Question CPU and mobo comptability

[kgabris]

https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/amd-ualbany-chip-away-at-intels-lead.295628/post-22138354

check dis out!

I was moderated not to answer old posts... and whynot?

How's a forum like a database for questions... are you financial inequity supporter? I heard about this problem (that I replied) at a shop........

If you'd like, ban me from your site, there are so many others.....

 

[kanewolf]

https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/amd-ualbany-chip-away-at-intels-lead.295628/post-22138354

check dis out!

I was moderated not to answer old posts... and whynot?

How's a forum like a database for questions... are you financial inequity supporter? I heard about this problem (that I replied) at a shop........

If you'd like, ban me from your site, there are so many others.....

Why not drag up 15 year old threads? They confuse casual users, and the original posters are usually LONG gone. The "best" information changes over time. Using an old thread as a reference... Good use. That is why threads are locked rather than deleted. But useful NEW information to add to an ancient thread. Not really. By adding to long dead threads, you just add noise to the currently active threads that nobody will read.
In the case of the thread in question, DDR2 experience is going to be relevant to a very tiny percentage of the boards members. If you believe you do have some insight a new, clearly titled thread is the best thing to do. That way casual users can quickly skip your thread and someone looking for DDR2 info can find it.

Even THIS thread has a confusing title and category. Instead of posting to forum feedback with a clear title, you post to CPUs and "CPU motherboard compatibility" for a title. NEITHER of those are relevant.