This. When a new post is reactivated by someone, responders don't always notice how old the thread's age, just the new post.I noticed that the other day. I assumed it was the result of a new member who posted a reply to a thread from 10 years ago, and then others joined in
This is one (originated 14 Jan 2014):What posts are you referring to?
Ah, I don't watch that thread... Thank you.This is one (originated 14 Jan 2014):
Where to Locate Shore Power Plug
I've recently been adopted by a beautiful CP 23/2. She was wondering where I should mount a shore power plug. Any thoughts?forums.sailboatowners.com
I did notice a change in the Xenforo behavior a few months ago that seems to make that a bigger problem. I usually follow the New Posts page, and the links there generally bring me to the first new/unread post in a thread. What’s different is that on really old threads that get a new reply the link now seems to go to the start of the thread instead of the first new post. I don’t remember that happening before. I usually end up reading a few posts and getting ready to answer before I notice the date that’s like 10 years old.This. When a new post is reactivated by someone, responders don't always notice how old the thread's age, just the new post.
it appears that the user "Urban hermit" is responsible for the 2 that I saw.
It isn't. Just seems to be out of place. However if you want to bring up an old thread for a good reason - no problem at all. What doesn't seem logical is when people answer a question from a old thread that is several years old - probably not relevant....I plead guilty. Apologies to all. I am new here. I'll be vigilant not to commit this mortal sin again. But why is this mistake such a mistake that it disturbes the Force?