Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:
Necroposting: The act of posting in an extremely old thread for the sole purpose of bringing it to the foreground of the forum to disrupt the existing threads is considered necroposting, and is prohibited. Extremely old is a subjective term, to be determined by the administrators. Threads that are legitimately, or accidentally necroposted in may be left at the discretion of the admin. Deliberately necroposted threads will be returned to the page from where they came, and may be locked if necessary.
The underlined portion is the important part, as it distinguishes between someone posting in an old thread from someone posting for "troll" reasons. In effect, it is that small part that really defines a necropost. And it would seem that at least one of the posts in question was made not to deliberately disrupt
front page threads, but to add a snarky something to an old discussion (that is, to poke fun at the fact that the suggestion of Wada's resignation actually came true months later).
A necropost is not the deliberate revival of an old topic, it is the deliberate revival of an old topicin order to obscure or otherwise bury other threads.
The question is whether the "necroposts" in question fit this designation...
edit: meh, what I said has really been covered already. I hope I'm not necroposting on the topic. :P Edited, Apr 2nd 2013 4:04pm by KaneKitty