MN pleeeeease consider CLOSING OLD THREADS...

I don't dispute that sometimes the info can be useful/interesting, so keep the threads rather than delete them. But just lock them so no-one can post on them after, say, 3 months.

Wouldn't it better if op just linked to closed thread rather than posting on it. Title (original post name) update

It wouldnt take much for someone to nip over and make sure it was added to once every 5 or so months to keep it going.

The change would however prevent people googling something, finding a decade old thread and reviving it because they don't understand the concept of the zombie banner as often happens or more frustratingly ressurecting a thread to spam or for no reason other than because they felt like it.

Can we keep the "just an add on???????" thread in Dadsnet? It's coming up for it's tenth birthday and we don't want to lose it.

There is absolutely no need and it's just stupid that it's possible to ressurect an old thread for no reason at all. MNHQ really really need to start making some changes to stop them being dragged up so often.

What BIWI said.

Maybe if we all go onto as many old threads as possible and post that we are just commenting 4 years later so that we can read the thread at our leisure (which is what happened in the most recent thread), something will finally get done.

I've been asking MN to do this for years.
In addition to sensitivity issues, Zombies are timewasters.
They frequently are just resurrected to spam, report to HQ to delete the spam, then a few months later the same thread pops up again with more spam. Report to HQ to delete the spam.
I know they have more useful ways to spend their time so don't understand why they don't want to lock old threads.
I use a couple of other message boards and zombies are locked on both after 6 months.

PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD WILL YOU DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS?!

@MichaelMumsnet you closed down this thread

It was a perfect example of how horrible it can be when people post on zombie threads.

Cue way too many posters who never bothered to read any of the previous posts pointing out that it was a thread from 2017!

Horribly, horribly insensitive.

However - you closed that one down, so why can't you close other zombie threads as well?

Bumping this again in the hope of getting MN to start making more sensible changes it prevent resurrection.

It's been beyond rediculous for zombie threads over the weekend it feels like every third thread I'm clicking on is a zombie thread.

I just accidentally posted on one from 2008 that someone has resurrected.

I also reckon that it would be better if after say 12 months they could be locked and the OP could revive them, but no-one else.

I opened a zombie thread by mistake too
Oops 😬

Maybe we should report as potential trolling whenever we see a pointless revival. At least some are piss takes.

Its alzo pointless posting on zombie threads, posters only read Op and dont read the posts at the bottom, so they dont get any relevant answers

Would it be possible to put a message above the opening post of every thread stating ‘This thread was started in 2017, please consider if it is still relevant to post’ or something like that? Then even the posters who only read the OP will know if it’s a recent thread or not.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting that old threads should be automatically deleted. Just that after six months of no activity they should be locked. Which is pretty standard on other parts of the internet. I understand that MN reply to old threads to point them out as zombie threads, but I’m not sure what the point of that is when that message just gets added to bottom, presumably after it’s been flagged by posters. And that’s not universal either. In Baby Names there are frequent threads bumped by posters years after they are posted without a message from MN. One tonight on the name Honey originally posted in 2009.

If a poster wants to update then they can start a new thread and link their old one. It might also get more engagement that was, as people won’t see the date and then click off assuming it’s a waste of time.

I like an old thread. They can be useful. And new posts may still be valid years later (eg health, gardening, how to deal with a toddler. Etc etc)

On the other hand, people posting "F" to follow, what is that all about???

I've clicked on 4 zombie threads alone today none of which were revived by the original poster.

It's getting beyond stupid how frequently they are revived by people who cannot be bothered to make their own thread or people who are asking for an update, if the OP wanted to update they would do so themselves.

I don't think there is a hard and fast limit but its very different if the OP updating than some idiot just posting for the sake of causing trouble or because they can't be bothered to work out how to start their own thread.

What's the time limit before a thread becomes a zombie thread

Is it 6,12 or 18 months or more ?

Is it from when thread was created or the last poster posted?

When I see one zombie thread, I see multiple after that. It's happening again today. There must be some people doing this on purpose for some reason. Weird.

At least its only 3 years but yeah, what's the point apart from generating revenue?

I don't see how keeping the thread live in my post at 08:28 benefits anyone - the OP, the new poster or any other users of the forum.

All it does is generate income for MN.

That thread is a classic example of the absolute pointlessness of a zombie thread.

As well as illustrating just how many people don't bother to RTFT.

Please @MNHQ tell us that you are addressing this?

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3169428-To-object-to-my-neighbours-putting-their-wheelie-bins-outside-my-house