Should people be able to posts topics previously discussed in the ATS database

Originally posted by Druscilla
reply to post by mellisamouse

 

... and these new experiences from new members can't be added to an older thread, thereby enriching a seasoned topic with new flavor and viewpoints?

Adding to an established thread you could then time-line through the evolving conversation, see the pitfalls in argument and debate, and even LEARN something old, but also NEW because you haven't seen it and won't see it unless you followed the progression of maturation the thread follows over time.

Sure they can... I have some bookmarked threads I have been following for years, but all I am saying is if someone starts a new thread, let it be... sometimes people don't wanna read through 2000 posts.

Also, some people who have been onboard an old thread, may chime in a new one with a summary or recap of the old 2000 post thread at times, really narrowing down a topic for many, which can be quite refreshing and helpful on a new fresh born thread, to help people aquire what they are on here seeking.... information!

I have learned a lot from some of the threads I was on board for, for the whole ride, and like helping summerize too sometimes.

I just think if the topic has been stale for a while a new thread really isn't hurting anyone, and it seems kinda strange how some people are such thread police in the first place if they aren't even moderators...

reply to post by mellisamouse


Well put. There are indeed exceptions to everything.
On the other hand, over propagation of duplicate threads all on the same topic on a narrow event, I think, could be more confusing and muddy the waters of self education and information learning.

For instance, There was recently a revived topic about a UFO sighting that in the murky past was shown to be a hoax. Due to time, over two decades, since the event was found and seen as a hoax and thus then relatively minor, little interest was paid to it.
Then, the event get revived, but, the sources and information pertaining to the hoax factor are dead links, or no longer really around since the event was no longer of importance that data was let slip.
Suddenly we have a fervent debate about how amazing this event is and how the aliens are coming and it just goes on and on and on because the original information detailing the hoax pre-ATS are no longer around, and without sources, well, you know how it goes.
While there were older threads on the topic, some of them pointing and mentioning the hoax, members in the new thread were adamant towards not looking or reviewing any of the old threads because, hey, this was really amazing.

In such cases, it's just terribly frustrating where if the older threads were reviewed, interest in something that was proven a hoax, may not have drawn so much renewed ferver.

Then again, as said, there are exceptions to all cases, and additionally there are examples.
It's not a perfect system, but, what we have could be worse.
I think it could be better too, but, such is such.

reply to post by firegoggles


Should people be able to post new threads on topics that have already been posted?

Yes, unless you want a forum full of 20, 50, 100+ page topics.
Who wants to read that?
Who wants to skim through years worth of bickering and trolling and off-topic banter and back patting to get to how people are feeling now about a subject?

If one person writes a book about something, does it mean that everyone else that follows must base their work off of the first?

Originally posted by madhatr137
reply to post by firegoggles

 

Should people be able to post new threads on topics that have already been posted?

Yes, unless you want a forum full of 20, 50, 100+ page topics.
Who wants to read that?
Who wants to skim through years worth of bickering and trolling and off-topic banter and back patting to get to how people are feeling now about a subject?

If one person writes a book about something, does it mean that everyone else that follows must base their work off of the first?

In case you didn't notice there's a >> button at the bottom of every thread with several pages.
It's to the right of the highest number shown.
Just in case you don't know, that >> button takes you immediately to the end of the thread where you can jump right in without reading a single jot if that's what you desire.

reply to post by Druscilla


No....really?

I've only been a member of the forums since 2007 and a lurker for a year or two before that...I never noticed.

My point is, sometimes people want to make a topic their own, look at it from a different perspective, etc. I have no problem with a moderator shepherding the players to an already existing thread...but sometimes that isn't quite fair to someone who has an original thought on an unoriginal topic.

How about if we have every thread about the NWO or how horrible the government is or how awesome Ron Paul is condensed down into one thread each? Then we'd have like 300 threads a month condensed into 3.

My point is, at a certain point, a thread reached a certain critical mass where it loses direction and meaning...at this time I for one don't see a problem with a reset...