Dune Choice + Forum Culture Oddities

Coupla things:

Forum Behavior


Folks say it's  (1)  poor forum etiquette to "necro" or post on an old topic, even if you have something new to bring to the discussion, but at the same time it is  (2)  bad form to start a new post about something that has already been talked about before.

In reverse: It's frowned upon to start a topic that already exists, yet it's frowned upon to contribute to a topic that already exists but happens to be too old.

Those sound like nearly mutually exclusive ideas, unless the philosophy is to eliminate every topic of discussion, except the very new, for the benefit of a few readers. 

Sometimes old topics should be revisited, and a bump once in a while might actually be pertinent to the person who contributed to the original post, even if it's old news to the forum trolls.  And sometimes a topic's nuance is different enough for it to be considered separate, despite them being similar. 

I don't see the point in only catering to people who are compelled to rant when they read new posts which turn out to have been started a while ago.  It's their hobby to only keep up with the latest on the forums, that's fine, but some of us prefer organic discussions of ideas rather than treating forums like a news blog. 

I realize those very people will wind up reading this blog, so a reasonable explanation as to how those two principles above don't conflict might help me understand.  I do already realize that simply bumping up an old post with a superfluous addition might cause confusion, as there's no way to distinguish between long-running conversations, totally new posts, and ressurrected posts.  I've done that before I realized there's an actual posting update.  I mean when it actually adds to the discussion.

Far Future Blog


There's been some interest in Dune games, I've noticed, and I've been continuing my strange obsession with Frank Herbert's world for pretty much the entire time since I wrote the blog below.  I've explored the computer game side of Dune a bit more, and wanted to ask you all what you thought might be an interesting topic to cover.

I recently had the opportunity to play the original Dune by Cryo Interactive, and am interested in talking about the many things that great game does right (along with its surreal failures).  I was also thinking of detailing one of the last projects of Cryo, called Dune Generations, which was never completed.  That one promises to have video, screenshots, and concept art, along with the design philosophy of what might have been.

If anyone has a preference for what they'd rather read about of the two, let me know and I'll concentrate on that first.

[EOL]
6 Comments
7 Comments
Posted by ahoodedfigure

Coupla things:

Forum Behavior


Folks say it's  (1)  poor forum etiquette to "necro" or post on an old topic, even if you have something new to bring to the discussion, but at the same time it is  (2)  bad form to start a new post about something that has already been talked about before.

In reverse: It's frowned upon to start a topic that already exists, yet it's frowned upon to contribute to a topic that already exists but happens to be too old.

Those sound like nearly mutually exclusive ideas, unless the philosophy is to eliminate every topic of discussion, except the very new, for the benefit of a few readers. 

Sometimes old topics should be revisited, and a bump once in a while might actually be pertinent to the person who contributed to the original post, even if it's old news to the forum trolls.  And sometimes a topic's nuance is different enough for it to be considered separate, despite them being similar. 

I don't see the point in only catering to people who are compelled to rant when they read new posts which turn out to have been started a while ago.  It's their hobby to only keep up with the latest on the forums, that's fine, but some of us prefer organic discussions of ideas rather than treating forums like a news blog. 

I realize those very people will wind up reading this blog, so a reasonable explanation as to how those two principles above don't conflict might help me understand.  I do already realize that simply bumping up an old post with a superfluous addition might cause confusion, as there's no way to distinguish between long-running conversations, totally new posts, and ressurrected posts.  I've done that before I realized there's an actual posting update.  I mean when it actually adds to the discussion.

Far Future Blog


There's been some interest in Dune games, I've noticed, and I've been continuing my strange obsession with Frank Herbert's world for pretty much the entire time since I wrote the blog below.  I've explored the computer game side of Dune a bit more, and wanted to ask you all what you thought might be an interesting topic to cover.

I recently had the opportunity to play the original Dune by Cryo Interactive, and am interested in talking about the many things that great game does right (along with its surreal failures).  I was also thinking of detailing one of the last projects of Cryo, called Dune Generations, which was never completed.  That one promises to have video, screenshots, and concept art, along with the design philosophy of what might have been.

If anyone has a preference for what they'd rather read about of the two, let me know and I'll concentrate on that first.

[EOL]
Posted by Mikemcn

I hate when they complain you made a thread about the same topic, when the whole reason you did so was because you couldnt find the original thread because its too old

Posted by ArbitraryWater

Fact of life: People are Hypocrites. I certainly dislike it when someone posts something like "Here is a link to an eight month old thread which is the exact same as the one you posted."

Maybe I am showing my (lack of) age, but the only things I know about the Dune is: 1. It's a series of sci-fi novels on a planet called Dune. 2. People on this planet are obsessed with harvesting "spice"

Online
Posted by Claude

I'm still learning about the internet, forums, when and what not to post. I still don't get it.

Posted by Jayge_

The thing is, some topics of discussion are time-based and new threads about them can be OK, but others are like "fuck why would anyone ever bother bumping this, this is ridiculous." It's all about knowing what's what.

Posted by ahoodedfigure
@Jayge: Yeah, I just wish more people knew that it was OK.  It comes down to someone's mood as to whether or not they're a fan of what the person wrote.  I pointed out what someone had written was false and it touched off this back and forth between people who were annoyed it was brought up, and people who were happy that the post was finally corrected.  It seems more like a taste thing than something easily definable, or we'd already have some discreet forum rules on it by now.
Posted by ahoodedfigure
@Claude: Forum culture has changed a bit since I started with it.  I don't remember people bothering to post on stuff like this.  If they didn't like it, they'd ignore it and let it slip to the bottom of the pile again.  But instead they actually bother to post, keeping the thing afloat.  It's strange to me.