Is there a rule about responding to old posts here?

Contribute Site feedback

AI-generated summary

The discussion explores whether there are rules about responding to old posts on the platform. merefield notes that topics are only closed by moderators, and otherwise, responding to old posts is normal to keep related information together. nobrowser mentions the term “necroposting” but finds it reasonable to update old topics with relevant, fresh information. ToddZ admits to cringing at prompts to re-open year-old posts but hasn’t faced consequences. NateDhaliwal observes that necroposting is more tolerated on Meta due to the volume of topics. chapoi confirms there are no formal rules, encouraging replies if they add value. sam emphasizes that responses should provide meaningful contributions—avoiding simple bumps or minimal additions—while also cautioning against outdated or dangerous information in old threads that may need moderation. Overall, the consensus is that while there’s no strict rule, adding value to existing discussions is key.

1

Is there a rule about responding to old posts here?
I’m really curious if there’s a rule about it. I’ve noticed that many people respond to posts that are one or two months, or even a year old.

2 Likes
2

Topics are closed if the Moderators want them to be.

Otherwise, I would say it’s normal because you want to keep information related to the same Topic in the same Topic.

16 Likes
3

Well, on some sites at least, if you do it you’ll be told something like “Don’t necropost”. :slight_smile: I think this happened to me on the F-Droid discourse.

To me it totally makes sense to keep adding to existing topics regardless of age.

–
Ian

6 Likes
4

I cringe a bit whenever I’m asked “are you sure you want to re-open this four-year old post?” but I haven’t been chewed out for it yet. :sweat_smile:

2 Likes
5

Like when Replit Ask was still around, we would allow necroposting as long as it’s on-topic.
It’s much “looser” here on Meta; I feel that there isn’t a lot of emphasis on ‘no necroposting’, since there are so many topics here and necroposting is hence not uncommon.

4 Likes
6

No rules about it :slight_smile: As others said, if it’s relevant and it makes sense to add it to the topic, go for it.

6 Likes
7

I’d argue that the accusation of “necroposting” is unreasonable for many communities that like information kept organised.

Obviously this may differ between communities and bodies of knowledge and specifically, perhaps, the rate at which that knowledge ages.

But posting on an old topic that is out of date with fresh information and updates can be helpful?

7 Likes
8

I am aligned here, but I am not too offended by the term “necroposting” when talking about problematic behavior. Take the following examples:

bump

(zero new information)

+1 I would like to see this issue fixed

(marginal at best, new information)

2024 - I just tried the repro steps and it is still happening

(passive-aggressive, new information but not adding too much)

On the complete other end of the spectrum, there is:

I saw the post by jane and agree with the assessment. I would like to add important fact 1, 2, and 3. I think we could make a breakthrough here with changes X and Y.

  • Replying to ancient topics is fine, provided you are adding value to the conversation

  • Reading is fundamental; don’t just scroll to the bottom and reply. Read carefully first so you have full context

  • Flag dangerous information in old posts in case staff need to step in and prune an old topic (e.g., “X is impossible in Discourse, by a founder” - when it has been possible for the past 5 years). Search landmines make it very hard for us to reason about our product.

9 Likes