"Everyone here (if they have made any signifigant number of new threads), has reposted something at one time or another."
Amused One, are you a convert because of the MLK repost incident? :Q Hehehehe!
"I say GO REPOSTS! They are useful and they aid the community. And to all the 'repost stalkers' man, get a life. If you are seeing too many reposts then take that as a message to push the chair away from the computer and go outside for a few minutes. Then maybe you won't mind as much."
Oh, so let's get this straight: According to your reasoning, repost must have been done by the same persons. Did you ever consider the possibility of distinct people saying "repost" without any repeating more than twice? Maybe it's possible that different people at different times see a post but saw an earlier post of the same thing and then said "repost"?
But if you choose to make it sound like some people make it their profession, then you have answered your own question: It is only a select few that make it a profession. So why come complaining to the entire forum and with an accusatory attitude?
"Well, it bothers me when you lazy, out-of-shape, no-hobby idiots do nothing but sit on here ALL day long, read every post, and then can actually tell 8 days later if something is a repost. I post here often, but not half as much as some of you."
What makes you think there are a bunch of people sitting by the side and counting number of posts? And what makes you think that it's impossible to have a great memory where one recollects something that occurred whilst one was around? Does that mean that I must be omnipresent because I could recollect just one event that occurred?
I look at our dates of registration and you have relatively more posts than I. But I have on one occasion mentioned something being a repost. Does that suddenly make me have less life than you? It would seem to me that the logic to draw there is that I'm more observant or I have a greater memory. I don't see why someone should be faulted for being able to remember something.
What I do agree with is that anyone who says "repost" should have the courtesy to provide a link to the supposed old thread. Not every viewer was around that day and not all keywords are the same. The default search engine of AT forums does not have the search content option. I also agree that it's ridiculous to expect people to resurrect threads that are older than a month. It isn't a bad idea to reference a thread older than one month but of the same subject title. However, it is unreasonable to expect people to follow the old thread (at least older than month) by digging it out and posting in it rather than continue with the new thread.