Sinisterly
Defining Gravedigging - Printable Version

+- Sinisterly (https://sinister.ly)
+-- Forum: General (https://sinister.ly/Forum-General)
+--- Forum: Announcements (https://sinister.ly/Forum-Announcements)
+---- Forum: Suggestions (https://sinister.ly/Forum-Suggestions)
+----- Forum: Old Suggestions (https://sinister.ly/Forum-Old-Suggestions)
+----- Thread: Defining Gravedigging (/Thread-Defining-Gravedigging)

Pages: 1 2


RE: Defining Gravedigging - mothered - 08-08-2015

(08-08-2015, 04:57 AM)Rock Wrote: Something one might consider to add to this definition, gravedigging is not defined by the age of the thread (When the original post was made), it's the last post/bump in the thread that determines whether it's really gravedigging or not. You can pretty much keep a thread alive for a long time by bumping it often and having other people post pretty frequently. (You can certainly disagree if you want, but it makes sense to me that you only count the last post before necrobumper leaves his post).

However say is the last post made in the thread was maybe more than 2 or 3 months old? (Or even weeks, depending on how you want to define it) then that would definetly be a necrobump. In inactive and smaller forums, gravedigging seems like an acceptable thing to do; it helps keep the forum active. However I suppose on a bigger forum such as sinister, gravediggin leads to annoyance.

One idea which I remember other forums implemented is to warn posters before posting on a thread. Pretty much a warning dialog down with the 'quick reply' that ways "Warning: This threads last post is older than x week/months. Posting in this thread may result in a warning or ban from staff". Worked pretty effective if you ask me. Also there's certain forums which one might consider implementing auto-locking, real world scenario would be the introduction sections. Why would you even keep into sections open for more than, say one or two weeks. I know another forum which does this, auto-locks intro threads after 7 days to prevent necrobumps. It's probably pretty easy to do this in mybb, just sayin.

Just dropping my ideas and feedback!

No doubt you do have some valid points, but there's a fine line with what Is/Isn't considered worthy of grave digging.

For example, one member may find a given thread as a point of Interest, thus believes It's warranted to resurrect It, whereby many other members may not find It useful at all. That's where all the commotion may erupt. For that reason (and of course many others), It's quite arduous to set concrete and conclusive rules and guidelines pertaining to grave digging.

If a staff member closes the thread due grave digging, It's at his/her discretion and If need be on request, I'm sure staff can provide the reason(s) as to why the thread was not deemed to remain active.


RE: Defining Gravedigging - Eclipse - 08-08-2015

Well, according to the definition of gravedigging highlighted in the OP, this thread wasn't gravedug. Tongue Ironically...


RE: Defining Gravedigging - Jiggly - 08-09-2015

I'm glad there's a discussion about this as I (and perhaps other members) were in a grey area about what it means. I was under the impression that it meant bumping very old threads However, I think the opinions stated by Oni and OP are very agreeable. Sounds like the bottom line is keeping good-high quality activity in relevant areas of the forum.