mead107 Posted January 31, 2006 Posted January 31, 2006 what gets me is that so many people do not go back 2 or 3 pages and see what has been posted . that is how ten threads get started on the same topic . in the past i have gotten a time out for bring all the same topics to the top of the current page . i do not think that anyone has the right to tell some one on how long or how often a person should post .if you do not like a topic ,then do not open it some times a smilie is all you need or a LOL . short can be ok and long can be to much . i do not like it when people have to bring the long quote down and take up so much space .
IDBillzFan Posted January 31, 2006 Posted January 31, 2006 No. The point was ONLY that when one reads through a thread and two or four or six posters have said the exact same response, or asked the exact same question, and it becomes entirely evident that if they would have simply read the thread they wouldnt be saying the exact same thing, the board would be better for everyone. That's all. 589909[/snapback] You know what's ironic? You posted a thread suggesting that people read so they don't have to repeat what has already been said, and in that same thread you've had to repeat four times what you already said in the beginning. It could very well be that the forum world is not quite ready to grasp the concept of repetitive behavior. Plus, it could very well be that the forum world is not quite ready to grasp the concept of repetitive behavior. In the end, there's always one kid floating in the water, face down, arms out so he looks like Jesus on the cross, and a teacher somewhere making you write a three-page essay about it.
stuckincincy Posted January 31, 2006 Posted January 31, 2006 Apparently there shouldn't be any laws or rules or standards or even unwritten assumptions to be followed by the majority, and the world and country and message board should be Lord of the Flies. 589883[/snapback] The TOS exists on TSW. Don't try to expand things with an appeal to other venues. Here, speak your peace sans fetters. Get out of line, start a drone-on campaign, start directed ad hominem attack, you get tossed. It works well as is. And lighten up, my very worthwhile friend. You have had a run of topics out of character... stuck
Beerball Posted January 31, 2006 Posted January 31, 2006 what gets me is that so many people do not go back 2 or 3 pages and see what has been posted . that is how ten threads get started on the same topic . in the past i have gotten a time out for bring all the same topics to the top of the current page . i do not think that anyone has the right to tell some one on how long or how often a person should post .if you do not like a topic ,then do not open it some times a smilie is all you need or a LOL . short can be ok and long can be to much . i do not like it when people have to bring the long quote down and take up so much space . 589926[/snapback] capital letters suck to. why have them around anyway. and punctuation whats with punctionation anyway has it ever done anything for you i know it never has done a damn thing for me and whybotherwiththespacebareitherjustthinkabouthowmuchspacewecansaveifwegetridofpunctuationandspacesthatiswhatwouldmakethisabetterplaceforoneandall
Dante Posted January 31, 2006 Posted January 31, 2006 The internet is the last bastion of freedom we have. Well maybe Sirius Radio as well. But everyone stop trying to regulate the wild west that is the internet!!!!!
mead107 Posted January 31, 2006 Posted January 31, 2006 capital letters suck to. why have them around anyway. and punctuation whats with punctionation anyway has it ever done anything for you i know it never has done a damn thing for me and whybotherwiththespacebareitherjustthinkabouthowmuchspacewecansaveifwegetridofpunctuationandspacesthatiswhatwouldmakethisabetterplaceforoneandall 589937[/snapback] you is so right
Kelly the Dog Posted January 31, 2006 Author Posted January 31, 2006 How about this-- You answer the thread and as you put it on the board there are three more there just like yours but -- where not there when you went to answer the thread in the first place? Some people are slow. Some people like to check spelling, some people get interupted and some people want to answer a thread and get things off there chest but not read through 40 other threads just to see if some one answered like they did. Maybe they don't have the time to do that, or the baby screamed or they have been up all day working and they want to relax for 20 mins before they go to bed or a whole host of other reasons that you can't indentify with so you don't care. This board is not for your personal pleasure it is for everybody's. Rules that benifit you because you are inconvienced are not what this board is about. At least I think so! Or maybe I am wrong. Maybe I'm just fooling myself. Maybe this board is yours! 589925[/snapback] I'm not talking about other threads. Did you read the post and the thread? I only suggested that perhaps read the thread you are posting in before you post. It doesn't have to be a steadfast rule. If you're in a hurry no one will or should jump on you for posting something that has already been addressed once in awhile. It's just a simple courtesy that would make this place easier to read and better to enjoy for everyone. Hence, a "common sense rule". Not even a rule, a suggestion.
turftoe Posted January 31, 2006 Posted January 31, 2006 A couple weeks ago I had to decide if my post was funny enough for you. Now I must examine the seriousness of the thread. Will it be ok if I just email you my post in advance? If it doesn't meet your approval, maybe you could edit it or something.
1gap2gap Posted January 31, 2006 Posted January 31, 2006 I'm not talking about other threads. Did you read the post and the thread? I only suggested that perhaps read the thread you are posting in before you post. It doesn't have to be a steadfast rule. If you're in a hurry no one will or should jump on you for posting something that has already been addressed once in awhile. It's just a simple courtesy that would make this place easier to read and better to enjoy for everyone. Hence, a "common sense rule". Not even a rule, a suggestion. 589944[/snapback] Oh so now you are going to dictate when this rule or "suggestion" should be enforced and when it should not be. Will you do it by using hence - your common sense or my comon sense?
