Start a New Thread, or Ressurect an Antique One?

[Radtech1]

Hmmm,

It happened recently where someone started a thread that has been posted several times before. It seems to me, that since a quick search brings up the previous threads it would have been better to post there - rather than re-inventing the wheel.

On the other hand, it sometimes makes scratch my head when someone posts on a thread that has been dormant for a few years.

So I am asking the members:

Would you rather see a new but duplicate thread OR a dead thread brought back to life?

[3Turner]

So that is what you were doing a little while ago. It was funny, I was reading the most recent one when my IE crashed on me. When I tried to get back on, all I saw were the ones you posted to bump them up....made me confused.

Oh, you forgot to put "depends on the topic". Can't start another 'show your boxes thread' with the monster one already going. On another forum I frequent, the moderators frown upon ressurecting old threads that are over 1 month old. they feel that the old info would confuse posters...like me ;).

[OCPickle]

If it is a technical question that is still valid and hasn't been answered yet, I say resurrect the thread. If it is a comment on a photograph....eh, send a pm, but posting is okay. If it is to say, "yeah, I had the same problem but it worked out" then don't post anything. The one thing to ask is, "If I resurrect this thread will it benefit POTN?" I don't think there should be arbitrary time limits placed on resurrecting threads.

[_aravena]

If it's a common question thread and you found it, sure, why not? It's funny 'cause most of the time the first post is someone that says leasrn how to use the search tool. And honestly, common question threads are common so they are always useful. Heck, there are like 5 100-400L threads in the lens forum on the 1st page.

Picture threads should stay dead especially if they're at least a month old and market threads can be left to PM's.