New group. You should read :).

[SoCalRedskinFan]

It all sounds very interesting and I look forward to seeing what the mods decide to do. Though I sit here and wonder what are you going to call this "group"?

Any ideas on that? My suggestion is "The Practice Squad." Any other ideas?

Oh yeah this belongs on any Redskin Thread!~

:dallasuck :dallasuck :dallasuck :eaglesuck :eaglesuck :eaglesuck :gaintsuck :gaintsuck :gaintsuck

H T T R

[Jumbo]

I'm upset. I purchased a complete set of used dental tools to go with my Johhy Slasher Action Adventure Cleaver Set when they asked me to be a mod and I have hardly been able to use any of it.

Plus I got these nifty jackboots and a trained leopard on a chain.

All dressed up and nowhere to go.

[Om]

Mr. Jumbo, may I interest you in something in a Tailgate?

[zoony]

I hope your right buddy.

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

c'mon man. take a deep breath, step away from the keyboard, and get some fresh air.

Say it with me....

"IT IS A FOOTBALL MESSAGE BOARD. THIS IS NOT A FIRST AMMENDMENT ISSUE. I AM NOT THE FRENCH RESISTANCE FIGHTING THE NAZIS IN 1943. I HAVE NOT BEEN PERSECUTED. THE ABSOLUTE WORST THAT WILL EVER HAPPEN TO ME IS THAT I CANNOT POST ON A FOOTBALL MESSAGE BOARD. OUT OF 1 TO 1 MILLION ON THE SCALE OF IMPORTANCE, THIS PROBABLY RATES A -2."

You're acting like you're part of the Peoples Liberation Front or something

Lighten up. If you want to post here, follow the rules. If you don't like the rules, post somewhere else. But save the drama fo yo mama.

anyways, I hope you do stick around because I suspect you're a pretty intellgent guy who has a lot to add... and you might just make a few friends along the way.

[JimmiJo]

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.

I hope your right buddy.

Excuse me, do you have anything in 'lighten the hell up?' Anything at all?

[Jumbo]

Mr. Jumbo, may I interest you in something in a Tailgate?

You mean the place where they think it's the people in the stadium that are nuts? :laugh:

I like that place, too, though. But there, when I'm in battle gear, I get asked out for dates.

[3DaysLatr]

I'm upset. I purchased a complete set of used dental tools to go with my Johhy Slasher Action Adventure Cleaver Set when they asked me to be a mod and I have hardly been able to use any of it.

Plus I got these nifty jackboots and a trained leopard on a chain.

All dressed up and nowhere to go.

That's the avatar right there.

A shot of Heath Shuler with the dental tools and the cleaver set holstered in bandoleros. He's got the jackboots on and the leopard on the chain.

Who's good with photoshop? Great job Jumbo!!

[LD0506]

That's the avatar right there.

A shot of Heath Shuler with the dental tools and the cleaver set holstered in bandoleros. He's got the jackboots on and the leopard on the chain.

Who's good with photoshop? Great job Jumbo!!

You want something twisted from PhotoShop? Rattle unsonny's cage, the dude is unwell but he can 'shop a pic!

[dcsmooth]

Yes, I do think it is a good idea; eventhough, I am being punished by this same rule as of 8/27/06. Now that I've learned (the hard way) I only hope to regain the privilege to post "new threads" again.

[dwills1]

This rule is subjective. I have been on this board for some time now, and have been banned because I posted the same thread title twice, but with different information. One was an original thread I started, the other was a washingtonpost article to back the thread. Maybe it was not the best way to post....maybe a different title should have been used...but I didn't even get a warning...."no new threads" for me!

If you are going to do it..be classy and professional about it...don't just waive your authority on people without giving them a fair warning..or idea for what happened.

[No_Pressure]

This no new threads group is a good idea. Sometimes the Stadium just gets swamped with vague post titles like:

"What if we......"

then you click on it and it says:

"Never signed Mike Sellers back? I really like Mike because he is big and if we didnt have him we wouldnt have won some of the games we did last year! Discuss!"

You just feel like slapping yourself on the forehead...that and the 27,000 threads either saying: "Why we will suck" or "The fans that think we will suck are jerks!"

[allskinz]

Can we moderate the creation of new threads? (like the mods don't have enough babysitting to do)..

[iheartskins]

This rule is subjective. I have been on this board for some time now, and have been banned because I posted the same thread title twice, but with different information. One was an original thread I started, the other was a washingtonpost article to back the thread. Maybe it was not the best way to post....maybe a different title should have been used...but I didn't even get a warning...."no new threads" for me!

If you are going to do it..be classy and professional about it...don't just waive your authority on people without giving them a fair warning..or idea for what happened.

When were you banned? Or is your usage of "banned" a synonym for posting a duplicative thread and being put in "No New Threads"?

You were on notice from the time you signed up when you agreed to abide by our rules. That you chose not to read them is not a defense. Ignorance of the rules is no excuse.

[dwills1]

"When were you banned? Or is your usage of "banned" a synonym for posting a duplicative thread and being put in "No New Threads"?

You were on notice from the time you signed up when you agreed to abide by our rules. That you chose not to read them is not a defense. Ignorance of the rules is no excuse."

