Common Sense Rules for TSW

[Draconator]

In this software, I do not remember seeing anything that will allow you to get rid of post count for members. You can, however, stop the post count from increasing. There is a setting for each forum:

If you set this to NO, then post counts never increase for members.

 

I do not think that there is a way to disable view counts. Maybe with custom skins? You will need to ask SDS about the custom skins.

589996[/snapback]

 

Custom skins do not have any bearing on overall post count listing. You could go into the board HTML section, and eliminate the post/view count manually, even if you use the standard IPB skin.

[Draconator]

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]

 

Let's say, that you are crusing the net, and you come across a board about a subject that you some interest in. Say, that they have a thread that has, for sake of argument, 5800 pages, with just under 300,000 posts. Would you then expect a first time visitor to read every single post?

[Kelly the Dog]

Let's say, that you are crusing the net, and you come across a board about a subject that you some interest in.  Say, that they have a thread that has, for sake of argument, 5800 pages, with just under 300,000 posts.  Would you then expect a first time visitor to read every single post?

590470[/snapback]

Yes. Totally. Every word.

 

 

That's as ridiculous an answer as your question.

[Dan Gross]

Let's say, that you are crusing the net, and you come across a board about a subject that you some interest in.  Say, that they have a thread that has, for sake of argument, 5800 pages, with just under 300,000 posts.  Would you then expect a first time visitor to read every single post?

590470[/snapback]

 

Are you suggesting that we merge the whole Wall into one giant thread?

 

If I came across such a message board, I would say "what kind of weird wackos are they?" and go find another one on the same topic, one that actually used separate threads...so I can actually follow the conversation....

[Beerball]

This, coming from a guy named "Beerball".

 

It is certainly valid but is not enforceable. At least I don't see how it could be.

590027[/snapback]

tard

[beerme1]

tard

590482[/snapback]

 

That's kinda what I thought too!

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

Let's say, that you are crusing the net, and you come across a board about a subject that you some interest in.  Say, that they have a thread that has, for sake of argument, 5800 pages, with just under 300,000 posts.  Would you then expect a first time visitor to read every single post?

590470[/snapback]

 

Let's say your ass was your elbow. Would you still ask this stupid question?

[Draconator]

Are you suggesting that we merge the whole Wall into one giant thread? 

 

If I came across such a message board, I would say "what kind of weird wackos are they?" and go find another one on the same topic, one that actually used separate threads...so I can actually follow the conversation....

590477[/snapback]

 

Weird wacko's, eh?

 

Let's say, that there is another message board, that has much better organization, and lesser restriction than those proposed in this thread. And lets say, that that board which has been around about half as long as this fine site, has more posts and more members. Let's say that the board in question, is ranked as one of the top 1000 message boards in the history of the internet. Those who are giving grief would have to atleast conceide that they must be doing something right. Correct?

[Draconator]

Yes. Totally. Every word.

That's as ridiculous an answer as your question.

590476[/snapback]

 

If a link could be provided (since we all know how links are so important), to prove that such a thread exists, and you saw it for your own eyes, how would you react? Any reaction would be fine.

[mead107]

has anything changed ?? some people still do not get it .

[BB27]

90+ responses takes me about five minutes to read.  Do you people have to read out loud or something? 

590404[/snapback]

 

I have surpassed reading out loud, I just mouth the words silently. Sometimes I whisper....

[#89]

nice try Kelly I got to #14 and knew that I wasn't going to waste my time on your request. Not because I do not agree with you but sometimes you just can't waste your time reading the whole thing before you express your opinion.

(even if someone already said the same thing)

[Beerball]

nice try Kelly I got to #14 and knew that I wasn't going to waste my time on your request.  Not because I do not agree with you but sometimes you just can't waste your time reading the whole thing before you express your opinion.

(even if someone already said the same thing)

590719[/snapback]

You have violated the rules! A spanking is in order!

[eball]

Do the terms "common sense" and "TSW" belong in the same sentence?

 

(No, I didn't read more than the first page of this thread)

[Spiderweb]

"Teeth"...that's plural right?

590424[/snapback]

 

Except in West Virgina, Tenneessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Georgia, NC & SC.

 

In those states, "Teeth" is both pural and singular.

[Johnny Coli]

Tom Brady is a slightly better-than-average system QB who needs a top-five defense, an excellent coach and a clutch kicker to win ballgames. Also, he now has an established tendency (ie 3 times over 11 games) to throw INTs in the endzone at crucial times during playoff games. This year the Pats finished 4 and 8 against teams with records over 0.500, solidifying the common sense reality that not only were they not a dynasty, they are clearly on the decline, and Brady is indeed the slightly-better-than-mediocre QB we all knew him to be.

[Guffalo]

Tom Brady is a slightly better-than-average system QB who needs a top-five defense, an excellent coach and a clutch kicker to win ballgames.  Also, he now has an established tendency (ie 3 times over 11 games) to throw INTs in the endzone at crucial times during playoff games.  This year the Pats finished 4 and 8 against teams with records over 0.500, solidifying the common sense reality that not only were they not a dynasty, they are clearly on the decline, and Brady is indeed the slightly-better-than-mediocre QB we all knew him to be.

590797[/snapback]

But he looks great in the Visa commercials.

[Kelly the Dog]

Tom Brady is a slightly better-than-average system QB who needs a top-five defense, an excellent coach and a clutch kicker to win ballgames.  Also, he now has an established tendency (ie 3 times over 11 games) to throw INTs in the endzone at crucial times during playoff games.  This year the Pats finished 4 and 8 against teams with records over 0.500, solidifying the common sense reality that not only were they not a dynasty, they are clearly on the decline, and Brady is indeed the slightly-better-than-mediocre QB we all knew him to be.

590797[/snapback]

THANK YOU. Finally some common sense in this thread.

[IDBillzFan]

THANK YOU. Finally some common sense in this thread. 

590877[/snapback]

AND it was a completely original thought. Nothing repetitive in THAT post that shouldn't be said over and over.

[Kelly the Dog]

AND it was a completely original thought. Nothing repetitive in THAT post that shouldn't be said over and over.

590881[/snapback]

And that's why it's essential to read every post here, because otherwise you miss trenchant, searing, vital, thought-provoking, original takes on the topic at hand.