Bump = Spam?!

[yeti]

Is it me or does Bumping a thread with a single word not equate to spamming the board?

It really annoys me when someone hasn't had their question answered or they're trying to keep their topic on top and all they put in their post is "Bump" or "TTT"...

Usually the user also double or even triple posts to do this too...

This sort of behaviour should try to be minimised in my opinion...

C.

 

[Der Alta]

This is being discussed amongst the moderators, and the action we're leaning towards is counting it as a bannable offense.

We're still in the midst of the discussion, so please bear with us.

AO

 

[cardude2004]

I don't think I have seen this, can somebody direct me to a post with an example?

 

[VT]

I don't think I have seen this, can somebody direct me to a post with an example?

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=53903

Last post .. he's basically just putting it back up top for more people to see it to try and catch a reply.

 

[Cosmic]

This is being discussed amongst the moderators, and the action we're leaning towards is counting it as a bannable offense.

We're still in the midst of the discussion, so please bear with us.

AO

So if I post just 'bump' in a post it's spamming and you can get warning for that?

 

[LoudMusic]

This is being discussed amongst the moderators, and the action we're leaning towards is counting it as a bannable offense.

We're still in the midst of the discussion, so please bear with us.

AO

I would like to inject that I feel a "bannable offence" might be overbearing. Perhaps if a thread is 'bumped' more than once with no additional valuable posts made it is simply closed.

I've gone round'n'round in my head on what should be done with old threads. If a thread hasn't picked up any new posts in six months, what's the point of it still being around? It's not like anyone goes back to them anyway. And any search that has that old of a thread in the results will surely have something much newer and much more relevant than the old one, or the old one would still be getting new posts occationally.

I think we need more thread locking and merging.

 

[ExigeEvan]

I've gone round'n'round in my head on what should be done with old threads. If a thread hasn't picked up any new posts in six months, what's the point of it still being around? It's not like anyone goes back to them anyway. And any search that has that old of a thread in the results will surely have something much newer and much more relevant than the old one, or the old one would still be getting new posts occationally.

I think threads over 6 months old should be locked, but not obliterated.

 

[pimp racer]

I think threads over 6 months old should be locked, but not obliterated.

No what if someone has to correct the thread or something? Oh and banning I think is too much.....or you can just ban them from GTP for like a week or something you know?

 

[Der Alta]

This is why we discuss it and think about it. Often times, the members themselves have a valid solution. So if minimal input is given in a thread, and it's deemed bumped, we lock it and let it drift away?

I just wish more of them spoke up with the solution, instead of pointing out a mistake or error.

LM, as we've seen more and more members sign up, what should we do with older forums? Should we lock the GT1 and GT2 forums, now that GT4 is on the verge of release (maybe verge is too strong a word). They contain valuable information but really not many people use them. Perhaps, delete any thread that is older than 1 year in the GT1 and 2 forums?

Interesting points.

Thanks for the input.

AO

 

[Ten]

Bump

(Couldn't resist! Please don't kill me! It was on top anyway!)

But seriously, I've seen this get way out of hand in other forums I've been to. I suggest slamming anyone who does it with a warning, and take month-long banning as a second offense action.

Just my piece, meh.

 

[xcsti]

Delete theads that haven't had any activity in more than 6 months or some agreed upon time, no matter where it is. I like the idea of banning a person who does that for a short period. Or removing the ability to post.

 

[Silverzone]

you should warn the members, not ban them.

 

[Iceman]

I don't see why this would be a bannable offense if it is a legitimate attempt at finding some more information, or updatings ones thread. I can see in many cases that it would be unneeded but you would have to be somewhat leniant.

 

[Ten]

you should warn the members, not ban them.

Hence why I said warn first, then apply a month-long ban if they make a repeat offense.

I actually think that warning is lenient enough. There are rules, it's not the moderating team's fault that you're to lazy to read them.

Which reminds me - if they do adopt any of these ideas, add a warning to the rules.

 

[VT]

I don't see why this would be a bannable offense if it is a legitimate attempt at finding some more information, or updatings ones thread. I can see in many cases that it would be unneeded but you would have to be somewhat leniant.

