And why is a thread from 2010 being bumped? Is there some new information of relevance? Originally Posted by FancyinheelsRelevance? We don't need no stincking relevance.
I know it was started in 2009. I was basing my comment on the date of the last post in 2010. And as far as the rules go, the pertinent guideline:Probably not.
#13 - In our review forums, be mindful of the 'maturity' of threads you are posting to, ie. the date of the last item posted. We ask that you refrain from posting to a review in which the last post was made 30 or more days ago. Some exceptions may apply if you are providing relevant, valuable or updated information about the provider, but as a general rule of thumb, this can best be accomplished by writing a new review altogether and avoiding the bumping of old ones. This applies to our review forums, in particular, as discussion threads are often allowed to flow for an unspecified length of time.
Since it's not a review, yes, it could run eternal, but I agree with BJ. (Well, I ALWAYS agree with a BJ. ) Wouldn't an updated discussion (link to this thread, if you must) be taken more seriously IF there's some point with at least a modicum of validity to be made?
Surely dearhunter has gone through several sluts by now.
Originally Posted by Fancyinheels