Rule A15 Do not bump threads

[Myth]

Could you clear this rule better example, like you cant Post in threads that are Older than three Months or something. This would make the Rules much more clear and understandable.


Thanks,
Myth

[GommeInc]

It depends on the thread. If someone is going to hospital for a month, then maybe bumping can be allowed so people get the full story of the hospital trip (when the person has returned). Bumping should be allowed for a week in most cases.

[Thisyou]

Yeah like you can Bump If it 2 Months old, but older than that wont be allowed.

[Blinger1]

What is considered a bump though? I mean, if you post in a subforum that hasn't been posted in for a while but the thread is towards the top (in the top 5??) then is that still a bump??

[GommeInc]

What is considered a bump though? I mean, if you post in a subforum that hasn't been posted in for a while but the thread is towards the top (in the top 5??) then is that still a bump??
That's a good point, if it's on the first page then it shouldn't count as a bump.

[Myth]

Yeah but sometimes you can Bump threads. If the post is relevant or contributes to the Thread/Topic. But like the Threads thta are made in January 08 or June stuff. You can created a new topic for it. Easier than risking an Infraction or Warning. :)

[Blinger1]

That's a good point, if it's on the first page then it shouldn't count as a bump.
The argument will be "but how do you know if it was on the first page?". That would be easy to tell (might take some time), find the last post on the first thread of the second page (make sense??) and then check the dates between that one and the one on the thread that was bumped.
If there is a huge difference (i.e, 2 months) then chances are it was bumped??

[Myth]

Yeah Blinger you do have a good post. But I was just that they could Clear It up more. Make it 100% understandable by people.

[The Professor]

Its purposely open ended so common sense can be used when deciding whether to punish for breaking that rule :)

[Samishlol]

Then need to make it more clearer, say like your not allowed to bump a thread after 2 weeks or so.

[TopManTim]

pfffft a mod bumped a 2 week old thread other day


they need to make the time span that qualifies a bump clearer

[ReviewDude]

Its purposely open ended so common sense can be used when deciding whether to punish for breaking that rule :)

I think maybe that's the wrong word. With respect, the Moderation Team shouldn't be there to punish people for doing anything, merely to ensure the rules are upheld, and to make sure the forum runs properly - if infractions and warnings have to be given, then they are just to remind people of the rules, not to 'punish' them for wrongdoing.

Petty semantics aside, I would argue that this rule should serve as a debate on the rules as a whole. It's fine to have vague, interpretable rules - but then they all have to be that way (and Moderators should be laden with more authority to extrapolate them). However, you can't just have one - then expect members to accept Moderators' judgments on that, and not everything else.

I would suggest, for the purposes of simplicity, the rule just be clarified - and a limit of, say, 14 days should be applied, with exceptions only for stickied and spam threads. That way, there can be no complaints, and everyone's happy :)

[leah]

It depends on the thread. If someone is going to hospital for a month, then maybe bumping can be allowed so people get the full story of the hospital trip (when the person has returned). Bumping should be allowed for a week in most cases.


That's a good point, if it's on the first page then it shouldn't count as a bump.
Agree with both of these points Ryan :)
Obviously if its months old and not relevant but someone bumps it then they should be punished.

[The Professor]

I think maybe that's the wrong word. With respect, the Moderation Team shouldn't be there to punish people for doing anything, merely to ensure the rules are upheld, and to make sure the forum runs properly - if infractions and warnings have to be given, then they are just to remind people of the rules, not to 'punish' them for wrongdoing.

Petty semantics aside, I would argue that this rule should serve as a debate on the rules as a whole. It's fine to have vague, interpretable rules - but then they all have to be that way (and Moderators should be laden with more authority to extrapolate them). However, you can't just have one - then expect members to accept Moderators' judgments on that, and not everything else.

I would suggest, for the purposes of simplicity, the rule just be clarified - and a limit of, say, 14 days should be applied, with exceptions only for stickied and spam threads. That way, there can be no complaints, and everyone's happy :)

Yeah it took me a while to think of a better word but I ended up giving up and using that one :P

I disagree, the rules that need need to be specific, for example giving out personal details, should be specific. Rules like bumping have lots of situations where a "bump" is perfectly justified and contributes to the forum and listing all those possible situations would be impossible as well as space consuming (the one Gomme mentioned I hadn't even thought of!). Its also one of the less important rules in the grand scheme of things so it doesn't really need concrete borders imo.

[Jord]

Its 7 days becuase I dumped one befor after 8 days and I got an infraction