ACor58 Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 If that's the case, why have threads at all? Why doesn't everyone just start their own thread for everything they want to say just to have their posts replied to? I assume, probably wrongly, that posters ask questions that they want the answer to. And not just to see themselves type. Put it this way: If you're in a lecture hall in college, do you want to spend half your class period with students asking the professor the exact same question another student just asked, simply because the second student wasn't paying attention? 590048[/snapback] We are not in a college lecture hall, we are on a message board. This type of thing happens on most if not all message boards, especially one like this where almost everyone has an opinion. What I am saying is asking people to read an entire thread before they add a post, while practical, is never going to happen. Starting this thread would be like starting a thread suggesting that the Bills trade for Ben Rothlisberger and have 4 pages worth of responses. Everyone would chime in with their ideas and ways to make it work but in the end it will never happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted January 31, 2006 Author Share Posted January 31, 2006 We are not in a college lecture hall, we are on a message board. This type of thing happens on most if not all message boards, especially one like this where almost everyone has an opinion. What I am saying is asking people to read an entire thread before they add a post, while practical, is never going to happen. Starting this thread would be like starting a thread suggesting that the Bills trade for Ben Rothlisberger and have 4 pages worth of responses. Everyone would chime in with their ideas and ways to make it work but in the end it will never happen. 590058[/snapback] I don't expect it to ever happen. I am not remotely suggesting anyone not express their opinion. UNLESS someone else has already expressed that exact same opinion and it adds less than zero. Sometimes you have to remind people to think a second before they talk. You don't expect them to always do it. You are not going to admonish them every time they don't do it. You know a certain percentage are never going to do it because they're freaks. You only hope that a certain number will often or sometimes take the few seconds it takes to read the thread and help everyone else out. That's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Personally, I don't like those ratings things, it's all pretty high schoolish and cliquish. And I don't know why two-thirds of the responses in this thread keep harping on hardfast rules and enforcement. I never implied or suggested that. I think they think they're funny. 590041[/snapback] I think perhaps there are two prevailing views regarding what a sports message board is supposed to be: 1) a means of ascertaining an objective truth through the collective commentary. Sort of like slowly chipping away at a stone until a beautiful sculpture is revealed, this camp wants each post to be its own unique contribution to the Truth that the thread eventually discovers; 2) an outlet for sports fans who, although passionate about their team, don't have too much free time and thus can't be expected to slog through all 18 pages of a thread entitled "Sherman to be named Bills head coach" before posting their idea about that topic. I'm guessing you might fall into category 1. I fall into category 2. I apologize in advance if I repost things - if so, please ignore my post (if you don't already as a matter of course). I try not to rehash things already stated, especially when starting a new thread. But I simply can't promise I will take the time every time I post to account for every single idea that has already been offered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 It's an actual setting for the forum at the admin level. It would apply to all users who post in said forum. 590047[/snapback] So, not something I could invoke, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 So, not something I could invoke, right? 590076[/snapback] Nope. You need to be an admin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gross Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 We are not in a college lecture hall, we are on a message board. This type of thing happens on most if not all message boards, especially one like this where almost everyone has an opinion. What I am saying is asking people to read an entire thread before they add a post, while practical, is never going to happen. Starting this thread would be like starting a thread suggesting that the Bills trade for Ben Rothlisberger and have 4 pages worth of responses. Everyone would chime in with their ideas and ways to make it work but in the end it will never happen. 590058[/snapback] So are you suggesting I and about 7 others start a new thread about why I think K-Dog's common sense thread idea will/won't work, pretty much rehashing what's been said in this thread? Then maybe we can get someone else to start a poll? Then 30 other people can start 30 other threads about different common sense rules that won't work either? Then someone else starts a poll on which common sense rule out of the 31 would be most feasible? That's the equivalent of what would happen with the Ben R. trade thread... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Nope. You need to be an admin. 590079[/snapback] 10-4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 10-4. 590084[/snapback] Who scored 10? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Who scored 10? 590088[/snapback] Popularly, Bo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted January 31, 2006 Share 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] Right on bro. You know what really bothers me is people who respond to the first post in a thread, without reading the subsequent posts, when exactly the same point was already made by the 6th post in that same thread. It really draws out a thread for no other reason than to watch one's post count go up. Really, annoying. It's also kind of as annoying as people who are compelled to quote the entire FFS post in their reply to say, "Right on bro." But I do see the validity of this rule, but have reservations of how enforceable it really is, even if people don't understand it. And, aren't you trying to limit our personal freedoms on this Internet site. I guess I should expect that from a lefty pinko. Oh, yeah, and I really hate thread hijackers. hey hey hey, look at the shiny object. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffaloboyinATL Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Right on bro. You know what really bothers me is people who respond to the first post in a thread, without reading the subsequent posts, when exactly the same point was already made by the 6th post in that same thread. It really draws out a thread for no other reason than to watch one's post count go up. Really, annoying. It's also kind of as annoying as people who are compelled to quote the entire FFS post in their reply to say, "Right on bro." But I do see the validity of this rule, but have reservations of how enforceable it really is, even if people don't understand it. And, aren't you trying to limit our personal freedoms on this Internet site. I guess I should expect that from a lefty pinko. Oh, yeah, and I really hate thread hijackers. hey hey hey, look at the shiny object. 590113[/snapback] Good post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffaloboyinATL Posted January 31, 2006 Share 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. 589834[/snapback] By the way, when can we start publically ridiculing and humiliating people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted January 31, 2006 Author Share Posted January 31, 2006 By the way, when can we start publically ridiculing and humiliating people? 590119[/snapback] They have already very publicly ridiculed and humiliated themselves quite nicely. But feel free if you wish to pile on. I wouldn't want to take away anyone's freedom on a message board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 By the way, when can we start publically ridiculing and humiliating people? 590119[/snapback] Now, ya moron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 By the way, when can we start publically ridiculing and humiliating people? 590119[/snapback] We stopped? I've got dibs on that dumbass meazza! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffaloboyinATL Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Now, ya moron. 590126[/snapback] whew, I'm glad I didn't mention the private beating option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 whew, I'm glad I didn't mention the private beating option. 590130[/snapback] We refer to that as extra-thread conditioning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dry martini Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 They have already very publicly ridiculed and humiliated themselves quite nicely. But feel free if you wish to pile on. I wouldn't want to take anyway anyone's freedom on a message board. 590120[/snapback] Normally, I get upset by the occasional confusion presented with a post containing a typographical or grammatical error. Fortunately, or unfortunately as this case may be, I've read this entire thread, so I understand the point being made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted January 31, 2006 Author Share Posted January 31, 2006 Normally, I get upset by the occasional confusion presented with a post containing a typographical or grammatical error. Fortunately, or unfortunately as this case may be, I've read this entire thread, so I understand the point being made. 590137[/snapback] I will change it. I should also suggest that posters at least casually peruse their own post once before pressing "enter", something I constantly ignore to do myself but will henceforth make the effort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BB27 Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 BTW, shouldn't this be on the other board? Or, at least labeled OT? Some people just ignore the rules... 590004[/snapback] What this guy said....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.529869a0a9afd197241cad0932282c97.jpg)
Recommended Posts