I'm sure many of us have seen this happen:
- Thread gets created.
- Discussion ensues; members post comments.
- Members lose specific interest in the thread topic and or the topic's "current events" pertinence wanes.
- Time passes.
- A member "rediscovers" the thread and finds the topic pertinent, perhaps because the topic is "timeless" or because some new current events have given it renewed germanity/gravitas.
- Thread gets closed on account of a moderator deeming it "necro'd."
That a long-ago created thread topic was created a long time ago and hasn't for a long time been posted-in seems a lame reason to summarily close the thread.
It'd be one thing were there a policy whereby all threads, upon receiving no posting activity after a specified period after its last post, were closed. But that's not what happens. What happens is an "old" thread gets posted in and a moderator discovers such and closes it, declaring that s/he did so because the thread was, so-called "necro'd."
I don't know about you, but that approach to closing threads suggests that the moderator had a vendetta against the member who made the new/recent post or against the OP-er of the thread or perhaps against the topic itself. And I certainly don't understand why mods would close a thread, thereby forcing members to create a new thread that essentially duplicates an existing one, no matter how long ago the existing one was created.
Edit:
The only forum section whereof I've noticed moderators are vigilant about closing threads is the Feedback/Suggestion forum. It appears mods are quick to shut down threads that discuss forum moderation.
Thread closed.