in Outland, or why something happened in the story back then. None. Whatsoever.

That's what my point is. There's no reason to make a new thread instead of bumping an unanswered one, when literally no context has changed in that instance, except, "Because the Blues say so."

"Because the Blues say so," would be fine, had people not tried to defend the position by using other arguments on the first page and just stated, "Because the Blues say so," in the first place.

If it's something irrelevant like bumping a class thread, pre-MoP, or bumping a 1-60 question prior to Cata, then I completely agree that it's unneeded noise. However, bumping something, which is still relevant and was never answered, shouldn't get some response like, "Nice necro." Those same people will state, "Use the search function," if a new thread is made, even if the topic was never answered in the past. Basically, people need to stop trolling both types of threads, thinking their awesome for noticing it was a necro.
Once again, I was talking about threads which are 2+ years old which ARE still relevant.

You would have known this had you actually read my post. You know, this specific part:


That's irrelevant, the information is available on google still. Bumping an old thread for information that would have been readily available through a quick search without cluttering the forums is the point.


If it's irrelevant, so is all of this subforum.

Snowfox said, it is better to create a new thread than to bump the old one which wasn't answered.

Let's not sit here and pretend 90% of the information in general isn't regurgitated for the 500th time about how PvP is unbalanced, "PvP happened on a PvP server," "Blizzard favors Horde," "Gnome appreciation thread#687," "Why Blood Elf Males are Hot," "Keep political issues out of my WoW," "New Warchief is <x>," "Nerf <x> class," "WoW is dying," "<x> MMO will usurp WoW," or any other myriad of repeated threads.

Edit: Forgot the oh-so-popular, "Maintenance extended... *RAGE*," or, "Is there going to be maintenance Tuesday?!" threads.

I don't really care about the appeal to authority argument. Blues aren't gods who are all-knowing or think of everything.


That's half true - it's their forums though, their property. So "here's what the blues believe" is one of my duties to convey, so that people know the rules. That's not the same as defending, it's just explaining.

However defending comes into play when you consider WHY they make those policies. What does Blizzard have to lose/gain with the "no-necroing" rule? That's what is important to look at. It's the same as botting vs boxing. One the blues allows, the others they don't. You can stop the discussion at "their game, their rules"... or you can go past that into WHY their policy is what it is.

Explaining WHAT the rules are is good.

Explaining WHY the rules are is better, but harder - people will fight you hard.


Normally, I agree with not necroing or bumping. However, there are valid instances as to when it is fine. The issue is, it's better to make a one-size fits all rule than to specify that it's okay in certain situations, because then everyone who gets in trouble for necroing will contest it.


Well, I'm old and wizened enough to know that every rule must have an exception... but that the exception proves the rule. We still need rules though, even when we can find exceptions.

In your single conjured case, perhaps you are right... however it is the exception, not the rule. The rule is the vastly overwhelmingly common case... and that case is that necro is done for the wrong reasons in most cases. I've seen many necros, but never one like you described.


There is literally no different context as to where <x> NPC is in Outland, or why something happened in the story back then. None. Whatsoever.


There absolutely is. Things get moved around all the time. If they can't find it with any of the plentiful ways of finding an NPC, then it's probably because something changed. I would absolutely expect a new thread for someone who couldn't find an NPC.

You're going to tell me they were able to find an old post about it?... but not the wowwiki or wowhead literal coordinates?

That's the fault of the person, in their search skills. They need to learn to search better, not necro more.

I don't really care about the appeal to authority argument. Blues aren't gods who are all-knowing or think of everything.


That's half true - it's their forums though, their property. So "here's what the blues believe" is one of my duties to convey, so that people know the rules. That's not the same as defending, it's just explaining.

However defending comes into play when you consider WHY they make those policies. What does Blizzard have to lose/gain with the "no-necroing" rule? That's what is important to look at. It's the same as botting vs boxing. One the blues allows, the others they don't. You can stop the discussion at "their game, their rules"... or you can go past that into WHY their policy is what it is.

Explaining WHAT the rules are is good.

