Replying to old posts is against the rules here?

  • Bompa
  • Graduate
  • Graduate
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 229
  • Loc: Philippine Islands

Post 3+ Months Ago

This may have been asked before, but that doesn't matter,
cuz if I "dig up" an old post and reply to it, it might be removed
and a warning given to me, (including a few unrelated insults),
by a moderator.

I just re-read the five pages of rules, mostly about putting sound
in flash sigs, gees. I didn't see anything in the rules saying that
we should not reply to a one year old post.

What's up with that?

I thought my reply was relevent and helpful to ozzu members as
well as to ozzu itself.

Here's the deal. I was looking at my backlinks and noticed one
for ozzu. I clicked it and there I was in a thread one year old.

I thought that is great! I'm still getting a backlink after a whole
year!!

I thought the other members should be aware of this cuz it means
contributing in ozzu has a long term benefit for one's own site.

So, I replied to that thread informing them.


OOOOPS!!!!!!

Within seconds there was a pm in my ozzu Inbox stating that
I had no good reason to "dig up" that old thread and that it had
been removed for that reason.

gees!


oh well, life goes on,
Bompa


Oh yah, almost forgot my suggestion :)

If replying to old threads is against the rules, could you please put that
in the rules? And why not just lock those threads?
  • ATNO/TW
  • Super Moderator
  • Super Moderator
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 23458
  • Loc: Woodbridge VA

Post 3+ Months Ago

What's your point Bompa? You replied to this post http://www.ozzu.com/other-search-engines/site-ranking-index-t141.html nearly 6 months after the question got answered (back in 2003), and then again today more than a year and a half later. The question was answered, so what's the point in bringing it up again? You know good and well why your post was removed. I explained it in the best clarity I could. Don't push it.
  • Bompa
  • Graduate
  • Graduate
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 229
  • Loc: Philippine Islands

Post 3+ Months Ago

ATNO/TW wrote:
What's your point Bompa? You replied to this post http://www.ozzu.com/other-search-engines/site-ranking-index-t141.html nearly 6 months after the question got answered (back in 2003), and then again today more than a year and a half later. The question was answered, so what's the point in bringing it up again? You know good and well why your post was removed. I explained it in the best clarity I could. Don't push it.



My point is, where is it written that there is a time limit?

And if a question is answered, does that mean no one can
reply to that thread? Where is that written?

So, again, I respectfully submit my suggestion that these rules
be posted where we members can read them.

I'm not "pushing" anything, I'm asking a question and making
a suggestion, that's the purpose of this forum.


sincerely,
Bompa
  • ATNO/TW
  • Super Moderator
  • Super Moderator
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 23458
  • Loc: Woodbridge VA

Post 3+ Months Ago

This is one of the reasons I like you Bompa. Your argument sticks to logic. I understand your reasoning. I don't understand your motive. (re: digging up old posts)
  • joebert
  • Fart Bubbles
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 13504
  • Loc: Florida

Post 3+ Months Ago

Sections 1-H & 1-I reserve the right for Ozzu team members to edit or remove posts when they feel they are spam, indecent, ect.

In my opinion, listing every single instance of what is considered spam, indecent, ect, is impractical as the tactics used by spammers is ever changing & it generally serves no purpose but to give them somthing to take advantage of in their quest to get everything for nothing.

If you feel that any member of Ozzu has treated you unfairly, Bigwebmaster is only an email or a PM away.
Posts like the one in question are generally set aside for review, not deleted.
Bigwebmaster is about as fair as it gets & always listens with an open mind while considering all the facts, ultimately this is his domain & the final say remains with him.

I agree with ATNO on digging up old posts, it happens with the intention of spamming in most cases, especially when the original posters question has allready been answered many months or greater prior.
  • UniquelyYoursPC
  • Web Master
  • Web Master
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 2997
  • Loc: Canada "A"

Post 3+ Months Ago

joebert wrote:
If you feel that any member of Ozzu has treated you unfairly, Bigwebmaster is only an email or a PM away.
Posts like the one in question are generally set aside for review, not deleted.
Bigwebmaster is about as fair as it gets & always listens with an open mind while considering all the facts, ultimately this is his domain & the final say remains with him.


i would like to change member to Moderator and add if it is just a member then tak it to the Moderators of ozzu not the admin
  • Daemonguy
  • Moderator
  • Web Master
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 2700
  • Loc: Somewhere outside the box in Sarasota, FL.

Post 3+ Months Ago

My $.02.

Bompa wrote:

My point is, where is it written that there is a time limit?

And if a question is answered, does that mean no one can
reply to that thread? Where is that written?

So, again, I respectfully submit my suggestion that these rules
be posted where we members can read them.

I'm not "pushing" anything, I'm asking a question and making
a suggestion, that's the purpose of this forum.


sincerely,
Bompa


The passage of time reference was not to indicate a direct reference to a specific rule or policy based entirely upon a limit of such, rather its use illustrates the issue ATNO was attempting to convey.

That being the topic of SPAM.

There is, in our collective estimation, no particularly viable excuse for responding to a year-old thread that was already answered and closed -- save for "bumping", (an industry term defining the process of moving one's own information and/or links to the top of the threadlist in a desperate effort to increase visibility).
"Bumping" is considered spamming, plain and simple.

