Online since 2002. Over 3300 puzzles, 2600 worldwide members, and 270,000 messages.

TwistyPuzzles.com Forum

It is currently Tue Jul 22, 2014 6:58 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Are bumps always bad?
PostPosted: Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:07 am
Location: Germany, Bavaria
Some time ago I had a general discussion with Dave regarding “bumps”. See below
In this specific case http://www.twistypuzzles.com/forum/view ... 86#p236686 it is questionable to me, if a new thread with a link to the old one would have been better.
Why would that be good behavior, while posting to that old thread is damned?
I think that the post is on topic. The thread is old but the mass-produced Rex Cube is not.
It does not add value, but asks a related question.
Compared with the many posts “how awesome” and “I want but cannot afford this” I consider this is a very reasonable post.

I appreciate that any post to an older topic should be on context and should add something. A reasonable question for help seems OK to me as well.
What would be better by opening a new thread?
I understand that the threshold for useless posts (like “Cooool”) is a bit higher when it means opening a new thread.

Here follows an extract of a PM discussion I had with Dave:

EDIT: I have deleted the quote, because somebody has seen this as a foul.
I have PM'd Dave for permission and will restore it, if he finds it OK.
I thought that Dave's view expresses more a clarification of a general rule than something private.

EDIT 2: I restore the quote after getting explicit permission from Dave:

DLitwin wrote:
konsassen wrote:
…Who has problems with a bump? If it is viewed as "bad manners", an introductory sentence can make it clear, that this a bump and why I want to make it.
Or does Sandy's computer have problems with bumps? (When I had made my first and only real bump, I got this opinion from a fellow member.)
The problem with bumps is when someone discovers a topic two years old and posts to say "Hey, that is cool!" Then everyone who hasn't seen it chimes in and for those of us who read that two years ago it is a lot of traffic for something that adds no value. One could imagine every topic over the 10+ years of the forum constantly being rediscovered and creating traffic. It is simply too much. I would love if people read backwards in time and appreciated the depth our forum has to offer, but we can't keep rehashing the same things again and again or it drowns out new valuable content.
If someone has something of real value to add it can be worth it, but as time goes on this value must be higher and higher.
konsassen wrote:
The recommendation "Instead, create a new topic and link to the old one." has one drawback:
Not everybody, who is interested and had subscribed to the original topic, will recognize the new thread.
This is the solution for very old threads where the threshold is very high (many years). The solution does not bump the thread but adds what is of value as its own new topic and then just refers to the older thread. People can read the old content but not then bump it….

Dave :)

_________________
My collection at: http://sites.google.com/site/twistykon/home


Last edited by Konrad on Wed Nov 17, 2010 4:35 am, edited 3 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Are bumps always bad?
PostPosted: Tue Nov 16, 2010 10:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 7:43 pm
Location: Shelby Township, MI. USA
it's a no win situation. You add to a somewhat old topic and someone will complain about bumping. But if you start a new topic someone will complain stating that you should have used the search tool. Sometimes it is the same people complaining in either situation. I just think there are too many people trying to be forum police. Does it really bother them that much? Why can't they just ignore it and move on?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Are bumps always bad?
PostPosted: Tue Nov 16, 2010 10:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 10:48 am
Posted: Wed Feb 25, 2009 2:00 am
Posted: Tue Nov 16, 2010 3:15 am

Yes, and no. In this case, the poster probably should have used a new thread, because the old topic wasn't really relevant to his post other than that it was about a rex cube.

Think of it this way, if the poster had made a new topic and linked to the old one, the old one wouldn't have made any sense. So why link to the old one anyway? Or post there?

But don't worry about it, we all have our fill of mistakes. I know I continue to make them as I get used to the flow of things here!

_________________
++Noah (NType3 here, Emrakul elsewhere)

Moderator for Puzzling Stack Exchange - a new site for specific puzzling questions!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Are bumps always bad?
PostPosted: Tue Nov 16, 2010 12:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 6:56 am
I think some our completely justified (like a builder posting a really late update) but then, when people randomly bump a topic to congratulate someone on a nice puzzle made 2 years ago, there's no point and it can be annoying.

P.S. maybe a year from now I'll remember to bump this topic just for fun :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Are bumps always bad?
PostPosted: Tue Nov 16, 2010 12:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2008 1:22 pm
I think bumps are fine when they have something to do with the topic, especially topics about custom puzzles.

