Return to

A Generic Forum Meta Discussion


Based on the fact that it was marked [SOLVED] already I beg to differ. It was ether unrelated or had already been fixed.
Linking to another forum post saying that “this might explain the issue” is not contributing.



Nov '17

I was tracking the thread you just closed. I’m interested because I need to find a cheap solution. So age of thread for me isn’t an issue. You really need to lighten up on what you consider necro.

Thead quote;

All your given requirements are met with services provided by by Wetter Solutions. Basically they supply security cameras in Orlando along with its complete installation setup. So i recommend you to contact with them at least once for complete details.


I disagree.
A better solution was inferred.
If linking to a necro post is prefered, then why is linking to an explanation of a solution not also prefered?


I’m not getting enough context, what thread is this?



I’m unsure what you mean by the first part. As for the second part its generally unhelpful to link to another forum post for someone to read through just to get an explanation of a bug thats already fixed. Like I said previously, its definitely something that was on the edge of the rules, especially as it was an explination. But the moderators deemed it unnessicairy and/or necro-bumping an issue that had no need to be necroed. It was a grey area, but the mods decided that it was on the other side of the line. Arguing over it is pretty pointless.


Just a related observation…

It would seem that Math.round() is being used to display lengthy intervals between posts. That means intervals like 75 days (~2.5 months) are being displayed as “3 months”.

To ensure that threads aren’t subjected to premature necro treatment, I would suggest using Math.floor() instead.



From what I see…
A reply was create possibly attempting to extract more information out of the OP in order to come to a solution 8 months after the fact.

That is only an assumption so far due to the reply being deleted, I could be absolutely wrong here.

A proper way to necro that would pass my eyes would likely be to ask if the OP still needs help 8months after the fact and whether a suggestion would be of any use.

Try to revive the thread that doesn’t come across just “trying to help” without any thought into whether the OP still needs it or not.


By this I mean when mods tell me to start a new thread and link the necro thread to it.

the second part level1 explained in detail, perhaps you didn’t understand. The gist of it was that he had new information on an old problem that would be relevant to anyone searching on the web for that specific problem. He was trying to help the future me when I run into the same problem with a better solution than what was provided originally.


File a bug report


Well, I was interested in the topic too. I was hoping more info would come from that thread. Being locked removes that possibility for me and anyone else that searches that subject.


It was an issue that had already been solved. A software bug that was fixed. Providing a forum post where the developers fixed it is, while interesting to read I’m sure, completely irrelevant for anyone in the future as any issue would have been fixed. It no longer existed as a problem unless there was a regression, which would be a slightly related, but nontheless useless forum post.


See, but just trying to extract information on such an old topic is not how you want to handle it, if I see that I would close it unless requested by OP in a PM to reopen.


Tell me what you would do please.


As I said, check in to see if they are still having the problem?

In a sense… and in context of that camera thread

TheAlmightyBaconLord, have you been able to resolve your issue?
I have a similar problem and I believe I can find the answers in this thread.


Have you been able to resolve your issue?
If not, I may have a suggestion that could work for you.

these are just small examples of what I’d do, I’d try to ping them in a way that would re-engage them back into the thread first before extracting more information to get a better understanding of the issue. If I was to see this sort necro, I would most likely link it to others about monitoring for a good day or two before debating whether closing it would be a good idea or not.

These of course would see need to pass other leaders+ eyes, which it is not hard to PM or explain that you wanted to know if they have solved it or not. Literally once we see the “mod” post of a thread being reopened, we are more likely to just leave it alone for another 3 months.

On another note, in my first example, it leads us to likely split the topic which still gives the OP the opportunity so find a resolution to their problem.


Why does it matter whether the OP still needs help or not? As Wendell is so fond of saying, “we must all contribute to the pool of knowledge”. Someone necroing a thread to post a fix could help somebody else reading a thread years later, long after everyone else concerned with the topic is gone. Restricting the flow of information and quality discussions is not a good thing.


Thanks for the suggestions. I still think that even if the OP is /has resolved the specific issue, that there is still info in the thread for the general public that may search that subject. Especially such a broad issue as security cameras.
As an aside, the last post that closed the thread was a spambot. That definitely needed removing but not the necro…IMO.
I am a mod on a truck forum and we get threads necro’d all the time. In a lot of cases we tell that poster to start a new thread but I can’t recall ever locking a thread for a necro. There would be just too much info lost if we did that. And a lot of times new relevant info is provided, but if not the option is still there for future posters to help out. Help not the original poster but those in the future that are searching for answers.


But be considerate of others, necroing a thread without checking with the OP whether it is alright to contribute blindly or not is like waking one from their slumber without good reason.

When you blindly just try to “contribute” to a thread, you are potentially email spamming the OP on an issue he may have already resolved. Would it not feel better to read an email asking if they have even resolved their problem first?

This is why we encourage people to make new threads linking back to the original. Don’t email spam someone who may not even want to get emails about something they no longer want to have involvement in.


You don’t see the dichotomy?


The last thing posted to that thread was literally blog spam? It looks exactly like the type of spam we see on the forums anyway?