Explaining WHY the rules are is better, but harder - people will fight you hard.


Normally, I agree with not necroing or bumping. However, there are valid instances as to when it is fine. The issue is, it's better to make a one-size fits all rule than to specify that it's okay in certain situations, because then everyone who gets in trouble for necroing will contest it.


Well, I'm old and wizened enough to know that every rule must have an exception... but that the exception proves the rule. We still need rules though, even when we can find exceptions.

In your single conjured case, perhaps you are right... however it is the exception, not the rule. The rule is the vastly overwhelmingly common case... and that case is that necro is done for the wrong reasons in most cases. I've seen many necros, but never one like you described.

I believe I already stated as much, when I explained why I know Blues have that rule in place to begin with.



There is literally no different context as to where <x> NPC is in Outland, or why something happened in the story back then. None. Whatsoever.


There absolutely is. Things get moved around all the time. If they can't find it with any of the plentiful ways of finding an NPC, then it's probably because something changed. I would absolutely expect a new thread for someone who couldn't find an NPC.

You're going to tell me they were able to find an old post about it?... but not the wowwiki or wowhead literal coordinates?

That's the fault of the person, in their search skills. They need to learn to search better, not necro more.

Finding an NPC was one example. If we're going to go down the road of, "Use other sites for that information," then why are these forums even here? Why not just use WoWhead's forums and ElitistJerk's forums instead of Blizzard having their own?

What meaningful questions are -ever- asked on this site that can't be found somewhere else? The exact same questions are usually answered on other sites, often with much less trolling than what is the usual case here. So why even have this site?

Finding an NPC was one example. If we're going to go down the road of, "Use other sites for that information," then why are these forums even here? Why not just use WoWhead's forums and ElitistJerk's forums instead of Blizzard having their own?

What meaningful questions are -ever- asked on this site that can't be found somewhere else? The exact same questions are usually answered on other sites, often with much less trolling than what is the usual case here. So why even have this site?


Well, to be blunt I'm not really here to help "experts" - people who believe they already know everything, particularly that claim to know more than the blues. I'll debate with such people, but they aren't the ones who would be necroing threads to ask where to find an npc.

I'm mostly here to help newbies and people who really want to find information.

Those people should obey the rules, until they known enough to know when to break them.

It's simple: If you are asking for help, obey the rules.

Finding an NPC was one example. If we're going to go down the road of, "Use other sites for that information," then why are these forums even here? Why not just use WoWhead's forums and ElitistJerk's forums instead of Blizzard having their own?

What meaningful questions are -ever- asked on this site that can't be found somewhere else? The exact same questions are usually answered on other sites, often with much less trolling than what is the usual case here. So why even have this site?


Well, to be blunt I'm not really here to help "experts" - people who believe they already know everything, particularly that claim to know more than the blues. I'll debate with such people, but they aren't the ones who would be necroing threads to ask where to find an npc.

I'm mostly here to help newbies and people who really want to find information.

Those people should obey the rules, until they known enough to know when to break them.

It's simple: If you are asking for help, obey the rules.


Which is fine, like I said before, had people (you included) just said, "Because the Blues say so," in their first response. They are free to run their private forums how they see fit.

But that's not what happened. People started making gross generalizations about bumping/necroing which, while may hold true for the majority of cases, do not hold true for all of them. Hence my points. When context has -not- changed in a certain situation, such as why "X" character decided to do something, years ago, and that question has already been asked but not answered, there really is no other reason to justify making a new thread except, "Because the Blues say so."

Like I said, that is a fine explanation... had people just stated that in the first place, instead of using other arguments that bumps never add content or that necroing just destroys context when that isn't always the case.


Well, to be blunt I'm not really here to help "experts" - people who believe they already know everything, particularly that claim to know more than the blues. I'll debate with such people, but they aren't the ones who would be necroing threads to ask where to find an npc.

I'm mostly here to help newbies and people who really want to find information.

Those people should obey the rules, until they known enough to know when to break them.

It's simple: If you are asking for help, obey the rules.


