Is it actually allowed to bump 4-year old topics with no reason at all?

Holy crap! A whole thread dedicated to ME.

This topic sucks. Let's talk about how cool I am.

Odin-without the old link in his signature, I would have never found Firefox.
Thats why he's cool. The end

You really should go around putting random companies.com in your URLs that's how I find a good majority of websites.

~3dfx.com
~websters.com
~encarta.com
~microsoft.com

etc...

You forgot en.wikipedia.org.

To prevent this topic from digressing any further:

The rules don't say anything about reviving old topics, so it's perfectly allowed. Just keep in mind reviving can be annoying, especially if it's done for no reason, or if the post has no significance. The latter goes for all topics no matter how old. In either case the topic can be closed. It's plain common sense, and it's applied to all topics, even old ones.

- JelZe GoldRabbit =:3

Originally Posted by JelZe GoldRabbit

Just keep in mind reviving can be annoying, especially if it's done for no reason, or if the post has no significance.

So why not forbid it?

Generally reviving threads for non-useful reasons is discouraged or (AFAIK) disallowed by the admins. Odin was warned after a few revivals to quit it but continued, so what he did was against the rules. And we're discussing about how to repair those topics.

Yep, It's: you can revive a topic as long as you have something useful that is relative to the topic.