Old Topics brought back to life.
This has been happening recently on the LA board. People have been restarting older topics, 2-5 years old. Why even bother? What if the mods locked all threads after 12 months?
Restarting older topics don't really add much. Things do change quickly, especially in LA.
There's an especially ridiculous example of this right now, where Dave Feldman posted a question in 1999(!) and someone just replied to ask the useless question "Isn't Zankou Armenian?" I'd guess that Dave has found his birthday restaurant by now.
Another topic is Tito's tacos brought back to life from 2001. The thing about that is that there was a recent post about Tito's comparing it to Cinco De Mayo. Why didn't that person reply about Tito's in that thread?
Also a very good poster, Wonginator replied to a thread from 2002!!!! Why bother??? Just start a new thread with your review.
re: reality check
I'm not sure it was him, but a poster there just unearthed the mystery and I've almost been caught by it too...
The 'problem' is that the search function defaults to relevance instead of date. In fact, the date in the search fuction results is REALLY small. Like I said, I once almost got caught responding to a post from 5 years ago myself until I noticed a reference to a long closed restaurant and realized the date of the post.
Since then I've searched and sorted by date. Perhaps that should be the new default.
I disagree. I think the resurrection of old topics is a good thing, because lots of very chowish wisdom was imparted there. If a place is now closed or has gone downhill, that's where it should be indicated, to collate all the knowledge in one place.
Kudos to Chowhound for breathing life into discussions we thought were long gone! :-)
re: Covert Ops
Sorry but I think restarting an old topic is just a waste. If a place has closed it's much better to start a new thread for example
Tito's Is now Closed Or Tito's has moved. Or Tito's has greatly improved.
Posting something like that in an older topic will get lost, especially if that topic had a lot of posts.
Okay, I'm sorry, but that's really funny!! Helllllooooooo from the past future chowhounders!!
Seriously though, why get so uptight about it? There was a thread a while back that several of us responded to before someone realized that it was an old topic! It was just a mistake, but still brought up some new, good points. Besides, it's not like you can delete your post after you've posted. And weren't there phantom old posts popping up without anyone posting new to it?
If it's a time sensitive question, then it is pointless to resuscitate.
If it's a question that is still relevant, post away. I find it interesting to see how some things don't change much.
Why not add to an old thread? I went hunting and all anyone ever posted about was Empress for dim sum in Denver. I just went to one (Super Star on W. Alameda) that lots of locals know about but I didn't turn up on the chowhound board. So I posted it. And I'd say it's still good info even if no one had bothered to comment on that particular thread about Asian food in Denver in a while. OK, a long while.
I posted this exact comment last week about the Los Angeles board:
Not sure what should be done about it. Perhaps over time it will stop.
It's made me be more careful about responding to posts. Now I just check the date, especially if a juicy topic with lots of replies rises to the surface, before I contribute to it staying at the surface.
I think it's part of growing pains.
If all the topics that came back up were like Thi on Roscoes: http://www.chowhound.com/topics/show/... or the post about offal sausage from Burke & Wells (An Excremental Encounter: http://www.chowhound.com/topics/show/...) (both of which have been transplanted to the new Chowhound.com) I'd have no problem with them. There is certainly a trove of great food writing and brilliant tips buried in the chowhound archives. I just wish that that which was sucked up from the past were those posts worthy of being resurrected.
(The link doesn't seem to be working on the Burke and Wells piece. You can cut and paste it, or search "excremental" on the International board, and you will find it.)
I find it odd that many of you don't like the idea of a history of posts on a particular restaurant. It is very instructive to post to an old thread to mention whether the restaurant is still just as good/better/no longer good.