Printable View
Ok, with all the old threads mysteriously hitting the front page over the last few days or so, perhaps it'd be nice if the "bump" button would sign the person doing it... kind of like the "edi post" screen. Basically allow a person to enter a short "why I bumped this thread" reason and add it to the string of posts. At least perhaps this would discourage people from shamelessly (and anonymously) bumping threads up to the front page that don't really have any reason to be there.
Well, I've been one of the people who bumped up two of my own posts this week because I never got any answers (or any responses at all) the first time. I was hoping that by bumping it up, someone else would see it who hadn't seen it before and maybe I could get an answer. It worked for one, but didn't work for the other. I certainly wouldn't have objected to putting my reason there along with the bump. It just made more sense to bump it rather than add a reply to my own question.
str34m3r> Someone bumped my roll call thread earlier today... thats the type of thing we are talking about.
draziw> good idea, but it shouldn't count as a post. Maybe have a 50 char max, and put their name with it.....
You're right souleman - it shouldn't count as a post, but maybe just a blurb in there intertwined with the posts:
Code:bumped by: xxxxxx - why: text they entered as a reason
But even if a worthles thread is bumped, as long as nobody replies to to it, it will eventually filter to the bottom... like the filth it is... But - I do see where you're coming from.
Yeah, maybe Just a little single-line between posts... Sound good, I suppose.
hmmmmmmm......good idea, then that one thread I made about micr0s0ft, which my friend did while i wasn't in the room, would have disappeared quickly and not got me flamed so much (some moron bumped it back up so i would get more negative antipoints).........i support your idea
I think it'd be better if members had limits on how many times you could bump up a particular thread, or how many threads you could bump up within 24 hours. That way you keep some degree of anonyminity whilst still controlling bump ups to an extent. Perhaps even if you required say 50 posts before you could bump up threads, or a similar restriction?
If we do have a reason given, only make it a short one-liner, and it would be replaced once someone else replied to the post or it was bumped up by someone else (e.g. if I bump up a thread, the reason appears in it, but when another member replies, the reason disappears).
some good ideas here... i love the idea of only being able to bump a thread a finite amout of times..and a signature would also be very cool...even if it just listed below like thread subscribers.
"bumped by:" i dont know just an idea
I think it a good idea for a couple reasons I've spotted a few threads here in the morning then not had time to read them to go to work and by the time I get back I've forgotten the original thread subject and see a bunch of really to do with nothing stuff. More then one of my threads have just gone away rather fast mostly because of the hours I post them I think. Never bumped any up just thought ok no one is interisted in the thread. Bumping up is good I think if it is for a revalant thread like security/ network questions not a bump up for something like what say sexuality, or what is a dat file type things.
Palemoon -
Thank you. I agree with your views on this. I posted my first thread today and it has sunk so far that it will probably not be answered, although it has been viewed quite a few times. I've seen threads that were killed that had questions I would have liked to have seen answered, while others with (in my view) lame subjects kept rising to the top of the list. My opinion - if the subject is worthwhile and can provide a good learning experience for others it shouldn't be considered lame or 'filth' as Specter6 implies. Why not an option to request a Moderator bump a thread to the top based on the subject matter? Just my opinion . . . V.
I don't think a user should have to sign or provide a reason for a bump, but then again. I have noticed alot of negative posts being bumped. Are these posts being used by individuals to even out their points?
No offense man, this thread is kinda old and looked down upon when you bring back old threads. That's why the blinking date is there. Aside from that, I agree with you! :)
JC: Blame me, I was the one who bumped the thread, Joey just responded. I'm just trying to keep the site-suggestion threads which I consider good-but-not-quashed-or-accepted from sinking into total obscurity.
Greetings All:
Ok, I wrestled with this one for a while.
I don't want to have a "bump up" post the user's name, as I don't see that accomplishing much more than starting flame wars (why the hell did you bump this thread you dumb somsabitch) or discouraging people from bumping things up (I don't want to get a bunch of negative antipoints and be called a somsabitch, so I won't bump at all).
However, I do understand that the feature has been abused some.
Soooooooo, here's what I came up with:
From now on, only users that have actually posted in the thread, are able to bump it up.
Not exactly a rocket-scientist solution, but I think it will accomplish the goal of limiting abuse, while still encouraging people to use the function.