Most of the bumped threads are threads started by someone which got a less than desireable amount of replies and they're bumped with a meaningless post to put it back to the top of the board in hopes of more people responding to it.

IMO if they didn't respond the first time around, they won't respond the second time around, or the third, and so on .. So I don't really see the 'legitimate attempt' part of that.

I posted a thread about an explorer.exe problem a month or so back in the Computer forum and no one responded, basically telling me that no one knew the solution. I did think about bumping it, but decided not to because of what I just said. If it gets no responses the first time around, why bring it back for a second attempt? When I found the solution to that problem I posted it to inform the rest of the community as to the proper solution; which is how a dead thread should be handled IMO, if you have the solution or something which is relevant to the thread its okay.

Otherwise, slap 'em with a warning the first time .. then ban them from posting for a certain amount of time.

 

[Iceman]

But what if you found a way to fix the problem, or had more information that might have been helpful? Wouldn't it be acceptable to make a post in that thread then? I suppose I'm straying of the definition of a bump here, so it depends on what the mods consider a bump, or a useful "resurrection" of a thread.

 

[VT]

When I found the solution to that problem I posted it to inform the rest of the community as to the proper solution; which is how a dead thread should be handled IMO, if you have the solution or something which is relevant to the thread it is okay.

I think you missed this Iceman .

 

[Duke]

But what if you found a way to fix the problem, or had more information that might have been helpful? Wouldn't it be acceptable to make a post in that thread then? I suppose I'm straying of the definition of a bump here, so it depends on what the mods consider a bump, or a useful "resurrection" of a thread.

Bringing back an old thread because you're adding something to it - even a followup question - is not 'bumping'. That's perfectly acceptable behaviour, and it's what we expect you to do when everybody yells "SEARCH FIRST! This is an old topic!"

'Bumping means to just add a word like 'bump' or 'TTT' (for To The Top) just to get the thread back up top on the page. I don't mind it being done once, but too many times is a form of spam and should be a warnable offense.

 

[livemusic]

I think it´s okay to bump a thread once or twice if it concerns a question not answered.

 

[Iceman]

Bringing back an old thread because you're adding something to it - even a followup question - is not 'bumping'. That's perfectly acceptable behaviour, and it's what we expect you to do when everybody yells "SEARCH FIRST! This is an old topic!"

'Bumping means to just add a word like 'bump' or 'TTT' (for To The Top) just to get the thread back up top on the page. I don't mind it being done once, but too many times is a form of spam and should be a warnable offense.

That's what I thought, I guess I was a little off on my perception of the term "bump". In the way you describe it, it probably should be a warnable offense.

 

[LoudMusic]

Bringing back an old thread because you're adding something to it - even a followup question - is not 'bumping'. That's perfectly acceptable behaviour, and it's what we expect you to do when everybody yells "SEARCH FIRST! This is an old topic!"

'Bumping means to just add a word like 'bump' or 'TTT' (for To The Top) just to get the thread back up top on the page. I don't mind it being done once, but too many times is a form of spam and should be a warnable offense.

Seems to me a thread getting that kind of activity just needs to be locked. One person won't let it go? Kill it. If the same member keeps doing the same thing, kill them. And I feel the only warning they deserve is the Terms of Service.

LM, as we've seen more and more members sign up, what should we do with older forums? Should we lock the GT1 and GT2 forums, now that GT4 is on the verge of release (maybe verge is too strong a word). They contain valuable information but really not many people use them. Perhaps, delete any thread that is older than 1 year in the GT1 and 2 forums?

Forums, no. Really old threads, yes. Unfortunately I don't know that it can be automated so my suggestion is void. And as I think about it more, I don't see any point in closing them.

I guess I'm off topic anyway. The discussion is on threads getting bumped. So there are some questions we need to answer first.

What kinds of threads are getting bumped?
Who is bumping them?
Why are they bumping them?

I would assume the majority of bumped threads are asking a question, being bumped by the creator, because they're not getting a responce. The person is impatient. The community has ignored them. Perhaps their question is redundant and no one felt the need to tell them to search. Maybe their question is rather outlandish and no one wanted to take the time to tell them that they're crazy. Or maybe they posted the question during a time that no one online knew the answer and several threads were posted to pushing their thread so far down the list that it becomes lost in the shuffle. I believe only that last reason is good enough to warrent a bumping, but only once. If they still get no responce then no one in the active community cares and the thread should be let go.

