Old topics

[Kashunowaka 300]

Don't reply to topics which are several months old. Read the forum rules.

[Jesinofuji 11]

I think this should be a tenative rule. Sometimes old topics can be followed up. For example a topic speculating about a certain rikishi's future potential might be interesting to look at months or even years after it stops getting posts. Also, sometimes old topics iclude good information, and there is no reason to re-post it all. And furthermore, I see no harm in bringing an old topic back to life.

[aderechelsea 125]

a really informative and conversation-generative post is "ok" but a lot of them are just meaningless.

if the topic is interesting though try to post a new thread with a link to the old thread that caused you to say something new.

this way a conversation can commence on a long forgotten subject that still has some life in it....

[Rijicho 6]

The main reason for the discouragement for replying to old topics is that they often have very out of date information. Especially in areas like honbasho talk or any keiko news threads. By replying to those threads, everyone is exposed to old stuff without any reason or significance.

However, when the old topic is very much a information rich thread like the one about toshiyori kabu system, then naturally bringing it up when new kabu swaps occur or some system change happens, by replying to the old thread of toshiyori kabu when announcing news about recent events in this subject, people won't ask the same questions over and over again like "What is kabu?" as they can read the long thread and learn the stuff in the process. So it is even encouraged to use these big threads where so much info is stored so that they pop up to the main page for new members to read.

Also despite the fact that the Sumo Information Pond is still quite modest, it does have a lot of information already and hence should be checked by new members before they post here.

All in all, use common sense when evaluating whether to revive an old thread or not and when you revive an old thread, you have to have more to say than few words without real contribution.

[Mark Buckton 1]

Rijicho,

Not a fan of banning old topics meself if someone thinks they are important enough to bring back to life - it isn't like we have to then respond now is it? If we consider it personally irrelavent - we have the option of ignoring it.

Self control is the way to go here rather than 'rules' and closing topics.

With regards to that choice in the following however, I ask why feel the need to close a topic that is clearly going to vanish with no response to the last post:

http://www.sumoforum.net/forums/index.php?...t=0entry29606

Especially as the revival was just 3 weeks after it effectively closed itself and topics such as this:

http://www.sumoforum.net/forums/index.php?...t=0entry29466

are brought back to life after 5 weeks or so, contributed to by an admin / moderator known for previous rash closures IMHO and are not closed, criticised etc.

I hope we are not seeing a 'one rule for them, one rule for us' possibility emerging?

(with the 'us / them' as of yet undetermined)

Edited June 13, 2004 by Adachinoryu

[Rijicho 6]

Not a fan of banning old topics meself if someone thinks they are important enough to bring back to life - it isn't like we have to then respond now is it? If we consider it personally irrelavent - we have the option of ignoring it.

Self control is the way to go here rather than 'rules' and closing topics.

Mostly so yes and this is not big problem here. The option of ignoring is valid in every case but this suggestive rule of not continuing old threads is there to make it more pleasant for readers of this forum. Just one little form of moderating I suppose. Some members occasionally revive old threads with completely empty one-liners or even off-topic side paths. Those are the ones I ask to refrain from. Self control is the way that is most ideal for this thing to work. Next example of "forced moderation" is bad now because I realized the thing you refer to...

With regards to that choice in the following however, I ask why feel the need to closes a topic that is clearly going to vanish with no response to the last post:

I noticed that after I had locked the topic. Not very good call and bound to bring this discussion up here as you now did. It was just so blinding example of completely empty follow-up that I only saw that. Won't reopen but if someone wants to discuss the weight+height combo, a new thread is very welcomed for that with approriate subject line.

Especially as the revival was just 3 weeks after it effectively closed itself and topics such as this:

http://www.sumoforum.net/forums/index.php?...t=0entry29466

are brought back to life after 5 weeks or so, contributed to by an admin / moderator known for previous rash closures IMOH and are not closed, criticised etc.

Well this topic is such that it never dies really if new members come aboard and wish to continue the discussion (with voting too). Also it is in off-topic where rules are looser in this sense anyway as the whole purpose of the off-topic forum is to be off-topic and reviving old off-topic threads is hardly a problem there as it would be in sumo discussions.

hope we are not seeing a 'one rule for them, one rule for us' possibility emerging?

Hope dies last.

New members are watched more carefully since they are unknown cards. Attitude changes according to member's behaviour and when more data available of member's habits and common sense. I think you know very well what I mean here. Manekineko's contribution to off-topic thread revival is very different matter compared to amgaa99's digging up Kotooshu thread and posting an empty message there in Honbasho talk especially since amgaa99 is a new member and has some tendencies to jump in head first.

[amgaa99 0]

Jesino san, I agree with you.

Rijicho san, why are you use my name in example.

I think, it is not bad thing that to make reply in old topic. If topic in interesting and including important information, why not.

[Guest TSoLmoN]

As a MEMBER I dont see any harm in bringing up old topics. B-)

[Asashosakari 20,223]

Rijicho san, why are you use my name in example.

I think, it is not bad thing that to make reply in old topic. If topic in interesting and including important information, why not.

