Shot Clock Reset or No Reset

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Another effin zombie thread (although only by 6.5 months) -- and again with nothing added.

And another wordy "look at how much I know" post that added nothing to the thread.

[ilyazhito]

You should give me the Jesus Christ Award for most threads resurrected.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

You should give me the Jesus Christ Award for most threads resurrected.

A better idea would be for you to stop trying to obtain that honor, as requested by one of the mods on the Chris Paul thread you revived.

[Camron Rust]

I really don't get why it is such a big deal that someone replies to an old thread. At least this way, the conversation history is there and you can easily let it die if there is nothing new. Otherwise, we're rehashing all the same stuff again in a new thread. Is that any better?

[LRZ]

Yes, a new thread is better because of the greater likelihood of the information being current and accurate.

[SC Official]

And the OP already had his question answered 6.5 months ago.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by LRZ

Yes, a new thread is better because of the greater likelihood of the information being current and accurate.

Things really don't change that much.

[LRZ]

Maybe. But case plays disappear, new ones appear, NFHS tinkers. Maybe not major changes over time, but current takes on issues are always positive.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I really don't get why it is such a big deal that someone replies to an old thread. At least this way, the conversation history is there and you can easily let it die if there is nothing new. Otherwise, we're rehashing all the same stuff again in a new thread. Is that any better?

If "someone" seeks further clarification on a point that wasn't resolved during the initial discussion, or has information that clarifies / changes a previous answer (assuming the "corrections" hasn't also been discussed), then sure -- open it up.

But just posting the equivalent of "I agree" is a waste of everyone's time -- and not everyone notices that it's a zombie thread so that generates more of the same answers.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I really don't get why it is such a big deal that someone replies to an old thread. At least this way, the conversation history is there and you can easily let it die if there is nothing new. Otherwise, we're rehashing all the same stuff again in a new thread. Is that any better?

This is not a big deal at all on other, similar sites. I know of a site that people bring up 10-year-old threads at times to either highlight something or make a point. I also do not get why this bothers everyone. The only issue I have is when you do not realize that some things might have changed, but not sure why it is always a big deal.

Peace

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

You should give me the Jesus Christ Award for most threads resurrected.

Well, I did say to myself, "OMFG! Not again.", so that's close.