Which is fine, like I said before, had people (you included) just said, "Because the Blues say so," in their first response. They are free to run their private forums how they see fit.

But that's not what happened. People started making gross generalizations about bumping/necroing which, while may hold true for the majority of cases, do not hold true for all of them. Hence my points. When context has -not- changed in a certain situation, such as why "X" character decided to do something, years ago, and that question has already been asked but not answered, there really is no other reason to justify making a new thread except, "Because the Blues say so."

Like I said, that is a fine explanation... had people just stated that in the first place, instead of using other arguments that bumps never add content or that necroing just destroys context when that isn't always the case.


Erm, no, I maintain that there is never a good reason to necro.

You've got a chicken & egg problem.

If they know enough to "necro properly", then they know enough to not need to.

If they don't know enough to "necro properly", they they definitely shouldn't.


Which is fine, like I said before, had people (you included) just said, "Because the Blues say so," in their first response. They are free to run their private forums how they see fit.

But that's not what happened. People started making gross generalizations about bumping/necroing which, while may hold true for the majority of cases, do not hold true for all of them. Hence my points. When context has -not- changed in a certain situation, such as why "X" character decided to do something, years ago, and that question has already been asked but not answered, there really is no other reason to justify making a new thread except, "Because the Blues say so."

Like I said, that is a fine explanation... had people just stated that in the first place, instead of using other arguments that bumps never add content or that necroing just destroys context when that isn't always the case.


Erm, no, I maintain that there is never a good reason to necro.

You've got a chicken & egg problem.

If they know enough to "necro properly", then they know enough to not need to.

If they don't know enough to "necro properly", they they definitely shouldn't.


I try to avoid using never in cases like this, I do think there can be a valid time to revive an old thread. For example when someone who hasn't been on the forums in awhile and who has in fact used the search features found an old thread on their issue read through it and has something new to add. In that rare case it can make sense to revive the old thread instead of trying to recap everything that was said in it.

That said the vast majority of people who necro and bump are just doing it to spam and troll.


Which is fine, like I said before, had people (you included) just said, "Because the Blues say so," in their first response. They are free to run their private forums how they see fit.

But that's not what happened. People started making gross generalizations about bumping/necroing which, while may hold true for the majority of cases, do not hold true for all of them. Hence my points. When context has -not- changed in a certain situation, such as why "X" character decided to do something, years ago, and that question has already been asked but not answered, there really is no other reason to justify making a new thread except, "Because the Blues say so."

Like I said, that is a fine explanation... had people just stated that in the first place, instead of using other arguments that bumps never add content or that necroing just destroys context when that isn't always the case.


Erm, no, I maintain that there is never a good reason to necro.

You've got a chicken & egg problem.

If they know enough to "necro properly", then they know enough to not need to.

If they don't know enough to "necro properly", they they definitely shouldn't.


Or, they're searching the forums, like people tell people to constantly when a new thread is created about a previously asked question, and they saw, "Hey, my question was already asked, but no answer has been given, so I'll go ahead and bump this instead of making a new thread about it."

Your argument makes no sense. It's better to make a new thread about a topic that was never answered, but at the same time, the poster should have already googled for the answer. Again, what is the purpose of this message board, since nearly every answer can already be found on WoWhead, EJ, or one of the wiki sites?

By the way, the search function on this site blows, so it's quite possible that someone wouldn't find an answer, even if the same topic was posted a few times. However, should they ask the question by making a new thread, they'll be told, "Use the search function." If they bump a thread asking that question, but can't find the answer in the search results, "Nice necro, learn to google."

I'm against the trollish responses more than the actual rule itself, which was my original point. Sometimes, there are valid reasons as to why someone necros something. Valid reason or not, they still get trolled to oblivion and back for either necroing, or making a new thread. So again, I ask, since nearly everything about this game can be found on on sites other than this one, why are these forums even in place?
Here's a question:

How much time needs to pass between the most recent post and a new post for you to consider said new post to be a necro?

I would say 1 month personally.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum