I was wondering why posting in a thread that's 2+ months old is frowned upon. If an "old" thread is bumped up because somebody posted their opinion then other members (some whom already have a post count higher than 10) see it and add their own comments, well that creates some discussion. Which is the whole point of a message board and something that's always been encouraged here.
Now I get the point of keeping new members (leechers) from spamming up the board reviving old threads so they can take a look at the goods, but keeping in mind that the site isn't that old, how old must a thread be in order to be considered it defunct or "tapped out" as it may be?
I say this out of concern since I'd hate to see potential productive members get shunned in their early stages because the rules might be taken a bit too seriously.
As I've already indicated in another topic, a thread that is two months old without any new post is considered a "dead" thread. Thus, unless something "odd" happens, most of those threads will be closed without fail.
That might limit the discussion field a little bit, but alright.
But if you keep letting threads die like that people will just make duplicates. And once the duplicate dies anther one will be made. Before long you'l have about 5 or 6 threads that all have the same subject with more than half of them closed do to being too old. Merging threads helps a bit, but you have to search for the thread to merge with before you can merge them.
My point is, maybe you should extend the deadline a bit. this forum isn't busy enough to have a 2-month limit on threads. As for the leechers who bump threads for the sake of geting to the goodies, delete their post and send them a warning or something. If they do it continuously then ban them. Seriously, we just need to be harder on the newbs is all.