This could be us if you weren't a chud.

>>22809659 (OP)
keep this thread alive for 16 years

>>22812846
i wish

anything is possible. there was a thread on /po/ that was up for nine years. might still be there after the great fail eariler this year.

>>>/po/547093

>>22812929
but what about the bump limit?
does necrobumping bypass the bump limit?
like, if the bump limit were 300, we would need to evenly distribute those 300 bumps across 16 years for the best possible odds, and hope the thread doesn't get pushed off at any point
but if a necrobump would work as long as the reply count is under 300, then the odds are much better

>>22812941
:O

>>22813073
a thread needs a dedicated cadre of strategic bumpers. It also take a really slow board. even if you only bump a thread once a week, it will reach limit in under 10 years. If you look at most boards, including /bant/, there are maybe a dozen or two threads that stay near the top and several dozen that hover around the bottom with only a few replies before dropping off. So it's dead threads that are bumping other dead threads off the catalogue.

A slow board that isn't being invaded by spammers could hold a thread for a decade on the catalogue.

>>22812846
Why