Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;SuperDave, post: 2388540, member: 1892&quot;]I honestly cannot; I saw two others (and reported one of them), and apparently Admin action was initiated. Unless my search skills are remiss, they no longer exist. Those posts do_not exist in Kellen Coins&#039; posting history any longer.</p><p><br /></p><p>In the bigger picture, I have three arguments against bumping very old threads, one of which encompasses a far larger picture than numismatics and the other two specifically-relevant to numismatics:</p><p><br /></p><p>A) In almost all other online venues, such acts are considered negative across a range from &quot;impolite&quot; to &quot;you&#039;re going to get immediately dogpiled and possibly banned&quot; for doing it. This is the only_place in all my years of online community experience - spanning as large a variety of subject concentrations as could be imagined, and also including other numismatic fora - where the practice is actually <b>encouraged</b> by the membership, much less the Admins. Kellen Coins is a youngster, operating in an adult environment, and it&#039;s in view of this bigger picture that I chose to be harsh in this instance in the hopes of imparting a strong-enough lesson to make him greatly averse to it in the future. I could not care less to any resulting damage to my own reputation; he&#039;s more important than me because his future is still vast, and with that perspective in mind he could screw it up for the same reasons why compound interest works - <b>the Internet never forgets</b>.</p><p><br /></p><p>B) Not everything in numismatics is static. Information changes; facts multiply and sometimes reverse previously-known &quot;facts.&quot;&nbsp; A five-year-old thread about the commonality of certain Morgan varieties, for instance, would contain downright misleading information. Newer members - the ones who wouldn&#039;t necessarily catch the &quot;necro&quot; nature of a given thread - could easily be misinformed, and worse yet, jumbled around (I call it &quot;thrown into the dryer&quot;) by the conflict of older information being actively contended against by more-informed newer posters. This is not a good look, especially in our niche where many new members are not only new to coins but new to the Internet (which is why so many of them bump very old threads; old Internet hands would have eschewed that habit years ago).</p><p><br /></p><p>C) Older, longer threads are a deterrent to newer members as well. Who wants to jump for the first time into a four-page thread, having to read all that? Long experience tells me that more frequent, fresher discussions of common topics have more intrinsic value to a newer poster, especially because they can feel like they&#039;re being addressed personally. It&#039;s why I will <b>never</b> tire of endlessly repeating the same words about the use of acetone (for instance). It needs to be talked about - again - as often as it&#039;s asked, as long as there isn&#039;t another identical thread still active on the subject. If it was <i>that</i> good, it&#039;s worth repeating fresh because that has a more favorable impact upon the audience.</p><p><br /></p><p>None of this applies to &quot;old hands.&quot; You and I understand stuff like this at a glance, and can take it in stride for what it really is without deliberate values judgments. We just can&#039;t lose sight of the bigger picture, that for every poster there are ten who read and never post, and they&#039;re learning as much as the people typing at the keyboard. We need to be cognizant of what we&#039;re teaching them, and how they most easily learn.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in