Guides should be excluded from Necromancy rules

[Yunru]

The Rules on thread necromancy exist to stop multiple active threads on the same subject.
However, with guides that is never going to be the case (unless an author specifically puts out a newer version in a new thread for some reason). Thus, all locking "raised" guides does is hinder people from inquiring about the guide, and may even create clutter as the author now has to repost the guide in yet another thread.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Please see these threads for the official word on the subject:

Sheriff: This has been asked and answered multiple times, including less than a month ago. This is a discussion forum, not a repository. If there's an active discussion taking place, the thread will remain active. If the discussion has died off and you want to revive it, PM a moderator for the relevant section.

Sheriff: Handbooks have the same 45-day limit as other threads.
From the last thread discussing this...

Sheriff: No general exception exists beyond that stated in the Forum Rules. Any thread is eligible for an exception, you just need to PM a mod and explain why it's necessary. They'll decide on an individual basis.

Sheriff: The rules against thread necromancy serves many purposes among them:

1) The posting population is inconstant and discussions lose momentum. Reviving an old discussion is typically counterproductive because the originators have likely moved on, having lost interest in the discussion or concluded that it has run it's course.

That being said, the policy is actually *helpful* in fostering an active community -- new people can start, engage and mold their own discussions that previous posters have lost interest in (typically because they've been discussed to death) without having to defer to the conclusions of previous conversations.

But mind you, a duplicate of a recent thread will likely be nixed by the mods. But a discussion about ... the TV show Scrubs that started two years ago has little bearing on the attitude of current posters.

Azrael's explanation of the thread necromancy rules is dead on. We'd rather have new discussions start than revive old threads where many of the original posters have moved on. That being said, we also recommend linking to old threads on similar discussions, as they can provide some insight to concepts that had been raised before.
Necromancy also brings with it problems when there were technical issues in the past (such as those from the old forum software) all of a sudden appearing on page one and confusing people.

Depending on just how long ago the thread was started, many things could of changed.

The poster you are replying to may have left the boards. Everyone could have changed their opinions and no longer believe whatever was said in their posts. New books or rules/errata may have been published that make whatever was said in the thread obsolete.

---

IMO, and as I have said before, the guide threads are not immune to any of those issues. The people that posted on them might be gone. The topic may not have garnered enough interest to be the basis for a stable conversation. There might be issues with the formatting (especially with the tables in handbooks, in my experience).

Grey Wolf

(That was a nightmare to re-quote)

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff: Correct. Thanks Grey_wolf_c for digging out that quote.

I would add:

1. "prevention of multiple active threads on a topic" is not one of the reasons for the Thread Necromancy rule. We have another "one thread/topic" rule that covers that.
2. the thread necromancy rule actually encourages new, active topics be created on topics that have fallen dormant
3. if reviving the older thread really is preferable, all one needs to do is PM a moderator for that section of the board and convince them to waive the rule.