New group. You should read :).

[dreamingwolf]

I agree, but instead of creating a new section for the senior members we create one for the new guys. we can call it the play pen, and the old timers can swoop in on them and show them how noob they are. kinda like sea turtle birthing, ya know they all start out in a nest and the predators pick them to pieces but a few of them make it to sea.

[TD Riggo]

Okay Art. You ol' thread-killin', free-speech trashing board Nazi!

I'll bet your skin is actually green, you have a home high about Whoville, and you have a "dog" named Max!

[JimmiJo]

Its not going to kill you to see the name "lavar" twice.

If we were only going to see name LaVar twice we could all live with it. However, under your system and with over 50,000 members we would have had three active pages of LaVar, and Ramsey, and Ramsey vs. Brunell threads. It is a big deal when good threads get bumped out by "LaVar to the Giants, NO!" threads.

I don't think the mods are being unreasonable in this. I suspect that if you spent a week trying to manage this forum you would be taking measures more stringent than they are.

[Art]

Okay Art. You ol' thread-killin', free-speech trashing board Nazi!

I'll bet your skin is actually green, you have a home high about Whoville, and you have a "dog" named Max!

Finally, someone who understands completely .

[Art]

I like the idea. People shouldn't be punished on the first offense. The offenders should only be not allowed to start new posts for 2 months. Then they will have thread-posting privileges reinstated if they can abide by the rules.

We're not even making them go that long. Most people put here have already been taken off simply by letting us know they'd like to be. If any of them are reading this they can confirm this.

[desertfox59]

Strange....this seems alot like an Idea I had before I was banned :paranoid:

http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=147166

...Anyway...where can I see the list? and if I'm on it?

[Art]

Strange....this seems alot like an Idea I had before I was banned :paranoid:

http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=147166

...Anyway...where can I see the list? and if I'm on it?

Strange, that seems nothing at all like this idea, to the point of being a completely different, unliked and unwanted idea. The people on the list have "No New Threads" as a title under their names.

[Abshir]

You really can't expect everyone to search the forum to see if a similar or identical thread has already been created. For example I will look at the front page only, if it does not have a similar thread to address then I will create one. I think one of the greatest things about this site is the content not the organization of the content. I have noticed in the past that the moderators and admin personnel do a fantastic job at merging like threads. Any how just my 2cents , keep up the good work.

[rvan1]

You really can't expect everyone to search the forum to see if a similar or identical thread has already been created. For example I will look at the front page only, if it does not have a similar thread to address then I will create one. I think one of the greatest things about this site is the content not the organization of the content. I have noticed in the past that the moderators and admin personnel do a fantastic job at merging like threads. Any how just my 2cents , keep up the good work.

see, that right there is the problem. using the search function, not just scanning the first page, is really vital, because A) the mods are getting sick of closing the same "who should we draft" or "who likes mark brunell" threads, people are getting tired of reading the same threads that add clutter, and C) everytime you create a new thread, it knocks another one off of the front page--- theres too much turnover, and good threads arent getting the appropriate time.

sure, the draft or mark brunell or lavar arrington or "are we spending too much in free agency" hasnt been discussed in the last few hours, but its been repeated ad nauseum, and everytime a new, repeated thread pops up, its just more work for everybody.

[Art]

You really can't expect everyone to search the forum to see if a similar or identical thread has already been created. For example I will look at the front page only, if it does not have a similar thread to address then I will create one. I think one of the greatest things about this site is the content not the organization of the content. I have noticed in the past that the moderators and admin personnel do a fantastic job at merging like threads. Any how just my 2cents , keep up the good work.

Technically, yes, we really can expect everyone to use the search feature prior to making a new post. In fact, we're pretty sure that's not only what we can expect, but what we DO expect. You want to ask whether Snyder is a good owner or bad owner, quick search for "Snyder owner" and see what was recently said. Want to know about the Beach Blitz, do a search for "Beach blitz" and find out if it's been covered. Obviously if you look and see nothing, ask, even if you've missed it.

The rule about looking over the board before you post has been around for a few years now. It's not new. Upon membership you agree to take a peek before you wade in. Regulars who follow most posts on the board generally simply know before posting whether something's been posted. Infrequent visitors should simply to a quick two word search to see if something similar was recently posted that may already answer their question or provide a place to chat.

The group in place now is an option OTHER than a complete ban or complete read-only action for violation of this rule. For that reason, it really should be 100 percent adored, because the options are worse if you're not for this group.

[GoDannyBoy]

If it cutdown on the clutter I am all for it!

[Hogskin1]

Technically, yes, we really can expect everyone to use the search feature prior to making a new post. In fact, we're pretty sure that's not only what we can expect, but what we DO expect. You want to ask whether Snyder is a good owner or bad owner, quick search for "Snyder owner" and see what was recently said. Want to know about the Beach Blitz, do a search for "Beach blitz" and find out if it's been covered. Obviously if you look and see nothing, ask, even if you've missed it.

