BringBackFergy Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Mods should. It's stupid. If your not interested in the topic or think your username looks cool to simply post "in", your ass should be banned for a week. Let me guess, things are a lot more civil at the BBMB?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Mods should. It's stupid. If your not interested in the topic or think your username looks cool to simply post "in", your ass should be banned for a week. One can't help but note that you post "In" in every single post you make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LB3 Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 INdeed. Though I don't think he INtended to come across as INsulting, I find myself INured to the INcohate INsipidity of INbred INternet warriors like "It's IN My Blood.," Call me INsensitive, if you feel so INclined. Out. /thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkAF43 Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Mods should. It's stupid. If your not interested in the topic or think your username looks cool to simply post "in", your ass should be banned for a week. The idiots who can't use a search function should be banned. If people are dumb enough to start the same topic 12 times, we deserve to mock them by saying IN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 "IN" is the artless version of posing the rhetorical "can El Pegual own BOTH....". In the spirit of "belinda" and "stojan," I suggest we replace "IN" with "It's In My Blood." /thread Occasionally my obsession with the NYT crosswords pays dividends... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Mods should. It's stupid. If your not interested in the topic or think your username looks cool to simply post "in", your ass should be banned for a week. What should happen if one doesn't know the difference between your and you're? INteresting question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PortlandiaEast Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Can someone please explain what this post is actually about? What is the OP upset about? (not sarcastic, I really don't understand) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
It's in My Blood Posted December 3, 2014 Author Share Posted December 3, 2014 (edited) If you're INcapable of navigating to the last page of the thread and seeing that it is INdeed current, then maybe the INternet is just a bit too complex for you. No it's not too complex. I just think it's more conducive for more dialogue from other users of TSW to not be shackled to a thread that was started two months ago. I love TSW. I'm here everyday, posts or not. Im just sick and tired of people falling back on "in" in response to a members new thought or an attempt to start a discussion without digging and reading through two months of replies. Edited December 3, 2014 by It's in My Blood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gugny Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 I'm so sick of this "IN" crap,@. In defense of security, although his comments are juvenile and generally stupid, it's a pain in the ass to go through all the posts. I clicked on your link DC Tom and it takes me to October. Should a thought or new development be buried in a thread started in October? I think not. If the cost of starting new threads which are "currently being discussed " is too much, I'd gladly be the first in line to subscribe to TSW. I think based on the number of active members and ads supporting this site, $10.00/month should be more than enough. Please don't take this as anything but trying to improve the experience of TSW, a site I frequent at least once an hour. Do you have a picture of your sister? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Can someone please explain what this post is actually about? What is the OP upset about? (not sarcastic, I really don't understand) He dislikes the word "IN," and does so without a shred of irony with regards to his screen name. Beyond that...it's irrational, so not worth thinking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkAF43 Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 No it's not too complex. I just think it's more conducive for more dialogue from other users of TSW to not be shackled to a thread that was started two months ago. I love TSW. I'm here everyday, posts or not. Im just sick and tired of people falling back on "in" in response to a members new thought or an attempt to start a discussion without digging and reading through two months of replies. It's not the 2 month old replies. It's the idiots who start a thread titled "orton sucks", and then another thread pops up, Ej better than Orton", and then theres the Orton better than EJ, and it's the same discussion about stats and performance. it doesn't need 3 different threads, it's the SAME topic. so those idiots think that the thought they have is somehow better and deserves it's own thread, starts a new one, they deserve every IN reply they get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Bills Fan Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 In CBF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 I'm out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 No it's not too complex. I just think it's more conducive for more dialogue from other users of TSW to not be shackled to a thread that was started two months ago. I love TSW. I'm here everyday, posts or not. Im just sick and tired of people falling back on "in" in response to a members new thought or an attempt to start a discussion without digging and reading through two months of replies. Were the thought new, there wouldn't be an existing thread, and that new thread wouldn't be littered with "IN". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chandler#81 Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts