71 replies to this topic

[Righty007]

Before reviving an old thread, please ask yourself one question:

Is this thread still relevant?

If your name is DaveBond21, please ask yourself this question:

If this thread is no longer relevant, why the heck am I about to revive it?

If it's not still relevant, please don't revive it. It not only looks silly but sometimes reviving an old thread starts old arguments and/or brings up silly old opinions about an unreleased film.

Thanks!

[DaveBond21]

Sorry.

[zencat]

Unless it's my 2002 'DAD is the best Bond movie ever' thread. Always nice for me to see that pop back up top every few months.

[Kilroy6644]

Unless it's my 2002 'DAD is the best Bond movie ever' thread. Always nice for me to see that pop back up top every few months.

It's kind of like when I see a picture of me 16 years ago, when I had a mullet. Thought it was cool at the time....

[Righty007]

Unless it's my 2002 'DAD is the best Bond movie ever' thread. Always nice for me to see that pop back up top every few months.

It's kind of like when I see a picture of me 16 years ago, when I had a mullet. Thought it was cool at the time....

Were mullets even still cool in '92?

[Mister Asterix]

Unless it's my 2002 'DAD is the best Bond movie ever' thread. Always nice for me to see that pop back up top every few months.

It's kind of like when I see a picture of me 16 years ago, when I had a mullet. Thought it was cool at the time....

Were mullets even still cool in '92?

Mine was.

[plankattack]

I must admit - DAD has been awfully good value on slow days. Can the "old thread" rule make an exemption for DAD?

Edited by plankattack, 03 March 2008 - 10:47 PM.

[zencat]

I must admit - DAD has been awfully good value on slow days. Can the "old thread" make an exemption for DAD?

I really don't mind that thread.

[mccartney007]

Unless it's my 2002 'DAD is the best Bond movie ever' thread. Always nice for me to see that pop back up top every few months.

It's kind of like when I see a picture of me 16 years ago, when I had a mullet. Thought it was cool at the time....

Were mullets even still cool in '92?

Mine was.

Mmm... mine too.

[Righty007]

I must admit - DAD has been awfully good value on slow days. Can the "old thread" rule make an exemption for DAD?

That thread is fine because it still has a good discussion going. Just use your judgement when reviving threads. Don't do it for the sake of doing it.

[Blofeld's Cat]

Let's see who resurrects this thread next year.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Let's see who resurrects this thread next year.

Your owner, hopefully...

[neversaynever]

While we're on the topic, I might suggest that some of the more prolific members should ask themselves a few questions before posting on any thread:
- will what I plan to post to this thread really add anything to the discussion?
- how many posts have I already made in this thread?
- how many of the posts on this page of this thread are from me?
- am I just posting a one- or two-word post in order to increase my post count?
- if the answer to the previous question is yes, should I maybe get out more often / find something better to do with my time?

Seriously.

[Righty007]

While we're on the topic, I might suggest that some of the more prolific members should ask themselves a few questions before posting on any thread:
- will what I plan to post to this thread really add anything to the discussion?
- how many posts have I already made in this thread?
- how many of the posts on this page of this thread are from me?
- am I just posting a one- or two-word post in order to increase my post count?
- if the answer to the previous question is yes, should I maybe get out more often / find something better to do with my time?

Seriously.

Bravo!

[Kilroy6644]

Unless it's my 2002 'DAD is the best Bond movie ever' thread. Always nice for me to see that pop back up top every few months.

It's kind of like when I see a picture of me 16 years ago, when I had a mullet. Thought it was cool at the time....

Were mullets even still cool in '92?

It was rural Missouri, I turned 10 that year, and "Achy Breaky Heart" was on the radio. It was very cool.

Were mullets even still cool in '92?

Mine was.

Mmm... mine too.

It takes a lot of courage to admit you had a mullet. I am honored to share this thread with you guys.

[DaveBond21]

While we're on the topic, I might suggest that some of the more prolific members should ask themselves a few questions before posting on any thread:
- will what I plan to post to this thread really add anything to the discussion?
- how many posts have I already made in this thread?
- how many of the posts on this page of this thread are from me?
- am I just posting a one- or two-word post in order to increase my post count?
- if the answer to the previous question is yes, should I maybe get out more often / find something better to do with my time?

