I doubt it will be much of a debate, but what the hey.

So here it is, looking over the front page here, seeing this.





Among others going back a page. These are threads that have been long dead for years.

So here is the debate, once they go dead, should if some one want to discuss the topic start a new one, or should they start a new thread. If they should let a dead thread remain dead, how long should a thread be considered dead before it shouldn't be resurrected.

Start a new thread, of course. To do otherwise would be against the rules. I'm not sure of an exact cut off, but I would say if the thread hasn't been posted in for months, let it stay dead. If anyone resurrects them, the best response is to give a snarky image about thread necromancy, like this:

If something's been dead for more than a month or two, it's best to just go ahead and start a new thread. A good rule of thumb is to see how many pages back the thread is in the debate room. If it doesn't appear until after the second or third page (depending on how busy the debate room has been lately), you can typically assume the thread has long since been forgotten.

And yes, every so often someone will revive a thread from 2006 so they can throw in their "lol Bush sux" comment which will eventually lead to a heated debate about how much republicans and democrats suck peppered with quotes from the Old Testament, all on the festering corpse of dead debate that was originally supposed to be about book censorship. In those situations, it's best to just post a snarky picture about thread necromancy and hope for the best.

This is my personal favorite:

Wait, is this going to turn into a picture thread?

Anyhow, here's a snarky link to go with the snarky picture of your choice.

Usually I'm in favor of letting old threads die. However, there are a few threads that I'd almost rather see resurected than see new ones, mainly because the new ones are mostly re-hashes of the old. ie: the gay debate, the religion debate, the sex before marriage debate, etc. I wish there was a way to force the reading of the entire thread before new posts were made too. Not going to hold my breath though. Maybe locking a thread after 2 or 3 weeks with no new posts would be a good idea.