rose_of_pollux:
Reviving the old thread seems to be the "tidiest" way to go, but just how frowned upon is thread revival?
I'm relatively new to being a moderator, so older hands Jock and Harrock may have a different angle on this question, but I don't think reviving an old thread is necessarily frowned upon if you've got something new to say on an old topic, ie: a new opinion, or some fresh information to expand everyone''s knowledge. Indeed, finding an existing thread to add to is generally better than starting a new thread on a topic that already exists or, as you say, leading a more current thread off topic.
I think it's only some particular
ways of reviving an old thread that are a bit frowned upon, such as:
a) reviving an old thread simply to add a brief "Yeah, I agree" type of post (often fine in a live forum conversation, but a bit pointless when a conversation's been dead for months or years);
b) reviving a thread in order to give an identical answer to one that was given pretty comprehensively at the time, but which you haven't spotted because you couldn't be bothered to read right through an old thread before posting;
c) reviving your own controversial old thread in order to restart a pointless argument in a picking a scab sort of way, rather than letting it lie!
These are some examples that spring to mind; there may be others!
But assuming that these don't apply to the thread you want to revive and the post you wish to add to it, you should probably go for it. (I promise we won't bite your head off in any case!) In fact, it can sometimes be nice to see interesting old threads reappearing, especially if there's something interesting to be added, or more to be got out of the topic.