The rule about looking over the board before you post has been around for a few years now. It's not new. Upon membership you agree to take a peek before you wade in. Regulars who follow most posts on the board generally simply know before posting whether something's been posted. Infrequent visitors should simply to a quick two word search to see if something similar was recently posted that may already answer their question or provide a place to chat.

The group in place now is an option OTHER than a complete ban or complete read-only action for violation of this rule. For that reason, it really should be 100 percent adored, because the options are worse if you're not for this group.

Art, I see your point here, and understand the good thing you are working to accomplish. I almost never start a new thread, so it does not really affect me, but I would like to point out one issue on the other side of this. I normally only look at about the top half of the first page when I browse the forum a couple times a day. A few days ago, I went into one of the threads that interested me. The first post in it was over a month old. The thread was several pages long, and was a pain in the butt trying to locate the start of the CURRENT discussion, which had picked up after a month of being idle. The earlier discussion was no longer relevent. This is clearly not a big deal, but I just wanted to point out a minor issue on the other side of this coin. In this case it would have been much better for first "new" poster on the topic to start a new thread. I would hope that if he had, he would not have been given the "timeout" for it.

[Art]

Art, I see your point here, and understand the good thing you are working to accomplish. I almost never start a new thread, so it does not really affect me, but I would like to point out one issue on the other side of this. I normally only look at about the top half of the first page when I browse the forum a couple times a day. A few days ago, I went into one of the threads that interested me. The first post in it was over a month old. The thread was several pages long, and was a pain in the butt trying to locate the start of the CURRENT discussion, which had picked up after a month of being idle. The earlier discussion was no longer relevent. This is clearly not a big deal, but I just wanted to point out a minor issue on the other side of this coin. In this case it would have been much better for first "new" poster on the topic to start a new thread. I would hope that if he had, he would not have been given the "timeout" for it.

Everything here is something we already account for. Dramatically long threads, threads several weeks old or whatever, we kind of reasonably expect will be discussed fresh in new threads. Trust me, the only people we're catching with this are people who essentially post the precise same news article that is on the front page and already merged a couple of times for the most part. Not everyone who's made a redundant thread has made the group. Most people won't. In fact, it's kind of hard to get in it and real easy to get out .

[rvan1]

Everything here is something we already account for. Dramatically long threads, threads several weeks old or whatever, we kind of reasonably expect will be discussed fresh in new threads. Trust me, the only people we're catching with this are people who essentially post the precise same news article that is on the front page and already merged a couple of times for the most part. Not everyone who's made a redundant thread has made the group. Most people won't. In fact, it's kind of hard to get in it and real easy to get out .

I think the biggest pro for this new group is the good faith that y'all seem to administer your new "power" with. It really seems like this new group is intended to catch those who are in obvious, direct violation of the rules, not those who make a so-so error or disputable mistake. Also, it really seems like a good way to teach those very new to the board about the site.

[CrossWalker]

Just wanted to chime in again, I had actually voted that I wasn't in favor of the group being made (obviously moot now as the overwhelming majority of posters are in favor of the group); but, after some thought I realize that when I first joined the site (under a different screename that I forgot the password to) I was able to find a large amount of threads right on the front page that I would be interested in replying to and discussions that I wanted to have with other posters. That's not the case anymore. I'm not sure why, but over the last year I'm just not all that interested in alot of the threads. Basically, I'm saying that the group is a good idea and thanks to the mods for looking at ways to make the board even better. Good Job Art, and averyone else involved in these decisions.

[Art]

I think the biggest pro for this new group is the good faith that y'all seem to administer your new "power" with. It really seems like this new group is intended to catch those who are in obvious, direct violation of the rules, not those who make a so-so error or disputable mistake. Also, it really seems like a good way to teach those very new to the board about the site.

Exactly so. The people caught by this are not people who appear to have made a good faith effort to look around first. They are people who essentially seem not to care and in many cases these are newer members. This group serves to allow them to participate and learn the community while also not doing something the vast majority of the community can't stand. Doing so enables them to feel like they are a part of it and enjoying it, rather than that they are being oppressed and picked on. We've had SOME of that expressed to us, but not a ton.

We do think we've seen a solid improvement in this area in recent weeks and we hope the focus on it the community has given now will help when the season starts and it gets busy again.

[desertfox59]

the thread that art and I are discussing:

http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=147166

Strange, that seems nothing at all like this idea, to the point of being a completely different, unliked and unwanted idea.

while not identical our Ideas are similar....i.e. both segerate the board in some way...what's interesting to me is that the same people who voted against My idea (which was in an embronic stage of development) on the basis of "We're all skins fans," and "we should never segerate" ...ect ect

voted for your form of segeration...that's telling.

Most people won't. In fact, it's kind of hard to get in it and real easy to get out .

This is good to hear....I hope it's true.

I think the biggest pro for this new group is the good faith that y'all seem to administer your new "power" with.

your "pro" will turn into a "con" when certain Moderators administer their "power" unfarily on you...I hope it never happens to you buddy.

