Should Members Be Allowed to Revive Old Forum Posts? If So, What Is the Limit?

[AltairX]

Many forums have a rule about reviving old posts— referred to as "necroposting." This is when members comment or engage with very old threads that may no longer be relevant.

Do you believe members should be allowed to revive old posts? If so, is there a limit to how old the post should be? Should there be a rule in place to prevent outdated content from resurfacing, or does the context of the discussion make it acceptable?

 

[Teegold]

In what sense are old threads no longer relevant? I believe that as long as the topic being discussed is relatable, there is nothing wrong in commenting on it, even if it was started years ago.

 

[Nomad]

I have always believed that old posts need to be revived as long as they are relevant. Irrelevant topics need to be locked.

 

[Menaka]

Allowing members to revive old forum posts can be beneficial for continuing valuable discussions and maintaining a sense of history. However, setting a time limit—such as 6 months to a year—helps prevent outdated topics from cluttering active conversations.

 

[Henrywrites]

My idea is that as long as the replies on those posts are still valid, there shouldn't be a limitation at all. It is just normal for the conversation to continue as I find no big deal with it at all.