Art Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 Hi. I'm testing a new group. This new group will be disallowed from making new threads on this board. After posting this, I will be put in this group by the big, grumpy, meany Art. You will see what group I'm in. People in this group, like me, post threads that are in direct violation of forum rules. Either they do not use descriptive thread titles or they contain exact information previously posted. This group will be used liberally, but, not without limits. If news is breaking and six people post the same thing within five minutes, none will be punished. If that same news is then brought back to us three hours later, that person will be. It isn't too much to ask to ask you to look over the forum before posting and posting ANYTHING you'd like within threads that may already contain that conversation. I would actually like to make this a poll. Do you like this new group or not? We're still going to play with it, so, I'm not going to promise we care what the vote is, but, I at least want to SEE what you think. This new group can do EVERYTHING on the board EXCEPT post new threads. They can reply all day long, but nothing new. And only people who've demonstrated they don't want to do what's been asked will be placed there. Let us know what you think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinFan 0-16 or 16-0 Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 Hi, I'm an example of how mean Art is. He sucks. He's limiting my free speech. Why do you care what I say. I'm FREEEEEEEE!!!!!! Oh, what, I can say what I want within existing threads? That's kind of good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCsportsfan53 Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 I don't even bother starting new threads, anyways. Usually isn't a reason for it but I sure wouldn't mind seeing the front page a little less crowded. I'd be all for temporarily taking away a poster's ability to start new threads if they can't follow the VERY simple rules we have regarding that. :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 22, 2006 Author Share Posted March 22, 2006 JB and Toothdoc, since you voted against, feel free to tell us why. This is a good chance to provide feedback. If, however, you use the phrase, "Free speech" anywhere in it, I'll have to slap you . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzmuda Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 My only concern is that a poster is punished for his or her inability to recognize a similar article because of another poster's inability to use a sufficiently descriptive (or misleading) thread title. Other than that, Thank God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins11 Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 My only concern is that a poster is punished for his or her inability to recognize a similar article because of another poster's inability to use a sufficiently descriptive (or misleading) thread title. Other than that, Thank God. It will probably be reserved to people that are consistently idiots and post a million threads about garbage. I remember one person who started at least 30 threads after being a member for 3 days. By the way, I'm going to start a new thread about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xameil Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 hmm...a clutter free way to get up to date news...I like it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 22, 2006 Author Share Posted March 22, 2006 My only concern is that a poster is punished for his or her inability to recognize a similar article because of another poster's inability to use a sufficiently descriptive (or misleading) thread title. Other than that, Thank God. We'll be pretty careful with the use. If someone has an article with six names in it and only uses one in the subject, and someone else latches on to something else in the article to post it again, while the same article, that's going to be ok. Posting breaking news quickly will be ok. During high periods of activity, interesting takes on a similar topic will be ok. Most things still will to be fair . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImmortalDragon Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 To get into the group, do have to do this more than once or the first time you do it you're in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen-like Todd Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 We'll be pretty careful with the use. If someone has an article with six names in it and only uses one in the subject, and someone else latches on to something else in the article to post it again, while the same article, that's going to be ok. Posting breaking news quickly will be ok. During high periods of activity, interesting takes on a similar topic will be ok. Most things still will to be fair . You Fascist Commie Libertarian Socialist Pinko Right Winger!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 22, 2006 Author Share Posted March 22, 2006 To get into the group, do have to do this more than once or the first time you do it you're in? Honestly, my guess is it'll be pretty much the very first time. Take akorn22's post last night, hours after the SAME exact topic had been on the board a half dozen times about us being losers in free agency. He didn't even have the courtesy to PRETEND he looked around by lying and saying he did . He was just so important he could make a new thread. In fact, I'm pretty angry with him, so I may retroactively put him in this group to feel better . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martini Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 This is dangerous ground on which you tread. Have you thought this all the way through?? Wont you be doing exactly what you have been acused of so many times on this board? Remember these people here are fellow Redskin Fans, peers and friends. Are you sure you want to play "god"? You will have to live with the decision you make but it seems to me that this will only drive people away. Those who dont mind it like me will never know the difference but those who will have a big problem for whatever reason will leave and not come back. I dont think any good can come of it. Good luck with whatever you decide. :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimm Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 Sounds like a good idea, one question, if you are banished to such a group is it permanent or is it for a set amount time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hokie4redskins Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 It's a good