Doubting the value of the necroposting rule

[T.C.]

Among the forum rules is this section:

2.5 Necroposting and Necromoaning

Posting in a thread that has not received a new message in a defined span of three months is known as “necropostingâ€Â. Necroposting is often frowned upon but not forbidden provided that your post does not break the other rules in this post, most notably rule 2.3a. These threads may be closed at the discretion of the staff.

Additionally, methods that draw attention to a necropost in such a manner as to shame the poster are also frowned upon and this is known as Necromoaning, Necromoaning posts are also subject to removal under rule 2.3a.

I feel this does not belong among the rules because it is not actionable. How should a forum user's decision to post be influenced by the rule that posting may be "frowned upon"? How should a moderator's management of the post be influenced by the rule that the posting may have been "frowned upon?". The declaration of official rules is no place for so much ambiguity.

Also, the rule that necromoaning posts are subject to removal is either oddly exclusive or redundant. Nowhere else among the rules is removal of posts mentioned. Does that mean necromoaning posts alone are subject to removal? Alternatively, if all posts which violate Rule 2.3a are subject to removal, why redundantly state that removal under Rule 2.3a applies to necromoaning posts?

-TC

[sal_vager]

These threads may be closed at the discretion of the staff.

Seems pretty actionable to me...

This rule works for the majority of the members, necro posts annoy people, necro-moaning posts also annoy people and can embarrass the poster who necro'd.

Nit picking the wording of the rules isn't going to change it, sorry, just refrain from necro'ing old threads.

Closing this one.