Seriously.

Bravo!

Isn't that just another way of saying "yes"?

[Tarl_Cabot]

Maybe our newbies missed out on some good threads and enjoy seeing a few pop up every now and then. Just please kill those "what are you blaming/giving credit Dan Craig" threads. ugh.

[Jim]

Maybe our newbies missed out on some good threads and enjoy seeing a few pop up every now and then. Just please kill those "what are you blaming/giving credit Dan Craig" threads. ugh.

It'll be the interminable quote threads first. Although I suspect that many use them just to ensure their basic motor skills are working. Typing out a line of dialogue? Brain must still be OK, another day in paradise beckons.

[Skudor]

What's allt his fuss about reviving old threads about?

I for one find them interesting to read and am grateful for anyone who can dig up things like that. I would have liked to have commented in one of them, but found it inexplicably closed. The particular threads that seem to have caused all this furore had their share of the silliness that preceeded Casino Royale but also some very interesting opinions. Both the opinions of those who were excited by the upcoming movie and those who were scared stiff by the prospect of a reeboot/Daniel Craig/any other ingredient.

If nothing else these threads serve as a reminder of just how opinions can change and that as a group fans can get a little bit too hysterical about changes to the franchise (or, in the case of Quantum of Solace, the possibility of the dreaded formula returning or Coke Zero being in every frame). Why shouldn't forum members be allowed to discuss this?

Perhaps some kindly person should draft a list of subjects that are deemed suitable for discussion, and perhaps also opinions deemed appropriate. And perhaps someone could also undertake the task of deleting/closing any old threads that are judged inappropriate for continued discussion.

[Jim]

What's allt his fuss about reviving old threads about?

I for one find them interesting to read and am grateful for anyone who can dig up things like that. I would have liked to have commented in one of them, but found it inexplicably closed. The particular threads that seem to have caused all this furore had their share of the silliness that preceeded Casino Royale but also some very interesting opinions. Both the opinions of those who were excited by the upcoming movie and those who were scared stiff by the prospect of a reeboot/Daniel Craig/any other ingredient.

If nothing else these threads serve as a reminder of just how opinions can change and that as a group fans can get a little bit too hysterical about changes to the franchise (or, in the case of Quantum of Solace, the possibility of the dreaded formula returning or Coke Zero being in every frame). Why shouldn't forum members be allowed to discuss this?

Good points; all we are requesting is a bit of judgment in so doing. As you observe, the speculations being currently expressed about Quantum of Solace could be proven every bit as off-the-mark.

Perhaps some kindly person should draft a list of subjects that are deemed suitable for discussion, and perhaps also opinions deemed appropriate. And perhaps someone could also undertake the task of deleting/closing any old threads that are judged inappropriate for continued discussion.

It's a question of degree. If a topic did appear to die a natural death then all that is requested is some thought about whether it's worth reanimating the corpse for sensible reasons, and to make a fresh point, or it's just to poke sticks of smug hindsight into the zoo as it was in 2005.

[Skudor]

And judgement is, of course, highly subjective - and never easy.

It seems to me, though, that moderating judgment has recently shifted toward a much harsher approach with censure coming far more quickly, almost ruthlessly. Is the policy here really that the mods decide on the desireability of threads? I always thought the censure on CBn was more relaxed and more aimed at specific comments or discussions degenerating into personal attacks.

I didn't get a chance to read all the new comments on those contentious threads (and they don't seem easy to find now), but surely if any smug sticks were being poked then they could only possibly be as sharp as the old opinions they were poking? And, frankly, I still don't get it. Was there name calling going on, or something like that? We've had the hilarious thread with Zencat's Die Another Day review revived quite a few times - that doesn't seem to have caused any offense. Surely if we post opinions on a website we should expect that some of them come back to haunt us! (my first post sagely predicted that the next Bond had to be someone a fair bit over 6 foot tall!)