idea, but not allowing people with less than 100-250 posts to start threads would solve all ills on this board. :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sailskipper Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 I think this is a very good idea, as it will cut down on reading things over and over again. My only concern is that people may be punished for posting a simlar topic as has already been posted, but withing that thread the author is searching for information not posted yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 22, 2006 Author Share Posted March 22, 2006 Sounds like a good idea, one question, if you are banished to such a group is it permanent or is it for a set amount time. I think it would be based on you as a member and how you handle it. If you understand, post in existing threads and not pout, it'll be a short period of time and you can PM any of the staff and say, "Hey, think I could come out of the group?" If you whine about it, it'll probably be forever . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen-like Todd Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 It's a good idea, but not allowing people with less than 100-250 posts to start threads would solve all ills on this board. :2cents: Innocent until proven guilty, my friend. This is a far more reasonable approach. Its essentially a lighter version of a ban. I'm assuming that a display of decent behavior while in the group would allow one to regain full posting abilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 22, 2006 Author Share Posted March 22, 2006 It's a good idea, but not allowing people with less than 100-250 posts to start threads would solve all ills on this board. :2cents: Not really. We've had guys like Andyman, Dinello and the guy who broke our free agency haul all with a handful of posts, but who have posted good information. We've had other new guys with EXCELLENT posts as they probably come from other message boards and understand how it works. It's not about post count that people don't get it. I mean, JB is the biggest violator. Ok, I'm kidding Jbooma, don't get mad . Quality posts can be made by people with 1 post or a million. Same with bad posts. A simple post count measure is not effective for long time lurkers who post rarely, or bright newbies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingGibbs Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 Wow. that's a catch 22 really. Good? Yes. Bad? Yes. There are going to be the obvious who deserve it. But, there will also be those who are reputable that will make that occasional honest mistake. So it should be scrutinized carefully and should'nt be use with a quick trigger finger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 This is dangerous ground on which you tread. Have you thought this all the way through?? Wont you be doing exactly what you have been acused of so many times on this board? Remember these people here are fellow Redskin Fans, peers and friends. Are you sure you want to play "god"? Mods are god. what's so difficult to understand. They write the rules, they pass along the rules... and they enforce the rules. That's the reason why the Redskins formed a merger with ExtremeSkins.... because they like the way the mods do their thing. Believe it or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 22, 2006 Author Share Posted March 22, 2006 Innocent until proven guilty, my friend. This is a far more reasonable approach. Its essentially a lighter version of a ban. I'm assuming that a display of decent behavior while in the group would allow one to regain full posting abilities. Correct. It's wrong to simply assume people with a low post count can't contribute. We do not want to paint a broad brush in that regard. And anyone in this group, as with ANY other group, including permanent ban, can be reinstated by talking to us. We WANT you here. Only people who don't understand we'll go out of our way to get you back in the fold don't make it back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjTj Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 It's a good idea, but not allowing people with less than 100-250 posts to start threads would solve all ills on this board. :2cents: I would put the number much lower - like 5 posts. Even andyman didn't start a new thread until he replied a few times. Anybody that tries to post breaking news as one of their very first posts is almost guaranteed to break some sort of rule. A very low post count requirement for starting threads could be reasonably effective with very little downside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frankbones Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 This should have been in place 2 years ago. I've been here 4 years and have started less than 40 threads, if that. Some newbies surpass that in less than a week. I think all new members must go have at least 20-30 posts before starting new threads. Also, to prevent a new member from coming on here and spamming 1 sentence posts in order to reach the New Thread plateau, limit new posters to one post every 30 minutes until they can post new threads. I'm sure I'll get reamed for these suggestions, but I think these measures will help this board. I belong to a board where I'm going through a 30 posts in 30 days trial were I can only post in existing threads and can only post once every 30 minutes. It sucks, but I understand why the process is necessary. I appauld the staff here for taking some measures that will benefit us all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twenty-eight Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 Honestly, my guess is it'll be pretty much the very first time. Take akorn22's post last night, hours after the SAME exact topic had been on the board a half dozen times about us being losers in free agency. He didn't even have the courtesy to PRETEND he looked around by lying and saying he did . He was just so important he could make a new thread. In fact, I'm pretty angry with him, so I may retroactively put him in this group to feel better . :laugh: thats why this is a good idea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McMetal Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 Can all New Users be assigned to this group? I agree emphatically with those who advocate limiting posting privileges for Cheerleaders, Waterboys, etc. This really would solve a lot of problems, I believe. Before I joined up officially I lurked here for nearly a year. It's important to develop an understanding and appropriate respect for the community, especially since the merger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.