Multiple consecutive bump oriented posts and the thread gets locked with a final post warning anyone invovled in bumping. Or perhaps just a general post stating the rule.

 

[pimp racer]

An Example - http://gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=50657

 

[LoudMusic]

Interesting. I learned two things by viewing that thread.

A) GTPlanet Premium Membership is well worth the money. Everyone should sign up (:

B) Some people bump their threads responsibly. He / she / it waited several days before bumping. Most threads I've seen bumped were bumped every eight to twelve hours maybe six or seven times.

In this case I would not be as offended by his bumping. Bumped the first time a week later then bumped again a full month after that.

 

[MrktMkr1986]

Delete theads that haven't had any activity in more than 6 months or some agreed upon time, no matter where it is. I like the idea of banning a person who does that for a short period. Or removing the ability to post.

Don't delete/lock threads! I found a perfectly usuable thread concerning the definition of people's nicknames and I thought it was something that should be revived. Everyone on this forum had to pick a user name... I just wanted to know why. Locking/deleting that thread would mean I would have PM everyone I'd want an answer from and not only is that time-consuming, it would be annoying to some people.

 

[LoudMusic]

Don't delete/lock threads! I found a perfectly usuable thread concerning the definition of people's nicknames and I thought it was something that should be revived. Everyone on this forum had to pick a user name... I just wanted to know why. Locking/deleting that thread would mean I would have PM everyone I'd want an answer from and not only is that time-consuming, it would be annoying to some people.

Actually you could just create a new thread and referance the old thread in your first post. But then that is redundant and unneccessary.

 

[MrktMkr1986]

Interesting. I learned two things by viewing that thread.

A) GTPlanet Premium Membership is well worth the money. Everyone should sign up (:

B) Some people bump their threads responsibly. He / she / it waited several days before bumping. Most threads I've seen bumped were bumped every eight to twelve hours maybe six or seven times.

In this case I would not be as offended by his bumping. Bumped the first time a week later then bumped again a full month after that.

A. OK in due time.
B. That is a very good point. If a user performs a responsible bump they shouldn't be banned.

 

[LoudMusic]

A. OK in due time.
B. That is a very good point. If a user performs a responsible bump they shouldn't be banned.

I don't think anyone should be banned for bumping, unless they are out of control with it. Then they should be treated like anyone else who make any amount of useless posts. It's the thread itself that I think needs to be delt with if it is continually bumped.

 

[Concept]

This is why we discuss it and think about it. Often times, the members themselves have a valid solution. So if minimal input is given in a thread, and it's deemed bumped, we lock it and let it drift away?

I just wish more of them spoke up with the solution, instead of pointing out a mistake or error.

LM, as we've seen more and more members sign up, what should we do with older forums? Should we lock the GT1 and GT2 forums, now that GT4 is on the verge of release (maybe verge is too strong a word). They contain valuable information but really not many people use them. Perhaps, delete any thread that is older than 1 year in the GT1 and 2 forums?

Interesting points.

Thanks for the input.

AO

I don't understand why they can't just be left open. It still has the potential to be a good popular thread. One post could make a difference.

 

[yeti]

I'm currently a mod on another Forum and we have a warning system where there is a warning bar from 0 - 100% and it goes up in 20% increments... If we give warnings then over time we remove them if people get better at not breaking the rules...

Perhaps a similar system could be used here for keeping track of offenders?

That way you would have several levels of warning before Banning as just one warning then ban is quite harsh... it also lets all of the staff know when and why the member has been warned (Our system logs Warn Notes for future reference and the member themself can read them for their own information).

Banning from Bump/Spamming is perhaps a tad strong... but warnings would be good.

C.

 

[Stinky Chicken]

Bump

(Couldn't resist! Please don't kill me! It was on top anyway!)

Trust you, mate.

I'm not sure how well this would work - or if I'm just repeating someone - but would it be wise to post a warning in a thread where the last post is 'bump' - or even a post? Something along the lines of "this is now worth a warning, please refrain from doing this or you'll get a strike in the member offense record book" etc?