I must say though, I think posting PMs is a bit of a foul. (unless Dave gave you permission).



EDIT - No need to edit on account of me, I was just letting you know as someone who owns and admins a forum, I've never allowed posting PMs without permission.



I think the context of the topic needs to be examined. For a long while on TP, there were a lot of ancient thread resurrections going on. Since then, every time someone bumps a thread, people seem to immediately become mods and start criticizing the bump, even in cases where it looked totally fine to me.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Are bumps always bad?
PostPosted: Wed Nov 17, 2010 3:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 5:32 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA
Derek is correct that you should always check with someone before posting any non-public communication (PM, email, etc.). This is rule #5 directly.

That said, I have no problem with Konsassen sharing that PM as a clarification.

On the topic of creating a new thread vs. a bump:

The easy fallback for me would be to just quote rule #10. This was around long before I heard of TwistyPuzzles so I can't with any certainty say the reasons behind it but I can easily say: Follow the rules.

Here is my perspective on it though:

Bumping a topic can be confusing. This happened recently when someone bumped Adam Zamora's 4x4x5 thread. Adam hasn't been on the forums for some time now so when people see his name pop up they thought: "Hey, Adam's back?". It isn't hard to see some amount of disappointment followed when that wasn't the case. The post was on topic, but so long after that initial thread that it really did deserve its own thread to avoid this confusion. Linking back to the original was in this case the best solution as it gives all the context for those who are interested but confuses no one.

The counterbalance to creating a new thread is having too many threads about the same topic. This happens from time to time. It is in everyone's best interest to try to localize information and posts, and it is a judgment call. The Moderators will step in and merge posts where necessary to adjust for this.

Regarding the concern that you can't win: People will complain about pretty much anything. It is important to keep in mind that all criticism is not equal. Do you best to stick within the letter and spirit of the rules and the mods will support you. These issues are rarely black and white so it is natural that people will disagree on such matters. It is rarely of great importance so we try to be flexible and others should as well. Remember that the report button is the preferred way to deal with anything you think is a bump. Any posts criticizing a bump is just more for me to delete. If you want to help report the post first and, if you feel the overwhelming need to educate, send a friendly PM.

Dave :)

_________________
Image
LitwinPuzzles.com has info on my puzzles.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Are bumps always bad?
PostPosted: Sun Nov 28, 2010 5:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm
I am wondering if there is any difference with threads such as "Packages just arrived with rare puzzles". Say for example this was not posted on for 6 months. Would it be ok to add to it? There are several such threads which kind of feel different to the others.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Are bumps always bad?
PostPosted: Sun Nov 28, 2010 6:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 10:48 am
For example, the meffert's last puzzle of the year speculation.

I'd like to know if the professor pyraminx is the last puzzle of the year, and that would be the place to ask. But the last post was just under a month ago, and what I have to ask really doesn't add anything to the thread.

_________________
++Noah (NType3 here, Emrakul elsewhere)

Moderator for Puzzling Stack Exchange - a new site for specific puzzling questions!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Are bumps always bad?
PostPosted: Sun Nov 28, 2010 6:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 5:32 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA
Tony is quite correct that some threads are considered special. We don't have a special designation for them but generally they aren't too hard to spot: They are ones that describe recurring events and that aren't named in a way that might cause confusion when they are bumped.

Tony's example is spot on and other good examples are Who's who, Tony's own Puzzles in Public and of course Gelatin Brain's Applet Solutions Discussion Thread.

How does one identify these compared to others? I can't find an easy rule to follow other than the standard "use your judgement". Some topics are created with recurring additions in mind, and others aren't.
Exceptions are some of the Off Topic game threads (true/false, etc.) where they are set up as recurring but at some point lose their usefulness even in that forum. Some amount of non-puzzle chat is beneficial to allowing people to get to know each other outside our primary interest (the stated purpose of the Off Topic forum), but beyond a point it just winds up filling up Sandy's hard drive with content of no lasting value.

Dave

_________________
Image
LitwinPuzzles.com has info on my puzzles.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Are bumps always bad?
PostPosted: Mon Nov 29, 2010 12:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 10:48 am
Dave, what about Meffert's last puzzle of the year speculations?

