John Pye

thelawnet

Just a couple of points:

1) some of the items are noted as 'no public viewing'
e.g.
https://www.johnpyeauctions.co.uk/Event/LotDetails/158559018/QTY-OF-ASSORTED-GENERAL-ITEMS-TO-INCLUDE-ELECTRIC-DEHUMIDIFIERMODEL-CD20L-VSTANK-CAPACITY-6-L-LOCATION-C0

for these items you have 14 days to return
2) for everything else it's sold as not working and you can't return
3) there is 50% to add on to hammer price
4) plus shipping (+VAT on shipping)

e.g.,

https://www.johnpyeauctions.co.uk/Event/LotDetails/158367411/QVC-DEHUMIDIFIER-MODEL-NOOL12BD023B-ROW-2 is a basic Chinese 12l dehumidifier. 

£55 + 50% = £82.50 + £12 = £94.50, and no guarantee.
You can buy new with guarantee for around £100.....

Pollycat

This is a 2 year old thread.

The OP has not logged on since September 2021.

soolin

Please be aware that this thread was 2 years old before being resurrected. 

Pollycat

I find necroposting very annoying.

It often leads to people wasting their time giving advice to someone who has no intention of coming back to the thread or who has already been given the answer to their question.

Most forums consider it bad form.

I think this says it all:

Why do people hate Necro posts?

Because it “bumps” the topic up to the first page, taking up space. Yes - that's one of the reasons why necroposting is frowned upon. Basically, if a thread is old and its topic of discussion has been resolved (e.g. the question has been answered), then there's really no point for anyone to post on it anymore

It's quite possible that there was a post above the one by thelawnet that has been reported as 'spam' and auto deleted. 

GabbaGabbaHey

I have to disagree - I have absolutely no problem with necroposting.

I would MUCH rather have all the information about a particular topic (in this case, John Pye) in a single place - with all the background information already explained - than have to go searching for it in multiple threads.

I'm also perfectly capable of looking at the date when any particular response was posted.

In any case, 2 years is hardly necroposting, is it? I've often participated in forum threads that were 10+ years old.

Spoonie_Turtle

GabbaGabbaHey said:

I have to disagree - I have absolutely no problem with necroposting.

I would MUCH rather have all the information about a particular topic (in this case, John Pye) in a single place - with all the background information already explained - than have to go searching for it in multiple threads.

I'm also perfectly capable of looking at the date when any particular response was posted.

In any case, 2 years is hardly necroposting, is it? I've often participated in forum threads that were 10+ years old.

Then you'd be shocked how many people do completely miss the original dates.

On another forum I frequent we have a few 15 year old threads, but they've consistently been active all that time.  Necroposting is reviving a thread that had previously died.

[I can see the case for it being acceptable and the case for it not.  Depends on the exact context, on a case-by-case basis.]

soolin

I can see the point of some threads being reactivated but generally I don't think it a good idea as information changes all the time and a new post might contain more accurate information rather than mislead someone. Things like our long running thread about FVF offers is useful, it means it can be bookmarked and new users will hopefully see just the latest offer- but then that's not a zombie thread as it is added to every 2 weeks usually. 

I think this particularly important when you factor in things like lockdown, drawing people's attention to a thread that was around the time of the lockdown means it is almost certainly no longer applicable, especially as the original OP has not logged in for 2 years.

If someone has issues with John Pye or wants to know what their T and Cs are then the latest information supplied is very helpful - but I personally think it is helpful as a standalone post- and not leading people to read something that may or may not have been in place during lockdown. 

Pollycat

GabbaGabbaHey said:

I have to disagree - I have absolutely no problem with necroposting.

I would MUCH rather have all the information about a particular topic (in this case, John Pye) in a single place - with all the background information already explained - than have to go searching for it in multiple threads.

I'm also perfectly capable of looking at the date when any particular response was posted.

Then you are in a minority.

One necropost can lead to quite a lot of wasted posts simply because people just look at the latest post.

One example is a thread started by someone who was going on holiday on a specific date and had some very specific questions.
There is absolutely no benefit in giving advice to someone who went on the holiday 18 months ago.

That is why a lot of forums see necroposting as bad form.

GabbaGabbaHey said:

In any case, 2 years is hardly necroposting, is it? I've often participated in forum threads that were 10+ years old.

Yes, it is. In my opinion.

Basically, if a thread is old and its topic of discussion has been resolved (e.g. the question has been answered), then there's really no point for anyone to post on it anymore

Regardless of how old or new the thread is.

As has already been posted, some long running threads have many posts each day.
They are not necroposts.
They are current valid threads.

GabbaGabbaHey

I am perfectly aware of the difference between necro/zombie posts and long-running threads. I've been involved with internet-based discussion forums since the mid-1980s, and the advice has almost always been to add to existing threads on a topic, whenever possible, rather than start yet another new thread.

If people are too stupid to read the date when something was posted, then perhaps the internet is not really for them.

Far more irritating, to me, is people who quote a whole, long, post, rather than selectively editing it down to the specific wording that they wish to respond to!