This is an excellent suggestion of Linelle's. Given the number of new members and/or single posters dropping in from Houzz, we'll likely never be able to self police this behavior through education, so a built in feature than prevented old posts from being resurrected would be very helpful.

Excellent idea. While the Admins are at it, could they pin buehl's "Read me first" post to the top so continuous bumping is not necessary?

Generally it's considered poor form to resurrect an old thread and start posting to it, cluttering up Page 1 and driving current threads needing answers/input into potential oblivion.

Well, you know, I do realize that many, probably most, of the resurrected threads are brought back for spam, but there have also been several people lately who needed help, searched, pulled up the most relevant thread, came and posted, and and got smacked for doing so, so personally I think some folks are going a bit overboard on that, which makes me dubious about this. If the only thread you can find is a couple of years old, what are you supposed to do?

I think it's unrealistic to expect someone who finds a GW thread with a google search to have found the floating FAQ and absorbed all of it before posting. How would they even see it, if they come in from a link?

I just don't see how you can say that those folks don't need help just as much as those who post entirely new problems that are more interesting to the regulars here.

writersblock - you make a good point. I don't know that they actually get smacked but just a suggestion to start their own thread. The problem is that a lot of people (i'm one of them, not that my advice is all that great) now check the date of all posts and if it's old I don't even open it. So if a lot of regulars are doing that the person who resurrected the post isn't going to get an answer to their query anyway.

Writersblock, I agree with you. I don't think old threads are necessarily of no current value or that new posters deserve being chastised for not knowing GW etiquette. I don't know if I've ever resurrected an old thread here myself, but I have posted *after* someone else has.

That's the reason I ask if a thread can be closed/locked after a reasonable time of inactivity. It should cut way down on spammers and help legitimate posters realize that the thread is old and it's time to start a new one. No judgment on worthiness of either the topic or the poster.

Agree new suggestions to a question that was answered years ago can be laughable (do you really think the person has not resolved the question they asked in 2009?) and annoying.

A few thoughts: (1) Recently noticed a lot of spam type posts on those old threads, I have started to flag them. (2) New posters [I was one] may not yet know the etiquette and think posting on an old thread shows you at least tried to find the answer before asking a question. (3) A few times I wanted to find out how something worked out long term and could not contact the OP. (4) Once I felt compelled, when I had new info, to update a comment I made so any future reader would have that info. (e.g., no problems with windows initially, but 1 year later found problem).

Maybe if the original date of the post was more prominent, maybe bolded it would help.

On the other hand, I've seen a lot of old threads revived with "So, do you still like it?" and the original poster replies because they're still getting notifications. I'd rather see old posts colored a musty brownish color with big red letters across the top and bottom to tell you it's a NECROPOST than have them cut off all together.

" if it's old I don't even open it"

I don't either.

I think if someone wants to refer to an old thread, they can link to it.

maybe we need a 'sticky' for 'board guides' too. This could be to tell newbies to start their own thread and link to the old one if there's something in it they question, need more info on etc.

it could also list a few helpful hints like clicking on comments to go to end of thread etc. I'm sure there are more of that type to help them.

If an old post is resurrected simply because a business is trying to draw attention to their site - and do so with multiple old posts resurrected - boo hiss on them! I'm flagging those posts, too. It's smacks of spam.

If, however, it's resurrected because it's the most relevant post on a topic or someone wants to know how well such-and-such worked, it's a good thing.

Fori, I had to look that term up...Great idea!

12crumbles: Exactly.

On another forum that I am on, a 90 day warning pops up when you go to post to an older thread....so an OP could resurrect a thread, but at least it would be more noticeable when an old thread comes up.

I like Springroz's suggestion. The warning could include a suggestion that if the person has a new question, she or he should start a new thread. It wouldn't matter how a poster came to a thread that way, or whether she or he had read the FAQ.

That would work, but I think we'd want the popup when the post is opened, not when we try to reply. That way we'd scan to the end to see if it's spam before reading something possibly long and outdated.

Is the 90 day warning from the date of the OP or from the date of the last post.?

Interesting - I've been on other forums where the etiquette is exactly the opposite and people are encouraged to keep all relevant questions and information together in the same thread instead of starting new ones with the same idea.

Exactly sweetsb. On other forums if you ask a question that has been discussed previously the forum police nick you for not using the search function.

How silly! I frequently search the archives, especially when I have a new project or problem that I wouldn't have read about earlier, and I may well ask a question based upon the info contained. When I join an existing forum, I ALWAYS dig back to see what was discussed earlier. This is why we have archives.