[rvan1]

your "pro" will turn into a "con" when certain Moderators administer their "power" unfarily on you...I hope it never happens to you buddy.

well, thats the thing--- i feel like ive been here long enough to understand the rules and what flys and what doesnt. if there was ever a thread i started that crossed what the mods view as a poor thread, i think that i could explain to them the circumstances of the thread, and we could come to an agreement. not to suggest that people with a lot of posts are immune to this group, i just think that with posts (and certainly time) comes a board experience level that demonstrates that you generally know the guidelines of the board.

regardless, i dont view this new group as anything more than a training device for some of the boards less-informed posters who havent really gotten a firm grasp of ES yet. and im not saying they wont, i just think the mods are creating this group to perhaps "speed up the learning curve". and while it is an extra power given to the mods, i think the hours they put in maintaining this site give them warrant for such an ability.

[Art]

df,

There's NOTHING similar to your idea and the idea in this thread. The idea you had in your thread was also put forth here and generally discounted by most. There's no segregation whatsoever in my idea. We have a rule. We can ban you or put you on read-only for violating it. This thread discusses whether there's merit to simply adding a LESSER punishment to the given equation.

There's no segregation whatsoever, other than mildly limiting those who break rules. Your idea was to pull apart conversation and it was totally unliked. So, indeed, the people who didn't like yours -- ME included -- might like mine, as there's ZERO similarity. The only thing telling is you're trying to attach the two in some way and I don't think you appreciate what that tells .

[desertfox59]

df,

There's NOTHING similar to your idea and the idea in this thread. The idea you had in your thread was also put forth here and generally discounted by most. There's no segregation whatsoever in my idea. We have a rule. We can ban you or put you on read-only for violating it. This thread discusses whether there's merit to simply adding a LESSER punishment to the given equation.

There's no segregation whatsoever, other than mildly limiting those who break rules. Your idea was to pull apart conversation and it was totally unliked. So, indeed, the people who didn't like yours -- ME included -- might like mine, as there's ZERO similarity. The only thing telling is you're trying to attach the two in some way and I don't think you appreciate what that tells .

Well art if you say the sky is green and the grass is blue...I won't argue with you ....I don't want to get banned.

well, thats the thing--- i feel like ive been here long enough to understand the rules and what flys and what doesnt. if there was ever a thread i started that crossed what the mods view as a poor thread, i think that i could explain to them the circumstances of the thread, and we could come to an agreement. not to suggest that people with a lot of posts are immune to this group, i just think that with posts (and certainly time) comes a board experience level that demonstrates that you generally know the guidelines of the board.

regardless, i dont view this new group as anything more than a training device for some of the boards less-informed posters who havent really gotten a firm grasp of ES yet. and im not saying they wont, i just think the mods are creating this group to perhaps "speed up the learning curve". and while it is an extra power given to the mods, i think the hours they put in maintaining this site give them warrant for such an ability.

I hope your right buddy.

[Art]

Well art if you say the sky is green and the grass is blue...I won't argue with you ....I don't want to get banned.

And yet, you wouldn't be arguing, but, would and just have been for suggesting arguing would get you banned. You can always argue a point safely. You can never suggest you can't less you run the risk of ban, as that's a sure way to get banned because you've always been told to feel free to engage the topic.

Though, to be fair, there's nothing to argue here as you have no point. Nothing about your idea is close to the idea here. To even say so, probably tells me you're fuming about being dismissed for having a dumb idea that remains dumb to this moment, and couldn't keep yourself from making a point you didn't need to make.

Again, your idea was a bad one from the get go, as most people said and thought. This idea is entirely different. That's not even me saying so. That's the English language defining it so.

[DCsportsfan53]

I will say, there have been a lot less repeat threads in recent weeks. Whether that's due to relative down time and duplicate threads are waiting to explode at the first sign of real new news remains to be seen. Hopefully, this group is having the desired impact it seems to be at this moment.

[SkinFan63]

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.

It can't hurt. (Well maybe it can)

I say try it and if it's a disaster, then maybe try something else.

If it works, then "Hail Art!"

Oh and by the way, did you score the new Operation Mindcrime II CD yet?

Hail!:point2sky

[TK]

Somehow I don't think Art's a Ryche kind of guy.

[LD0506]

your "pro" will turn into a "con" when certain Moderators administer their "power" unfarily on you...I hope it never happens to you buddy.

Fox, it isn't a case of blind lemmingism to trust the mods to do their jobs with some intelligence and reserve.

It isn't draconian totalitarianism to ask (yes ASK!) that the members read the rules and try to kinda sorta maybe stay within the lines most of the time.

I've said this before, in posts and to the mods themselves, I support their actions and decisions to maintain this board and do what they see best to improve it even if it comes to me being scrutinized or disciplined, because that's what it means to take personal responsibility for your membership in this or any community.

You sound like you have issues here, ok I am not the one to tell you that you are wrong, but I would suggest you learn a new style of expressing it. This one doesn't seem to work well.

And on another point, why is it so difficult to look through the Stadium? Buy a scroll mouse for crissakes, zip down the page, look through the next, rinse and repeat..... I honestly don't find myself needing to use the search all that often because I find it quicker and easier to just look.