Ergo his remarks apply not to a specific time period per se, instead remarking to the applicability of Section 1, para h;
OZZU Rules wrote:

h. Spam is not tolerated here in most circumstances. This includes offering hosting services (charged and free), installation services, etc. We may let an occassional spam go through in the General Forum as long as the poster is quite active in Ozzu. If your first post is spam I can gurantee you it will be removed. Users posting spam will be warned and their post removed. See specific item on spam and 3rd party linking for more information.


Which of course brings me to yet another directive, Section 1, para i;
OZZU Rules wrote:

i. The moderating, support and other teams reserve the right to edit or remove any post at any time. The determination of what is construed as indecent, vulgar, spam, etc. as noted in these points is up to Team Members and not users.


This specific reference clearly defines the roles of the moderators and their role specifically with regard to defining what is and is not SPAM, and the employing whatever means are required to curtail such.

I am certain someone of your vast forum experience comprehends the term "bumping" and what it implies, therefore I am perplexed by your confusion.

Understand also, the subject matter of your original post is -- to say the least -- questionable. The very fact it was permitted to remain previously, astounds me; you should have been content with that.
Again, and if the question should arise as to whom makes the determination and classification of what is and is not obscene, re-read my last quoted reference of the posted Ozzu rules.
  • Bompa
  • Graduate
  • Graduate
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 229
  • Loc: Philippine Islands

Post 3+ Months Ago

Daemonguy wrote:
My $.02.
...I am certain someone of your vast forum experience comprehends the term "bumping" and what it implies, therefore I am perplexed by your confusion...



Ah, yes I understand the term bumping and that bumping can
have selfish intentions.

Now I understand where atno is coming from. It just didn't occur
to me cuz I almost never begin new threads, but look for interesting
threads/topics to which I can contribute my two cents.

Thank you,
Bompa
  • blink182av
  • Guru
  • Guru
  • blink182av
  • Posts: 1258
  • Loc: New York

Post 3+ Months Ago

I have the old post problem in every forum I have ever joined. People bitch about using the search (excuse my french). The search brings up too many results it seems and it takes too much time and is very boring to look through them all for your answer.
  • SB
  • Moderator
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 8743
  • Loc: Aberdeen, Scotland

Post 3+ Months Ago

I think you might have misunderstood the point in this thread blink182av.

Bompa is complaining about mods getting on at him replying to a thread that is over a year old as he felt he could add something valuable to the thread despite how dead it was. You seem to be complaining about how you dont like using the search feature and would rather just create new posts and probably end up getting cricitised for this. A wee bit different.

My thoughts? well, i can see how it can be annoying bringing up old posts but it depends on the type of post. Pointless posts like old games that have been discovered in the General Discussion forum really should be locked and rightfully the member should be given some sort of PM to suggest that Ozzu dosnt appreciate the old pointless topic being brought to the top again. If, however, the topic is of some sort of use and could be quite similar to a problem somebody is having then i cannot see any reason as to why this is wrong. I usually find that its new members that actually use the search feature and find these old topics and reply only to be told that its not allowed. This is not the case all the time, but i have seen it.

Its a bit of sticky area for Mods, perhaps there could be more Sticky topic in every forum where members who have had a problem could post what the problem was and how it was resolved in a short and simple summary so people could find out what there problems might be and fix it without having to open up really old topics and replying to them and in turn being told that its not allowed by some moderator. Just a suggestion.
  • ScienceOfSpock
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1893
  • Loc: Las Vegas

Post 3+ Months Ago

SB, Blink does bring up a good point, though.
The general rule is, if you're going to ask a question, use the search and make sure it hasn't been asked before.
The problem is if you find a post, but it doesn't quite answer your question,
do you post to it, in an effort to keep everything on topic (and help potential replyers remember what they suggested originally), or do you make a new post?
Does the unwritten rule "Don't dig up old posts" still apply? Should you post a new topic?
I'm one of the first to point out grave robbers, but I still admit that sometimes there can be a reason for digging up old posts.
  • Daemonguy
  • Moderator
  • Web Master
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 2700
  • Loc: Somewhere outside the box in Sarasota, FL.

Post 3+ Months Ago

No one said it was against the rules to dig up old posts, simply to do so with no valid reason (read: bumping).

It's obvious when someone 'bumps' a thread for personal gain or personal amusement. It's equally as obvious when an old thread, that perhaps never had an answer set to it or one that was obscure in detailed specifics is revitalized for clarification.

No one is saying you cannot respond to an old thread, we're merely saying "watch your motivation" for doing so. ;)

Ever watchful....

--D

(As an addendum; reading the rules and trying to circumvent policy via some "loophole", real or perceived is not at all wise either.)

Post Information

  • Total Posts in this topic: 12 posts
  • Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests
  • You cannot post new topics in this forum
  • You cannot reply to topics in this forum
  • You cannot edit your posts in this forum
  • You cannot delete your posts in this forum
  • You cannot post attachments in this forum
 
cron
 

© 1998-2014. Ozzu® is a registered trademark of Unmelted, LLC.