00:00
00:00
Newgrounds Background Image Theme

Dunso just joined the crew!

We need you on the team, too.

Support Newgrounds and get tons of perks for just $2.99!

Create a Free Account and then..

Become a Supporter!

Guide to Bumping Topics.

9,637 Views | 71 Replies

Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-24 23:42:32


I’d like to have one thread where this age old debate about the discipline concerning bumping topics can be settled once and for all. I’ve never seen it as an overly complicated issue, but upon doing a few searches it’s evident that a lot of you don’t get it.

Okay, verbatim from the rules: If you break these rules, you'll earn an instant ban, regardless of which moderator sees the post(s). ~ Bumping any old topic without a good reason and new information.

This holds. But what, pray tell, does it mean?
Seems pretty self explanatory, doesn’t it?

I think the main problem is people aren’t sure what constitutes a super-long bump or what constitutes a basic overnight bump. I shall attempt to define them and give examples of good and bad ones. These opinions are my own, so if any of the mod team wants to add to or dispute them, go ahead, although I’m fairly confident that the feelings are mutual since the concepts are pretty obvious. Anyway, this is part where you confused users pay rapt attention:

The two different kinds of bumps

Self promotional bumps: This is where you bump your own thread after X amount of time in order to have more people see it. Generally your X should be at least a few hours after the last post AND after the topic has dropped off the first page of the forum. If you keep your bump message unspammy and coherent, the likelihood of a ban is practically nil. I’d say if after three tries and your thread is not faring well, it’s time to give up or risk catching a mod’s eye for constant bumping.

> Bumping your own topic with bump messages every ten minutes or so will likely warrant a ban.
> Posting legit responses to your own thread is not really considered blatant bumping. Obviously, the normal rules still apply.
> Constant promotion of a successful thread can get very annoying. If you have a lot of pages allow the topic’s momentum to keep it alive. Otherwise, let it die. Stick with responding or adding new information if you’d like to see the topic moved up again. Beware though: it’s not too hard to detect someone who’s “responding” just to bump the topic.

The ‘Old Thread’ Bump: This is where you post in a topic where the last post was… a while ago. And this is where most of our confusion and complains arise from. I usually consider a thread to be stale if it’s past its lockability duration; namely, seven days. A month is getting fairly old, a year is very dusty and anything more than that is ancient.

But none of that matters at all.

When I ban people for bring back a topic from ’02, it’s because they posted something like “o yea me too”. Or they quoted the Original Poster (OP) and said “pwned!” or “well sure you think that now but wait til youre older.”

It all comes back to the simple statement from the Rules.

If what you post adds to the topic, there’s no reason to get banned for it.

HOWEVER, you have to be aware that it’s often hard to actually add anything to topics that are old, simply because the topic has moved on. The best kind of topics to bump without worrying about this issue are simple ones. Here’s an example of a two month revival that I was responsible for: http://newgrounds.co../topic.php?id=234064

IF you are unsure, include a DISCLAIMER. It’s not too hard. Say something like, “hey, I’m not sure if I should be bumping this but I think that this topic should be revived because ________”

If one of us are trying to find the punk who bumped the three-year-old-all-caps-title thread, and we come across a post that shows you acknowledge the age and that you’re aware of what you’re doing and why and such, EVEN if the bump wasn’t warranted we’re a lot less likely to clock you with the ban stick. Because a post with a disclaimer as such shows responsibility and maturity. People make mistakes, yo.

There’s always the issue where you’d like to have a topic discussed without the majority of people seeing the old first post. If that’s your reasoning, in the new topic you should include a link to the old one(s) and stick one of those handy disclaimers in your post which acknowledges the existence of the old threads and states your reasons as to why you felt a new topic was needed. Unless you’re obviously being a jerk about it, there’s no way that that would land you a ban.

Another point: if a mod locks a topic with a link to the proper thread, or a link to the proper thread is present in a locked topic, chances are it is safe to bump said linked topic. To completely avoid misunderstandings, upon bumping said linked topic say something like “Zerok linked this topic, so I’ll just post what I said in the other one here:” That way the ownership is on the mod.

I think that’s about it.

Recap:

SAFE TO BUMP WHEN

> It is your own topic and it’s been over an hour or so AND the topic has fallen off the front page.
> The thread was linked by a mod.
> You are adding something new to conversation (include DISCLAIMER to ensure maximum safety).
> Remember, the age of the thread is for the most part irrelevant. Use common sense.

Pretty much anything else is AT YOUR OWN RISK.

The best advice I can give those who are serious befuddled by the whole thing is to include those DISCLAIMERS. Same goes for any rule you’re unsure of.


Self-published fiction: Mostly Lies

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-24 23:43:29


Thank you for this information I'll make sure ill use it next time I want to bump somthing :D


"Friends may come and go. But two hundred pounds is always two hundred pounds."