Kelly the Dog Posted January 31, 2006 Author Posted January 31, 2006 The internet is the last bastion of freedom we have. Well maybe Sirius Radio as well. But everyone stop trying to regulate the wild west that is the internet!!!!! 589939[/snapback] Common courtesy does not impede freedom. i didn't suggest anyone stopping saying something new and free. I suggested the exact opposite.
KRC Posted January 31, 2006 Posted January 31, 2006 I think it should be a rule that if you are going to respond to any thread, you must read all previous responses in that particular thread. To eliminate duplicate and triplicate and quadruplicate responses. Even if the thread is 16 pages long. This may not be punishable by death or banning, but a basic unwritten law nonetheless. I think it would improve the board tremendously. 589834[/snapback] Noble effort, but inpractical. Hell, even the rules that are set in stone (TOS) are ignored, there is no way that unwritten rules will be followed. People want to see their post count go up. They want people to pay attention to them. Neither of which makes the discussions better. As mentioned previously, people start new threads (on already existing topics) in order to draw attention to themselves. This is either to voice their opinion on the same topic or they are in such a hurry to try to be first to post something that they overlap each other. Then there is the laziness factor (RMPL). The only way to slow this down is for the mods to constantly merge threads. Repeated offenders will be warned, then additional sanctions after that. That will whip people into shape, but it will add work for the mods (which means it will not happen). Dan Gross put it best in one of his posts: quantity does not equal quality. It is one thing to have a little fun. It is another to flood the board with the same crap over and over again.
mead107 Posted January 31, 2006 Posted January 31, 2006 I am just wondering how many pages this will end up being . This is getting long winded and I have to go to work at 11 pm . Should there be a time limit on how long a topic should be open ?
dave mcbride Posted January 31, 2006 Posted January 31, 2006 This is intended, seriously, to be a serious thread. Anyone putting a joke in here, or not responding seriously, should be publicly ridiculed and humiliated, and privately beaten for being a total ass. It will be a public admission that you are a total ass if you put a joke or a non-serious suggestion in this particular thread. I am asking politely. There are 1000 other threads to joke in. Please use those. I think it should be a rule that if you are going to respond to any thread, you must read all previous responses in that particular thread. To eliminate duplicate and triplicate and quadruplicate responses. Even if the thread is 16 pages long. This may not be punishable by death or banning, but a basic unwritten law nonetheless. I think it would improve the board tremendously. Please offer a serious response to this notion, if you have one. Or suggest another serious rule which may or may not be officially adopted. 589834[/snapback] no. if a post has 80+ responses and is filled with dumb, one-line inside jokes (as many are), you can't expect posters to sift through them. it's a waste of people's time. unfortunately, you're asking for the impossible -- for people to read every post. i certainly don't, and neither should you if you want to remain sane.
mead107 Posted January 31, 2006 Posted January 31, 2006 KRC ,could we do away with post count and view count ?
Kelly the Dog Posted January 31, 2006 Author Posted January 31, 2006 Noble effort, but inpractical. Hell, even the rules that are set in stone (TOS) are ignored, there is no way that unwritten rules will be followed. People want to see their post count go up. They want people to pay attention to them. Neither of which makes the discussions better. As mentioned previously, people start new threads (on already existing topics) in order to draw attention to themselves. This is either to voice their opinion on the same topic or they are in such a hurry to try to be first to post something that they overlap each other. Then there is the laziness factor (RMPL). The only way to slow this down is for the mods to constantly merge threads. Repeated offenders will be warned, then additional sanctions after that. That will whip people into shape, but it will add work for the mods (which means it will not happen). Dan Gross put it best in one of his posts: quantity does not equal quality. It is one thing to have a little fun. It is another to flood the board with the same crap over and over again. 589958[/snapback] True, and you're right. I just think that people easily forget stuff, and if you remind people to be courteous once in awhile some of them will remember to be more corteous more often. You're not trying to get everyone to do it, just more people more of the time. I don't know how many times I can say it shouldn't be a steadfast rule. The responses to this thread have been rather remarkable to me, even after being here for so long.
Kelly the Dog Posted January 31, 2006 Author Posted January 31, 2006 no. if a post has 80+ responses and is filled with dumb, one-line inside jokes (as many are), you can't expect posters to sift through them. it's a waste of people's time. unfortunately, you're asking for the impossible -- for people to read every post. i certainly don't, and neither should you if you want to remain sane. 589964[/snapback] Just a small effort some of the time or most of the time would improve the place drastically, IMO. I shouldn't have mentioned the 16 page threads, it's really more about the one and two pagers.
Kelly the Dog Posted January 31, 2006 Author Posted January 31, 2006 Oh so now you are going to dictate when this rule or "suggestion" should be enforced and when it should not be. Will you do it by using hence - your common sense or my comon sense? 589950[/snapback] No, but if you would read the post you are responding to you would know the answer.
stuckincincy Posted January 31, 2006 Posted January 31, 2006 The responses to this thread have been rather remarkable to me, even after being here for so long. 589969[/snapback] Good.
.thumb.jpg.529869a0a9afd197241cad0932282c97.jpg)
Recommended Posts