Putting new forum members in a Catch 22

[hospitaller]

or, those members who make comments such as 'so and so posted this before', or 'I think x member already mentioned this last year'.

are we in some sort of unspoken contest now where whoever discovers or mentions something first..wins a prize or something?

[Streetcar]

I wasn't even trying to comment on the relative level of politeness or civility in the response. I just found it interesting that a new member would be chided for not searching the old threads, then chided again for following that advice and bringing up an old thread.

Personally, I don't mind new comments on an old thread (unless the subject is specifically time sensitive, like a Kilt Night). Surely we "old salts" are not so full of ourselves that we believe everything that could have possibly been said on an old subject has been said, and that no one could possibly have a new or different take on the issue.

My comment was more on the "damned if you do, damned if you don't" feeling that some posters must be getting.

[Jack Daw]

Frankly, I like old threads resurrected by newbies. I also sometimes read good books twice or more.

[george7]

I wasn't even trying to comment on the relative level of politeness or civility in the response. I just found it interesting that a new member would be chided for not searching the old threads, then chided again for following that advice and bringing up an old thread.

Personally, I don't mind new comments on an old thread (unless the subject is specifically time sensitive, like a Kilt Night). Surely we "old salts" are not so full of ourselves that we believe everything that could have possibly been said on an old subject has been said, and that no one could possibly have a new or different take on the issue.

My comment was more on the "damned if you do, damned if you don't" feeling that some posters must be getting.

If we're not welcome to post on old threads, they should die.

I think we have kept old threads open in case there was insight. We had one on Mazda's the other day that sparked a new, relevant flame. That's a good example of an old thread having a second life.

[ghostlight]

I guess this is where I put on my Internet Traditionalist Snob hat and try to make a point and behave myself at the same time.

Before we assume the "thread from the dead" icon is rude, I'd like to point out that thread necromancy is generally considered poor netiquette in many online communities. It has been a common grievance in "Eternal September" discussions for years and, in many community circles, is basically comparable to going to the pub wearing your pleats in the front. It's also unfortunately a very common method of trolling.

The mods here sometimes use the "thread from the dead" icon when they close resurrected threads, so I've assumed XMTS was following suit. I've occaisionally used the icon myself when someone resurrected a thread without adding anything constructive to the topic.

This is one of the few forum-based online communities I've spent a lot of time in that both moderated for thread necromancy and declined to administratively lock threads after they had been inactive for a certain period of time. For some of us, the combination here is something of a mixed message.

I don't personally have issue with people being referred to previous discussions and then dragging up those old topics -- if the poster actually has something constructive to add. The topic of discussion here and the medium we're having our conversations in certainly makes it seem appropriate in many cases. However, dragging up an old topic for no purpose other than to add a "me too" response or to re-ignite a debate that ended months ago is not constructive, in my opinion. Some of the threads that have come back recently are two or three years old -- so old that half the participants are no longer active here.

[Regnifne]

Good points, from all parties! I don't think I fell into this category when I first started looking around (or trolling, whatever you prefer to call it. Being new and slightly intelligent makes me read everything I can before I ask questions), but I agree with the fact that some threads do have a second life, especially when pertinent and thoughtful posts are made. Locking older threads doesn't really give them the opportunity for revival, and I see where ghostlight is coming from. A mixed message that seems to work . . .

Oft times, the object of a search can be daunting for newcomers, especially if they don't know terminology or are not familiar with different articles of kilted goodness.

That's Streetcar's point, in my opinion: "regulars" sometimes forget they used to be new, too. This is by no means exclusive of XMTS, but how are we supposed to welcome and enlighten the trousered masses if we jump down their throats over a simple oversight? Then again, if the same newb wants to be a noob (big, negative difference, for you non-gaming types) by blatantly ignoring forum netiquette, a sound beating about the head and shoulders should clear that right up. . .

On the whole we seem to be a fairly friendly (and prrrrraise the Laird, stubborn!) rabble and have multiple ways to work situations out without mashing toes or pulling hairs. . . Cheers!

And more power to those who can use the search function in ways others can't and refer those folk to proper locations. . .

Now I'm thirsty. int:

[CDNSushi]

In principle, I agree with Streetcar's sentiments. However, I also do think some onus of responsibility is on the newcomer to "look before he leaps" so to speak.

One of the cardinal rules of forum posting, for instance, is to LURK first. Netiquette guides differ as to the amount of time that a newbie should lurk on a forum before posting their first thread, but I think the general consensus is: long enough to get a feel for the culture, customs, conventions and aura (for lack of better word) of the community.

As for zombie threads, well, again -- I think it's a bit of a matter of netiquette and learning whether or not thread necromancy is socially acceptable on the forum you happen to be on. I've been on some forums where it's SO taboo, that ALL (as in 100%) threads get LOCKED after a given time of activity (like 2 weeks or so). Again, each group has its own subculture and conventions.

Reading the rules is only step 1. There are many unwritten rules that, when broken, do not result in banination, but do result in being scorned by the locals.

One of the forums I used to hang out in was far, far, FAR quicker to tell newbies to shut up and use the search function before proceeding. Whether it's right or wrong, I won't say. But I WILL say that it never was effective in cutting down on the number of questions that were asked cyclically (like once a week) but it did make answering the questions more efficient.

If anything, I would suggest a technique that combines: being friendly and welcoming (first and foremost), helpful (answer the question, even if it's a quick one-liner), and educational (refer the person to where they could get more information, including the famous "search function" all without being elitist, snarky or condescending.

When I was active on another (kilt-unrelated) forum, I had a fairly standard stock reply that I could cut and paste from previous answers. I don't think we need to be snarky to the new members, but getting them to learn how to operate the forum buttons isn't a bad idea either.

My standard reply went something like this:

Hi there <Newb's name>,

I noticed you were new here on the forum. Just wanted to say "hey" and welcome here. We're a pretty friendly and helpful group so I hope you stay for a while.

Anyway, to answer your question, <quick,1-2 sentence answer>. That's just the quick n' dirty answer though. This has actually gets brought up fairly frequently (so much so that there's a sticky about it at the top of the page)...

If you need more detail that the answer I wrote, use the Search function (It's on the top-right of the page). It it doesn't work for you, put up a question in the "tech support" forum so the mods can look into it.

In fact, I just did a search for <newb's question> for you, and here's some off the hits I got.

<link>
<link>
<link>

But there's a few more than that too that are quite relevant to what you're looking for. I encourage you to look them up too.

Cheers,

Jim

[Larry124]

For sure. Its just rude and certainly not welcoming. I wonder how many good members we lose at the front door.

We DON'T have to snipe at them. We DON'T have to post a rude response. We can just move on and let a more charitable, more empathetic, more tolerant board member post a response.

Gitcha - Gotcha is B.S.!

Thanks Streetcar for pointing this out...even if its an old topic that's been posted before that you coulda used the search engine on....those sniping posts do continue and that's sad.

Ron

I'm wi' you.

[sathor]

Actually, more often that not, it seems like the newbies questions are answered rather than fobbed of with the "use the search function" reply.

No, the newbies get 5 pages of welcomes from asking a question, with a 10~15% of getting an answer to their question, then another member sacrifices themselves to ask the same question, where there is about 5 pages of various answers, and a 10~15% chance that someone mentions that the question was just asked in another thread, though no answer exist there....

[skauwt]

No, the newbies get 5 pages of welcomes from asking a question, with a 10~15% of getting an answer to their question, then another member sacrifices themselves to ask the same question, where there is about 5 pages of various answers, and a 10~15% chance that someone mentions that the question was just asked in another thread, though no answer exist there....

so true aswell