Ancient threads: why not to replay?

I see all the time people replaying to old threads and others who are saying it was wrong... so when is a thread considered as dead and why is it wrong to replay to a two or more years old thread?

Would like to know also.
Although i haven't "bumped" any very old threads but still curious.


For example many people do not like to create new threads every day, instead they ask their help in old thread or they just have to something useful to add.


I don't like spamming forum with my questions.

While not technically wrong, why bother responding to a thread that is old? Chances are the OP already has discovered the answer.

If you need to find out the answer to the old question, then just post a new question. That way, folks answering can answer it in a current context without having to re-read all the old replies (which may no longer apply since the programming environments may be out of date).

Btw, by 'old' I'm referring to threads that are older than 6 to 12 months. That's my definition anyway and I'm sticking to it. :-)

What if someone is searching for a succinct term in the subject line or body, and lands on the old thread?

It would be nice if that thread were resolved, so that an answer can be found by people other than the original poster.

I don't like unanswered threads that have a clear subject or content, that can be found with key words in a search.
A complete thread can be more helpful over time, as it can be re-read by visitors/members, without further comments.

If the subject line and content was poorly related to the answer to begin with, then I guess a new thread could be created with a more pertaining subject line, and hopefully an answer.:)

A perfect example of why not to reply to an old thread.

http://www.codeguru.com/forum/showthread.php?t=219234

and here a counter-example why one should resurrect old threads

http://www.codeguru.com/forum/showthread.php?t=459972

@Arjay: I think you've pasted the wrong link, because both posts are dated today