stevenaa Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 Great idea. I made a post last week that would likely have gotten me placed in "The Group". No worries though. I've been around long enough to know the mods are fair. I would have simply PM'd a mod and let them know I searched on the title of the article before posting. The article, it turns out, originated from AP, so the varying news sources used their own titles. That is why my search failed. I'm confident the mods would taken me at my word and removed me from "The Group" . In the event someone is placed there in error, I'm confident they will be quickly removed. This is simply a tool to make this forum a more enjoyable place to be. I spend way too much time here, so any improvements are welcomed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
praise_gibbs Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 I like the idea! I learned to not try to "break" breaking news because, I know that before I click on the submit reply button, it has already been posted atleast 3+ times. Using this such feature, I honestly think that it will further educate other members on this board to use the search button as if it was their own personal possession. Though, I understand how it would be used as needed and thats why I am in favor of it. This would be Extremeskins version of the EASY BUTTON as it would help make this board even easier to read and discuss our beloved Redskins! I commend the way this board has been progressing and I am thankful for all of the work that goes into it. :applause: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 22, 2006 Author Share Posted March 22, 2006 Great idea.I made a post last week that would likely have gotten me placed in "The Group". No worries though. I've been around long enough to know the mods are fair. I would have simply PM'd a mod and let them know I searched on the title of the article before posting. The article, it turns out, originated from AP, so the varying news sources used their own titles. That is why my search failed. I'm confident the mods would taken me at my word and removed me from "The Group" . In the event someone is placed there in error, I'm confident they will be quickly removed. This is simply a tool to make this forum a more enjoyable place to be. I spend way too much time here, so any improvements are welcomed. Indeed so. Actually you wouldn't have been moved into that group for that post. We understand honest mistakes. We don't understand lazy ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westbrook36 Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 Art, you have my permission to go forward with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowGixxer Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 i know ive posted several times on this subject, but its apparent i havent been very clear in describing why im opposed. so i will attempt one final time. lets say a major event takes place, the signing of a new player for example, and 3 or 4 threads start minutes after its announced. no big deal, the threads are merged and everyones ok with it. now a few hours go by, hundreds of posts are added to the mega thread. members read every post trying to get every bit of info that they can on the subject, i know thats why i come to this board. but then a single member has an original idea, maybe its hours after the big news, maybe its the following day. he wants more specific info, he has a slightly different question. to him its important, he doesnt want it lost in the sea of posts from the other threads. it might be missed. some of the members scorn him for creating the post, he should have used the search function. but thats the point, it was important enough to him that even tho there were posts already about the subject, he fealt it deserved its own thread. some will say that this poster just thinks too highly of himself, has to see his name in lights so to speak. i dont see it that way. sometimes the threads get too big, sometimes a person might want a quick response to something thats on their mind. with this new idea, it could be decided by a moderator, that this person didnt follow the rules. he loses the ability to create new threads solely based on your opinion that what he posted wasnt worth being said. i know you would try to be objective, and not pull the trigger to fast. its just that it has to happen only one time to an undeserving individual to be unfair. seriously, is creating a post, even tho you dont like it or feel its excessive really that big of deal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 Great idea.I made a post last week that would likely have gotten me placed in "The Group". No worries though. I've been around long enough to know the mods are fair. I would have simply PM'd a mod and let them know I searched on the title of the article before posting. The article, it turns out, originated from AP, so the varying news sources used their own titles. That is why my search failed. I'm confident the mods would taken me at my word and removed me from "The Group" . In the event someone is placed there in error, I'm confident they will be quickly removed. I remember that. You even promptly apologized for it. You'd have been fine, in my book for that. It's not your fault that the person that originally posted it didn't follow some combo of Rules 8 & 10. Therefore leading to no search results because they didn't title the thread as directed in #10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colesfan05 Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 Is it possible to make temporary sub-forums. Say there is a new player signing, there will be many different threads discussing this player. Would it be possible to group all of those threads into a sub-forum where different ideas could be brought up on the same main topic, so that these ideas could be adressed in their own thread. This might be able to prevent original ideas from being criticized as already talked and from being overlooked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenaa Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 i know ive posted several times on this subject, but its apparent i havent been very clear in describing why im opposed. so i will attempt one final time. lets say a major event takes place, the signing of a new player for example, and 3 or 4 threads start minutes after its announced. no big deal, the threads are merged and everyones ok with it. now a few hours go by, hundreds of posts are added to the mega thread. members read every post trying to get every