~Henry Rollins

BBS Signature

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-24 23:45:46


Defintiely faving this for future viewage. Thanks!!!


Most Recent Flash I Voiced In! (UPDATED 6/1/11)

Most Recent Outside Project Voiced In! (UPDATED 2/5/12)

Add me on Skype: NGsonicmega

BBS Signature

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-24 23:46:19


Cooool. It was very nice of you to compile that.

They should include some of that in the rules. I didn't think it was very clear in the rules, and your writing made it much clearer.

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-24 23:47:20


Hopefully, with this guide, others wont make the same mistake I did.

the 6 day ban was not fun :[

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-24 23:47:54


Bump.

DISCLAIMER!!!
hey, I’m not sure if I should be bumping this but I think that this topic should be revived because __cocks__.


- ><--stick vs. sprites-->< - ><--flat beat-->< - ><--pico vs. sticks-->< -

BBS Signature

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-24 23:48:43


I Actually read all of that and I agree with it tottally.

It really clears stuff up.


BBS Signature

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-24 23:49:28


At 9/24/06 11:46 PM, DFox wrote: Cooool. It was very nice of you to compile that.

They should include some of that in the rules. I didn't think it was very clear in the rules, and your writing made it much clearer.

The rules have to have a balance between clarity and brevity.

If every one of those bullet points was followed by a chunk of text like this people'd be terrfied to read the rules. Perhaps something like a [read more about this rule] link following the bullet point could be implemented.

In the meantime, threads as such will have to do.

Also, you're welcome, all.


Self-published fiction: Mostly Lies

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-24 23:51:05


And remeber, if you do it wrong or post a picture saying "bump", I'll
fucking spank you.


R.I.P LIVECORPSE

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-24 23:51:56


Good show, Zerok. I've always been afraid to bump old topics, but now this cleared it up for me.


Sigs are overrated.

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-24 23:52:10


At 9/24/06 11:49 PM, Zerok wrote: The rules have to have a balance between clarity and brevity.

If every one of those bullet points was followed by a chunk of text like this people'd be terrfied to read the rules. Perhaps something like a [read more about this rule] link following the bullet point could be implemented.

True. A read more link would be great, but then you would need a lot more, for almost every rule.

If someone would compile those then it would help tremendously. I mean I'm pretty concrete with the rules but newcomers may not be and might want some more details.

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-24 23:53:16


i will keep all tis in mind for when i am posting from now on...

hey thanks for takeing the the time to type this all out! how long did this take you to type and how many letters did you have left?

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-24 23:55:42


Thanks, Zerok.
I go bookmark this topic for further reference and further linking for those special people. ;)


Tsukino Usagi of the NG /a/ {Sig by cast}

A ninja may be fast, but my dick is faster.

BBS Signature

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-24 23:55:51


I kept bumping will stampers white power topic and got it locked


BBS Signature

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-24 23:57:47


It makes much more sense now. Thanks, Zerok.

At 9/24/06 11:51 PM, Enoll wrote: And remeber, if you do it wrong or post a picture saying "bump", I'll
fucking spank you.

That doesn't sound as terrifying as much as it does arrousing. :o


Filler text.

Because this space needs to be bigger than it already should be.

Jigen made this sig. madknt downsized it to fit the filesize limit. Go team.

BBS Signature

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-25 00:00:10


At 9/24/06 11:47 PM, brainface wrote: Bump.

DISCLAIMER!!!
hey, I’m not sure if I should be bumping this but I think that this topic should be revived because __cocks__.

Cough:

At 9/24/06 11:42 PM, Zerok wrote: Unless you’re obviously being a jerk about it,
At 9/24/06 11:51 PM, Enoll wrote: And remeber, if you do it wrong or post a picture saying "bump", I'll
fucking spank you.

And it's not the GOOD kind of spanking either.

At 9/24/06 11:52 PM, DFox wrote: If someone would compile those then it would help tremendously. I mean I'm pretty concrete with the rules but newcomers may not be and might want some more details.

There's a lot of stuff going on right now. What with the update in November looming and all. The rules were recently updated, as you know, so another large change might not be immediate. But it's a good I idea, in my opinion. We'll see what time brings.

At 9/24/06 11:53 PM, the-man-in-black wrote: hey thanks for takeing the the time to type this all out! how long did this take you to type and how many letters did you have left?

No problem.

It took maybe 20-30 minutes. As for the character count... I'm not sure. It's all raw text except for a few HTML tags, so you can copy-paste the whole shebang into a reply box (without hitting the button, of course) and look for yourself. If you desperately wanted the exact count, find every instance of underline, bold or italics and take away 7 characters for each one.


Self-published fiction: Mostly Lies

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-25 00:00:54


We need a similar thread on the definition of spam. I've seen one mod post in a topic, contributing to it, and then another mod will lock the same topic for being spam.

Other then that, I think our mods do pretty well.


Bleh.