The rules also so no profanity etc.. etc...but that doesn't keep people from starting a post. I'm not going to go back and forth on this one....no one that joined this board sat down and read all of the rules front to back...if you think that then your kidding yourself. If you did...then go get yourself a oatmeal raisin cookie with some chocolate milk. If I can't post a new thread ever...oh well....but to me the "fair" thing to do is give a warning before "taking away a priveledge".......

no I'm not banned...just unable to post new threads

[TK]

"When were you banned? Or is your usage of "banned" a synonym for posting a duplicative thread and being put in "No New Threads"?

You were on notice from the time you signed up when you agreed to abide by our rules. That you chose not to read them is not a defense. Ignorance of the rules is no excuse."

The rules also so no profanity etc.. etc...but that doesn't keep people from starting a post. I'm not going to go back and forth on this one....no one that joined this board sat down and read all of the rules front to back...if you think that then your kidding yourself. If you did...then go get yourself a oatmeal raisin cookie with some chocolate milk. If I can't post a new thread ever...oh well....but to me the "fair" thing to do is give a warning before "taking away a priveledge".......

no I'm not banned...just unable to post new threads

Check the time/date stamp on Art's original post in this thread. That was "fair". That was Global Community Notice. Enjoy your milk.

[gimpy007]

Not just a good idea, but a great idea. It seams as if we have the same subject written 20 different ways by 20 different people wanting to start a new thread.

However, I would think that it would be okay for people to start threads in the other "Forums" other then "The Stadium" where we seem to have less useless multiple threads.

Point is that we don't need 20 threads why people think MB should not start or why JC should, etc...

I think the Mod’s would do a great job of picking and choosing who and who isn't posting redundant, useless information. Well that’s my :2cents: on the subject. Take it for what it's worth.

[dwills1]

This thread just re-surfaced today. Who's to say that everyone on the board read it? How about not allowing people to start new threads only after they have read this topic? Obviously if people knew this was a rule or read this message...they wouldn't start threads with the same title....but I'm not a mod

[TK]

This thread just re-surfaced today. Who's to say that everyone on the board read it? How about not allowing people to start new threads only after they have read this topic? Obviously if people knew this was a rule or read this message...they wouldn't start threads with the same title....but I'm not a mod

And who's to say they didn't. How about people having the common sense to read a thread that's been started by a staff member that says in the title 'You should read'. If you go back through this thread, you'll notice how long it was an actively debated topic, just look at the date stamps. Or is that to much to ask from someone that's been a member here for two years?

[dpj0122]

It is a dumb idea and it is even worse because it is enforced arbitrarily and without adequate notice. But BFD, I just created an alternative screen name from my work computer. Who has the last laugh?

[dwills1]

"And who's to say they didn't. How about people having the common sense to read a thread that's been started by a staff member that says in the title 'You should read'. If you go back through this thread, you'll notice how long it was an actively debated topic, just look at the date stamps. Or is that to much to ask from someone that's been a member here for two years?"

ok ice cream man....I'm not going to continue using this thread for individual discussion...it was started for people to voice opinions...and that's what I did...it is what it is..

[Leonard Washington]

does this effect tailgate postings?

[skinsfan76]

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:

why? only people with 100-250 posts on this board have the ability to start informative topics?

just because it is typically the newbies that start excessive threads does not mean EVERY newbie is going to do it.

Art's proposal follows the innocent until proven guilty theory, whereas you are suggesting that all newbies be presumed guilty until they can prove themselves innocent, after some set number of posts.

and under your theory, what is to say that once someone reaches 250 posts, they won't go wild with excessive threads?

[praise_gibbs]

It is a dumb idea and it is even worse because it is enforced arbitrarily and without adequate notice. But BFD, I just created an alternative screen name from my work computer. Who has the last laugh?

:insane:

The Mods now. :laugh:

1. Each visitor may own a single registered account.

The ExtremeSkins staff screens and approves all new accounts. Duplicate accounts are prohibited, and the staff employs security measures to enforce this policy. Duplicate accounts will immediately closed (i.e., banned). Do not create additional registered accounts to bypass an issued ban; absent compelling circumstances, any attempt to circumvent a ban by registering a secondary account will result in a permanent banishment of all related accounts.

Just a thing of note: This is something, by reading through this thread, a lot of the people that are against the 'No New Threads' group are the ones that are classified under that very title. Cowinkydink?

[iheartskins]

It is a dumb idea and it is even worse because it is enforced arbitrarily and without adequate notice. But BFD, I just created an alternative screen name from my work computer. Who has the last laugh?

Unfortunately duplicate accounts are also against the rules.

[herrmag]

why? only people with 100-250 posts on this board have the ability to start informative topics?

just because it is typically the newbies that start excessive threads does not mean EVERY newbie is going to do it.

Art's proposal follows the innocent until proven guilty theory, whereas you are suggesting that all newbies be presumed guilty until they can prove themselves innocent, after some set number of posts.

and under your theory, what is to say that once someone reaches 250 posts, they won't go wild with excessive threads?

Why do people get so offended by this suggestion? The reason is, as you will see once the season starts, that opposing teams' fans will attack this board the week leading up to the game (and, should we lose) the week after and will do nothing but start flaming threads. In addition, some 'skins fans that aren't really planning to be part of this board, will come on after a loss just to start the "we suck" threads over and over again. But, I think having thread starting privileges removed is a good move. I hope it works out.