Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

Zobie threads why do mn hq allow

32 replies

ZackyVengeance · 26/02/2017 22:58

6 year old threads to be restarted? Especially when the origianl is goady in the extreme?

OP posts:
Dawndonnaagain · 26/02/2017 23:26

it puts some of us in a very vulnerable position.

Original poster
ZackyVengeance · 26/02/2017 23:29

very,
the tread is so old I am now socking on it lol

OP posts:
WicksEnd · 26/02/2017 23:43

MNHQ
Can we please have the zombie warning at the start of the thread??????

Also the site is sooooo slow on safari on an iPad, it's taken me 5 minutes to post. No problem ever with any other sites, it's always MN which is the problem.

Sorry for posting about it on your thread OP but I fear I may be here all night if I try and start a thread of my own!

Original poster
ZackyVengeance · 26/02/2017 23:44

its ok, mn hq should sort this out

OP posts:
WaitrosePigeon · 27/02/2017 07:46

Threads should be locked after a year of starting. That's what I've always said.

MNHQ
LornaMumsnet · 27/02/2017 09:52

Just dropping in to quickly answer the question about having a zombie thread warning at the top of threads.

We did actually have exactly this back in the dim and distant past but feedback from users was that it was off-putting, especially to new members arriving on a thread, perhaps via Google, for the first time.

It made people feel like they couldn't or shouldn't get involved with a thread, it seemed. So we decided then to move the warning to the end so you only saw it if you were actually posting on a zombie thread.

We do see the argument for warning at the top of threads, too, but just thought you might be interested to know how that came about.

We will pass your other suggestions over! As ever, we can't make any promises.

ALemonyPea · 27/02/2017 09:55

Why can't threads be locked after a certain time, and only be restarted by the Op? A note where you post to tell people to start a new thread, or how to start one for newbies as well might help, rather than them rehashing year old threads.

People are getting frustrated by all the shit stirring goady trolls, and having to defend things they defended years ago.

Dawndonnaagain · 27/02/2017 10:49

Okay, I can see why Mumsnet did this, but heavens I'm not the only one who spent last night being tearful. There has to be a way round this, although buggered if I can think of it at the moment. (Up with dd a lot last night).

pinkunicornsarefluffy · 27/02/2017 10:52

I did it by accident when I first joined MN after searching for help online. I didn't realise it was an old thread and was advised to start my own.

I think closing them would be a good idea so can read but not post.

Original poster
ZackyVengeance · 27/02/2017 22:31

the trouble is when the thread is a horrid one in the first place. that has caused hurt and upset the first time round. what is the point in letting it be re started? all it does is cause hurt again.

OP posts:
cozietoesie · 28/02/2017 00:12

Why can't threads be locked after a certain time, Lorna? They could still be read and linked to. What would be the big disadvantage?

cozietoesie · 28/02/2017 12:18

In fact, what would be any disadvantage. I'm blowed if I can think of one.

cozietoesie · 28/02/2017 23:18

Indeed, can anyone else think of any decent reason why, given that they could still be read and linked to, threads should not be locked after a period of time?

MNHQ
LornaMumsnet · 01/03/2017 10:00

Hi all,

We find that in leaving threads open, people can return to post updates and such.

We really have no plans to change this at the moment - so sorry.

If a thread happens to be reactivated after a long period of time and is causing stress, please do report and we'll be more than happy to take a look!

PatMullins · 01/03/2017 10:03

But why not just leave it to the OP to initiate an update?

tribpot · 01/03/2017 10:08

I think it's probably a software limitation that MN are dressing up as policy.

Removing the zombie warning from the top is a bizarre decision. Some spammer decides to reactivate a thread from another decade and you read all the way through it before you get to the Zombie warning? WTF is that about?

If new posters find the Zombie picture offputting, by all means change it to something else, and have a pop up on Post Message saying 'you're posting on a thread that's 75 years old, are you sure you want to do that? Starting a new thread may be more appropriate'.

Original poster
ZackyVengeance · 01/03/2017 10:29

LornaMumsnet so you leave a horrid thread open.yikes

it has been reported. posts have been deleted. so mn hq are aware of it.
even the thread title is goady. what good reason can there be for not locking it once it is restarted and post are deleted??

OP posts:
pinkunicornsarefluffy · 01/03/2017 11:59

It would make sense if threads were automatically locked after say 3 months, like they are when they get to 40 posts There must be a way of doing it surely? Then if OP wants it unlocked, they message MN and ask.

As Tribpot says, the Zombie warning should be at the top of the thread. If it was putting people off posting on that thread, then surely that was doing its job?

SuchHysteria · 03/03/2017 01:10

I don't mind zombie threads being left open but please, please make the zombie thread warnings clear AND permanent

daisychain01 · 05/03/2017 14:47

It made people feel like they couldn't or shouldn't get involved with a thread, it seemed. So we decided then to move the warning to the end so you only saw it if you were actually posting on a zombie thread

MNHQ please please can you listen to your users. The above statement shows hQ still has not grasped the fact it is a massive waste of time and energy when a Zombie thread appears at the top of the list and you start ploughing through the thread reading it, which takes ages. This happens long before most people post!!! By then you've wasted the time, then suddenly see the date and realise it is 6 or even 10 years old!

I have just read through a thread on Employment Issues reading all the detail, only to reach the end of the whole thread for someone to say "sorry this is 10 years old, but is everything OK?"

Honestly please just put a big bold message atop the thread "this thread is over 1 year old, the details may not be current. Consider starting a new thread!".

Nobody will be put off - honestly more people will be grateful for the info than put off.

Otherwise people's will stop investing time RTFL because they will get fed up of more and more of these stupid Zombies.

This caters to your existing loyal users, not just new people.

Thanks is it time for Gin yet? Grin

Sparklingbrook · 05/03/2017 14:50

Well said daisy. I wonder what actual percentage of zombie threads are updated years later by the OP.

They are usually reanimated by spammers, goady fuckers or pervy men.

MissDemelzaCarne · 05/03/2017 14:52

Please, please put the zombie warning back at the top of the thread.

daisychain01 · 05/03/2017 14:57

Grin sparkling- I bet about 0.000001% OPs come back to their thread.

I have seen lots of threads (there's even 1 currently running atm) where the OP says "hi, remember me from 6 months ago ... [ just wanted to update you, my fanjo hairs have all grown back now ] or similar.

Most just take the line of least resistance, let's face it.

daisychain01 · 05/03/2017 14:58

OMG loads of GFs and perves out there!!

PunjanaTea · 05/03/2017 15:00

Threads should definitely be locked after a certain period of time. If the original OP wants to update they can start a new thread and add a link to the old one.