_________________
++Noah (NType3 here, Emrakul elsewhere)

Moderator for Puzzling Stack Exchange - a new site for specific puzzling questions!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Are bumps always bad?
PostPosted: Mon Nov 29, 2010 12:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2000 3:17 pm
Location: Hong Kong
I would say to let that one die a quiet death. The end of the year is almost here, Uwe hasn't come out and said it yet, but the Vulcano, the Mosaic and the Professor Pyraminx is what he was referring to. Realistically, if he makes any more in December they won't be shipped until January anyway....

_________________
Rox's Rambling Blog
Katsmom's Puzzling Videos


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Are bumps always bad?
PostPosted: Mon Nov 29, 2010 5:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:13 pm
DLitwin wrote:
Tony is quite correct that some threads are considered special. We don't have a special designation for them but generally they aren't too hard to spot: They are ones that describe recurring events and that aren't named in a way that might cause confusion when they are bumped...

How does one identify these compared to others? I can't find an easy rule to follow other than the standard "use your judgement"...

Generally threads with >100 posts, which already include a long history of "bumps". :wink:

_________________
If you want something you’ve never had, you’ve got to do something you’ve never done - Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Are bumps always bad?
PostPosted: Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 3:11 am
Location: Oregon, USA
If a new post adds significantly to a thread's long-term value, then it ought to be bumped rather than start a new thread. Especially if a reader (or finder) of the first thread would logically want to read the new information.

For instance, I posted specifications for three 1982 Rubik's Revenge variants in this thread several years ago. It would be nice if someone added the specifications for the Taiwan-built 1982 Revenge, even if it means bumping a 3-year-old thread, because all that information would be together in one place.

Besides, that threads shows up in Google's top results for "Rubik's Revenge Macau" and similar searches, so it's a potentially-useful resource.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Are bumps always bad?
PostPosted: Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 2:44 pm
I have to say, I was quite taken aback when I first encountered the no-bump rule. I thought, you're kidding, right? I'm on several forums, and I've never seen a rule like this before.

So... I admit I don't get it, but hey, when in Rome and all that.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Are bumps always bad?
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2010 8:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:31 am
Location: Greece, Australia, Thailand, India, Singapore.
VeryWetPaint wrote:
If a new post adds significantly to a thread's long-term value, then it ought to be bumped rather than start a new thread. Especially if a reader (or finder) of the first thread would logically want to read the new information.


Agreed 100%. it is good to have information concentrated in one place
instead of it being scattered around. In the past I was also wrongly supporting
the "rules followed by everyone" regarding this matter.

I mean, I believe bumps *are* ok IF AND ONLY IF some interesting and/or useful
information is added.

:)


Pantazis

_________________

Educational R&D, Gravity, 4D Symmetry, Puzzle Ninja, Matrix Mech, Alien Technology.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Are bumps always bad?
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2010 3:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:13 pm
BTW, the term "bump" was originally coined as an acronym for "Bring Up MY Post", to stop people repeatedly raising their *own* posts (and any underlying motives) to the top of the pile without adding any real content.

I think this is much less of a risk when people bring up somebody else's post, as they would normally do so only to add relevant content. Personally I think we go too far with the no-bump rule beyond the real meaning and purpose of the term.

My point is that a "bump" is defined more by the underlying motives, not by some arbitrary set of rules based on timing or 'usefulness' of content, etc.

Just my opinion. :wink:

_________________
If you want something you’ve never had, you’ve got to do something you’ve never done - Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Are bumps always bad?
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2010 5:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 2:44 pm
Kelvin Stott wrote:
BTW, the term "bump" was originally coined as an acronym for "Bring Up MY Post", to stop people repeatedly raising their *own* posts (and any underlying motives) to the top of the pile without adding any real content.

Nice idea, but that's a backronym.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Are bumps always bad?
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2010 10:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:13 pm
bhearn wrote:
Kelvin Stott wrote:
BTW, the term "bump" was originally coined as an acronym for "Bring Up MY Post", to stop people repeatedly raising their *own* posts (and any underlying motives) to the top of the pile without adding any real content.

Nice idea, but that's a backronym.

Well I never knew that, and in fact I'd never heard of the term backronym! :D

Still, that wiki article seems to confirm that a bump is defined more by the underlying motives than anything else.

_________________
If you want something you’ve never had, you’ve got to do something you’ve never done - Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

Forum powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group