I don't want to get into a prolongued argument about this - at the end of the day the mods generally do a superb job here. But I feel like things are getting less comfortable on CBn and I wouldn't have aclear conscience if I didn't point that out.

[Jim]

Noted, and we'll take those points on board. Thanks.

[Skudor]

Noted, and we'll take those points on board. Thanks.

You're always welcome Jim

[Righty007]

Skudor, nobody said you're not allowed to revive old threads. We just ask that you use a little judgement when opening a thread that possibly has no current relevance. If you can still add something with substance to an old thread, by all means open it. Just don't go on a reviving spree because you're bound to reopen a few that just didn't need to be reopened.

Nobody's out to get you or any other member of the Forums. Forum moderating is a filthy business but somebody's got to do it to ensure that the Forums don't get out of hand. This thread simply serves as a reminder as to what guidelines you should think about prior to reopening a thread.

If a specific thread was closed that you think you could still add substance to then please PM me or another moderator. We'll take a look at it because we're pretty reasonable. Again, nobody's out to get you. We just want to keep the Forums running smoothly.

Thank you.

[Licence_007]

Perhaps a silly question, but how long is it before a topic is considered old?

[DaveBond21]

I revived a few old threads recently. Mainly because people were asking the following questions:-


1) When did the Casino Royale trailer come out?
2) How much filming had been done on CR at this time of the year in 2006?
3) What did people think when TWINE, DAD, Casino Royale were being filmed?

Even though I was around at the time, I decided to look back and find out the answers. I found they were answered in 3 or 4 very interesting old threads.

[Righty007]

Perhaps a silly question, but how long is it before a topic is considered old?

The discussion isn't about old vs. news topics. It's about relevant vs. dead topics. A thread from 2002 could still be good if there's still enough to discuss. Don't bump up a thread from 2002 with just an "I agree." Understand the difference? There's no set age, it's all about common sense.

[Skudor]

Skudor, nobody said you're not allowed to revive old threads. We just ask that you use a little judgement when opening a thread that possibly has no current relevance. If you can still add something with substance to an old thread, by all means open it. Just don't go on a reviving spree because you're bound to reopen a few that just didn't need to be reopened.

Nobody's out to get you or any other member of the Forums. Forum moderating is a filthy business but somebody's got to do it to ensure that the Forums don't get out of hand. This thread simply serves as a reminder as to what guidelines you should think about prior to reopening a thread.

If a specific thread was closed that you think you could still add substance to then please PM me or another moderator. We'll take a look at it because we're pretty reasonable. Again, nobody's out to get you. We just want to keep the Forums running smoothly.

Thank you.

And as moderators it is your prerogative to run things any way you please - and the effort is appreciated! Ultimately forums are very much a "like it or lump it" sort of thing.

My concern is that I really couldn't see any harm in these threads. Perhaps they were of marginal value. That's entirely possible but it is also an utterly subjective judgement. I just had a proper look at them and I really couldn't see any good reason for intervention.

I've been around on this forum for a handful of years now and so far I'd mostly noticed moderators acting on things like merging threads, kicking trolls out, calming debates that had degenerated into personal insults, and so on.

I don't remember ever seeing threads being closed for merely not being considered interesting or valuable - and I profoundly disagree with the concept that they should be (it is simply far too subjective). It's like there is a move from moderating to editing and censorship. Perhaps it's intentional, perhaps it isn't. I just want to state my views because I care - not to be a pain!

But - again - I emphasise that I completely understand that moderating is not easy and that you guys do a very good job. And, obviously, if I don't like it I can always just start pestering my mates with lengthy emails about obscure Bond related stuff by email instead of posting here (and given how fed up they were in the past, I think I'd rather pester everyone here with said Bond commentary).

Out to get me? Where? Sould I be concerned? I wasn't until now!

[doublenoughtspy]

Skudor,

We appreciate your honesty and concerns.

We aren

[Skudor]

Doublenoughtspy,

Of course non-Bond related stuff is very easy to spot, although I think it serves a purpose of building a community rather than just a forum and even the most vacuous threads can be good fun