The point isn't that the thread might include something important (nobody's disputing that), but that 99% of the people here already read it months ago. Nobody is stopping you from reading old posts, but many people here would appreciate if you don't move old threads back to the top by responding to them, because that wastes everybody's time clicking on a thread that is marked "new" when it isn't. I can tolerate that when it's one thread, but you did it on five or six threads on Sunday (without adding anything hugely interesting), which was enough to be annoying. As has been said by others, if you absolutely feel you have to talk about something, open a new topic.

Especial case in point: This thread. It was over three months old, and to be perfectly honest, your post requesting a picture-uploading feature wasn't too useful; especially since the same subject was discussed again two months later (here) and uploading pictures was enabled then.

Edit: I see you've done it again with half a dozen threads in Off-topic today... B-) There goes another ten minutes of my life I'll never get back.

Edited June 14, 2004 by Asashosakari

[Zentoryu 154]

Rijicho san, why are you use my name in example.

I think, it is not bad thing that to make reply in old topic.

When you post something relevent and interesting it isn't a bad thing. But when you don't... :-/

For a member to open and read an old thread because there has been a new post to it, only to find that the new post is one line like "I want this guy in Makuuchi," is utterly irritating and a waste of time. It contributes nothing to the old thread.

If you're going to post to an old thread, please say something relevent or interesting that contributes to that thread and makes it worth the time of the other members to read your post. Otherwise members are going to start ignoring posts made by you for that very lack of relevancy.

[Gusoyama 104]

In my opinion, the http:// tags are there for a reason. Simply state "Back in May 2003, we talked about who the next Yokozuna would be. Now that Hagiwara has become the new Grand Champion, we can look back and see how silly we were! Here's the link to the thread: http://www.sumoforum.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=3254

[amgaa99 0]

Ok, I see. Sorry for my inconvience. Thanks guys.

[Ryunokaze 0]

Piss-off Asashosakari, like you had anything better to do with the ten minutes anyway...

We are all able to discern old from new information.For buggery sake just scroll or tab to the end if you are in the least bit interested.Otherwise leave it alone.

What is with this need to stop people posting ?

It's all info even if YOU don't think so.

The point of a forum is for as many people to contribute to as many topics as possible, isn't it?

Post in any bloody thread from any bloody time you like and don't allow yourself to be muzzled.

This isn't a club with tight entry, its a forum on the web for fuuck sake.

[Rijicho 6]

Piss-off Asashosakari, like you had anything better to do with the ten minutes anyway...

We all know that you have deep resentment in your soul towards Asashosakari and probably have dangerously high blood pressure (do you suffer from high blood pressure?) when reading his posts or letting your angry "This is the way I am! Frank and straight-forward man!"-attitude flow freely on this forum.

What is with this need to stop people posting ?

There is no need to stop people posting. Discouraging people from posting frivolous information to old threads is very different from stopping people posting. If you don't understand the difference, so be it.

It's all info even if YOU don't think so.

There is a thing called common sense that should be enough to evaluate whether a new post to old thread serves any purpose. It is also info if some stranger calls you on a street to walk his way and says "I bought a new shirt today. It is in my closet back home" but it doesn't serve a purpose to you.

The point of a forum is for as many people to contribute to as many topics as possible, isn't it?

No it isn't. The point of a chatroom may be such but on forum the law of jungle only makes a damn mess at the end. If you encourage 5 persons who all like to post one sentence messages all the time, soon the forum is full of complete nonsense with very little value in the contents of the posts. Also who would like to read countless of "Yes I agree" or "No I disagree" posts to many different threads? Or "Is that so!?" or "How interesting!". With posts like that it would be easy to have a very very active forum indeed if amount of posts by as many people as possible would be the measure.

There are no excessive quality demands here and nobody's posts are automatically frownded upon on the basis of the length or information content but repetitive chatting here without generally interesting content has to be controlled so as not to let this forum join the paths of so many other forums where many old-timers and formerly very active members simply stop posting and get alienated from the forum because of dozens of empty messages posted by newcomers and people whose contribution to the discussion's contents is almost always minimal. Killing a forum is amazingly easy. Chatters are the last ones to die so the equation is easy to see even without much experience of understanding of forum dynamics.

Nobody can say that the original Rijicho would have been very strict with rules and gave pretty free hands to everybody. Only intervened with polite suggestions to refrain from something when needed. I aim to be similar Rijicho and not put much strain on this forum. But I do follow my own vision of what NOT wanting to see on this forum ie. change of focus to massive amount of posts in chatting style at the expense of more informative threads.

Post in any bloody thread from any bloody time you like and don't allow yourself to be muzzled.

You mean "Ignore the guidelines, take a beer, take the load off, screw the tight-ass idiots who critizise anything, sit back and go your own way because this is a webforum!"?

I suggest you try to learn some aspects of critizism from the member you so heartily admire and whose posts you so adore.

This isn't a club with tight entry, its a forum on the web for fuuck sake

Amen.

Freedom of speech is a good thing. That "fuuck sake" really emphasizes your point so strongly that I am forced to re-evaluate my opposing stance towards your opinions. In spoken language such expressions are quickly put aside and I doubt any of us is very sensitive to this oh so common habit but here in written forum those remain visible and certainly are unnecessary. But then again this ain't no Sunday school right so what am I complaining about?

[Mark Buckton 1]

I suggest you try to learn some aspects of critizism from the member you so heartily admire and whose posts you so adore.

Moi? (Holiday feeling...) I trust?