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-25 00:02:13


At 9/25/06 12:00 AM, King wrote: We need a similar thread on the definition of spam.

Alright then.


Self-published fiction: Mostly Lies

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-25 00:05:15


is this because of me?


mmmmm....sig......

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-25 00:10:54


At 9/25/06 12:05 AM, Beatlemaniac wrote: is this because of me?

Haha, I just looked back at that thread, as I completely forgot about it.

I can't speak for Zerok but this is a common thing so I would say not directly. I mean I see people bumping 2 year old threads sometimes.

And the thing with bumping old threads is, after it's bumped, NO one looks at dates. Not even moderators, and not even myself. It's just not an instinct. That's why this thread is important.

Oh, and Zerok, glad I was able to sum up your thoughts on page 3 :)

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-25 00:13:32


At 9/25/06 12:02 AM, Zerok wrote:
At 9/25/06 12:00 AM, King wrote: We need a similar thread on the definition of spam.
Alright then.

You should make it :P You're very articulate. I'm sure you'd do better then I would.


Bleh.

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-25 00:15:04


At 9/25/06 12:13 AM, King wrote:
At 9/25/06 12:02 AM, Zerok wrote:
At 9/25/06 12:00 AM, King wrote: We need a similar thread on the definition of spam.
Alright then.
You should make it :P You're very articulate. I'm sure you'd do better then I would.

I could be wrong but I think that means he's making it.

And yeah, Zerok's really good. Just by this thread you can see he's extremely dedicated and that's awesome.

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-25 00:16:31


At 9/25/06 12:15 AM, DFox wrote:

I could be wrong but I think that means he's making it.

And yeah, Zerok's really good. Just by this thread you can see he's extremely dedicated and that's awesome.

I hope so. The only thing wrong with message boards is the lack of inflection and body language, theirs more to understanding people then just by what they say.


Bleh.

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-25 00:23:39


At 9/25/06 12:05 AM, Beatlemaniac wrote: is this because of me?

Nope.

It's because I locked a topic called "your first kiss" or something after I saw a link to an older, relevant topic posted within. It got me thinking about how the OP might have felt and all the controversy about bumping shit came to my forethought and so I decided to pump this out.

At 9/25/06 12:10 AM, DFox wrote: And the thing with bumping old threads is, after it's bumped, NO one looks at dates. Not even moderators, and not even myself. It's just not an instinct.

This is quite true. I can't speak for the other mods, but I know I often go to lock a topic after putting a lock message only to find it's months old. =\

At 9/25/06 12:15 AM, DFox wrote: I could be wrong but I think that means he's making it.

I'm cooking something up. ;)

And yeah, Zerok's really good. Just by this thread you can see he's extremely dedicated and that's awesome.

Music and the BBS have more appeal than Classics readings and sleep at the moment. But I have been distracted of late and I gues I feel the need to keep... involved in this BBS that's been such a great source of something to do for the past few years.

<3


Self-published fiction: Mostly Lies

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-25 00:26:08


At 9/25/06 12:23 AM, Zerok wrote:

At 9/25/06 12:15 AM, DFox wrote: I could be wrong but I think that means he's making it.
I'm cooking something up. ;)

Thank you!

<3


Bleh.

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-25 00:38:37


At 9/25/06 12:26 AM, King wrote: Thank you!

<3

Tragic story:

In the middle of it, I moved my tower and it got upset and restarted my system.
Luckily, MSWord auto recovered everything and I saved what I have.

But the event destroyed my resolve and now I'm going to go to sleep.
So I'll finish it shortly-ish and post it when I find the time.

'Night.


Self-published fiction: Mostly Lies

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-25 00:40:16


At 9/25/06 12:38 AM, Zerok wrote:
At 9/25/06 12:26 AM, King wrote: Thank you!

<3
Tragic story:

In the middle of it, I moved my tower and it got upset and restarted my system.
Luckily, MSWord auto recovered everything and I saved what I have.

But the event destroyed my resolve and now I'm going to go to sleep.
So I'll finish it shortly-ish and post it when I find the time.

'Night.

That blows, big time.
Still, thanks so much for working on it, I think it's the only real issue with the moderating on this site. It's not overly huge, but I think it could be adressed.

Thanks, man.


Bleh.

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-25 00:41:03


i think any time when something meaningful isnt added to the thread they should be banned, self promotional bumps are the worst..


// Sig Makers // WWE Fans // Tumblr //

BBS Signature

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-25 00:55:20


At 9/25/06 12:23 AM, Zerok wrote: This is quite true. I can't speak for the other mods, but I know I often go to lock a topic after putting a lock message only to find it's months old. =\

I look at topic numbers for date estimations before I even click on a thread. 'Round about 572500 is when they're about a week old right now. We're solidly in the 576000's for current topics.

Response to Guide to Bumping Topics. 2006-09-25 01:42:35


So is it okay if I bump a toipic from two years ago as long as I have something new to add to it or should I just make a new one?