I live a very busy life, but not so busy that I begrudge an old topic that someone has resuscitated. If a topic is old and I don't want to read it, I close it. Very simple.

sbkh, not sure which aspect you find silly.

I'm in favor of doing some research before starting a new thread. In fact, many Google searches lead right to GW. I get that not everyone is good at searching. There are plenty of unwarranted smack-downs when new people ask basic questions some vets feel are tiresome to them.

Old threads don't bother me in and of themselves, but they sure do seem to get under others' skins, so that's why I brought up a possible solution. I don't mean for old threads to disappear because there's a lot of value left in them. How many times have you posted somewhere and don't even remember which forum or which thread it is? I appreciate comprehending that a several years' old conversation probably ended long ago. Time to start a new one. I save a few old magazines. They are looking dated these days.

About these old threads. Honestly, I don't care whether people post in them or not.

What actually bothers me more is when people do a drive-by post. Ask some angst-y question which needs to be answered right now, and the troops muster and produce edited layouts and color renderings, really lots of work, and the original poster never comes back, never even says thank you. There ought to be a law.

I don't mind seeing an old thread here and there- I usually don't open it unless it's something that really interests me, but I am amazed at how many really old threads are currently on page 1.

I have wasted time trying to help people who finished their kitchens years ago precisely because I failed to notice it was an old thread. I now ignore them completely, and find it irritating when they clutter page 1. Linelle, thank you for bringing this issue to the fore and explaining it so succinctly. I think the "cutoff" should be one year after the original post, especially because once their kitchens are finished, we hear less from our old friends, the OPs.

Eam, thanks. It's a little surprising to me that there's been so much huffing and puffing about people dredging up and commenting on old threads, and yet it seems most people on this thread are okay with it. I can ignore them *after* I stop and take note of the old date. They're clutter. There are worse things I suppose.

It's also interesting to me that no admins have commented, e.g., "we've considered that," or "not possible for various reasons," etc.

Old threads popping up on page 1 don't bother me if it's someone asking a genuine question about the issue like "I have the same problem so did this solution work for you?". I get that people come in via web searches and such and often don't even realize they are posting on an old thread. When I have seen situations like that, I have popped in and suggested they also start a new thread as they will get more responses. Of course, what they're hoping is for the OP to respond which may or may not happen, right?

I do get annoyed when old threads pop up due to spam and self-promotion comments but those bother me in new discussions, too.

If I've noticed that new discussions were pushed off page 1 without many responses, I either try to add a helpful respond to push it back to page 1 or will post something like "I don't know how to help you but I'm bumping up your discussion so, hopefully, someone who can help will see it."

I honestly don't think this issue happens enough to put a lock on old posts.

I appreciate the ability to comment on old threads. I am not as active as many GW users, and I know that sometimes asking a questions of the OP on an older thread is a good way to get a (currently) relevant response. Spam should be flagged, obviously, but I don't agree that it is poor etiquette to comment on a topic of interest, no matter how old. Obviously, the OP or other original commenters may not want to jump back in to the commenter, but why shouldn't I be able to comment?

I also don't mind seeing old posts at the top of the page; I haven't been around long enough to memorize every post and it really isn't difficult to skip the topics I am not interested in, regardless of age.

I have been wondering if Tamara is still with us. When is the last time anyone has seen her post? Was there a response in the photo thread? It seemed to me that they made all the changes they intended to within the first few weeks of being Houzzed. Lots of requests were never implemented.

Q. Why I revive old threads?

A. No other way to contact the original poster. The truth is Houzz really isn't a forum. It doesn't look like, it act like it, and I'm pretty sure that it is designed differently. The search functions are different. The way 260 comments show up on one page is different. To be honest I didn't even know there were admins until I read this. There are no stickys. Random rules that yo aren't aware of until you read a comment 30 threads in 4 comments down.

I had found a couple of answers to my questions but the thread was too old and initially I didn't want to revive it. One of them the user is still currently active but I don't want to derail a thread by asking something unrelated to the subject. I tried clicking on their page but there is no way to PM so I just ended up following them. Then I found another thread and said WTH and decided to ask because their answer is a little more relevant than the ones I asked for.

Other than reviving an old thread to get an answer what would be the best way to get a response from the original poster?

recent post by Tamara

http://ths.gardenweb.com/discussions/3194335/hey-tamara-the-cooking-forum-isnt-search-able

Why is this inquiry in the Home Forums / Kitchen area?? You could ask the webmasters here: https://support.houzz.com/hc/en-us/requests/new

As the OP, I can answer that. I put it here because I thought of it while I was here. :)