Thread:RockFaceMonsta/@comment-30076690-20190316030744/@comment-30076690-20190316164946

The idea behind necroposting is that in some posts there is no value in adding extra information. This could be for several reasons such as: All these might seem quite subjective, but I guess the spirit of the users from the site might affect its rules and the way they are handled. But the main point is that some users (an enough relevant number) just continue posting in those posts without any value.
 * The post was started by a user that asked for specific help and already resolved the issue.
 * The post was started by a user that asked for specific help and is unresolved. Although there is no resolution the post is old enough (there seems to be a one month rule) that the original poster won't need the help anymore.
 * The subject is not relevant anymore. For example, the topic is outdated.

What makes the difference between a common-style forum and a Q&A site is the distinction between answers and comments. Without this difference the post can become unmanegable. The reader has no efficient way to differentiate between useful/not-useful information. In Stack Exchange sites the importance and relevance is represented in answers and comments (comments sometimes can end up in discussions that go away from the main topic). So topics can get complex enough that it might be a good idea to ban posting on old posts without adding any value. Some forums ban any necroposting, some are more flexible, some permit opening new posts about already discussed topics... it probably depends on the value the users provide as a whole.

and yes i specifically sought out an answer on some other forum so that I didn't have to do it myself