bit of info that they can on the subject, i know thats why i come to this board. but then a single member has an original idea, maybe its hours after the big news, maybe its the following day. he wants more specific info, he has a slightly different question. to him its important, he doesnt want it lost in the sea of posts from the other threads. it might be missed. some of the members scorn him for creating the post, he should have used the search function. but thats the point, it was important enough to him that even tho there were posts already about the subject, he fealt it deserved its own thread. some will say that this poster just thinks too highly of himself, has to see his name in lights so to speak. i dont see it that way. sometimes the threads get too big, sometimes a person might want a quick response to something thats on their mind. with this new idea, it could be decided by a moderator, that this person didnt follow the rules. he loses the ability to create new threads solely based on your opinion that what he posted wasnt worth being said. i know you would try to be objective, and not pull the trigger to fast. its just that it has to happen only one time to an undeserving individual to be unfair. seriously, is creating a post, even tho you dont like it or feel its excessive really that big of deal? If a thread starter has an original idea that doesn't fit in an existing thread, he/she will be fine. That is the point. A lot of very fine posts get pushed into oblivion by multiple posts on the same topic. Art has stated numerous times that no will be censored for content. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 22, 2006 Author Share Posted March 22, 2006 i know ive posted several times on this subject, but its apparent i havent been very clear in describing why im opposed. so i will attempt one final time. lets say a major event takes place, the signing of a new player for example, and 3 or 4 threads start minutes after its announced. no big deal, the threads are merged and everyones ok with it. now a few hours go by, hundreds of posts are added to the mega thread. members read every post trying to get every bit of info that they can on the subject, i know thats why i come to this board. but then a single member has an original idea, maybe its hours after the big news, maybe its the following day. he wants more specific info, he has a slightly different question. to him its important, he doesnt want it lost in the sea of posts from the other threads. it might be missed. some of the members scorn him for creating the post, he should have used the search function. but thats the point, it was important enough to him that even tho there were posts already about the subject, he fealt it deserved its own thread. some will say that this poster just thinks too highly of himself, has to see his name in lights so to speak. i dont see it that way. sometimes the threads get too big, sometimes a person might want a quick response to something thats on their mind. with this new idea, it could be decided by a moderator, that this person didnt follow the rules. he loses the ability to create new threads solely based on your opinion that what he posted wasnt worth being said. i know you would try to be objective, and not pull the trigger to fast. its just that it has to happen only one time to an undeserving individual to be unfair. seriously, is creating a post, even tho you dont like it or feel its excessive really that big of deal? I'm not sure what to tell you, YG, but, indeed, our views matter simply for the fact we maintain and moderate the forum. While we don't care about the content, we could well determine the post wasn't sufficiently different enough to merit a position of its own and we could take action against that member. This isn't an anarchy. There are rules and there are judges and the appeal process is simple. "Hey, sorry I posted that how I did, but, I thought it was different and I could get a quick answer and I didn't want it buried under 500 posts." And he'd be let back. It's NEVER the person who has a reason for making a repetitive post that we worry about. It's the person who flaunts his individuality such that he allows himself to say he's above the rules and everyone else can stuff it because he can speak freely. His response would be: "Who do you think you are to judge what I write? I have the right to speak freely. If you don't like it, don't read it." That person we can do without. And, we will do without. Trust me, if all we had were honest mistakes or reasonable repetition this would NEVER be an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenaa Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 If a thread starter has an original idea that doesn't fit in an existing thread, he/she will be fine. That is the point. A lot of very fine posts get pushed into oblivion by multiple posts on the same topic. Art has stated numerous times that nobody will be censored for content. EDIT: Hmmm. I didn't quote myself. This is an odd repetitive post. :whoknows: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arrowhead Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 I'm sorry, I came here looking for a LaVar Arrington or Patrick Ramsey thread. Can anyone point me in the right direction? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 22, 2006 Author Share Posted March 22, 2006 Art, you have my permission to go forward with this. The second part of the rule is if you're a fan of another team you can't post new threads either because they'll be incorrect . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctorfro Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 I completely understand wanting to cut down on repetitive threads. But basically what you're saying is that everyone should use the search function before posting. I have done that before and because my search wasn't specific enough I found nothing. So when I posted I basically got lit up by the moderators. I understand what you're meaning in this but I think you guys have gotten a little too sensitive and need to take a break for a while. Not meant to be offensive. Just chill a little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Om Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 i know ive posted several times on this subject, but its apparent i havent been very clear in describing why im opposed. so i will attempt one final time. lets say a major event takes place, the signing of a new player for example, and 3 or 4 threads start minutes after its announced. no big deal, the threads are merged and everyones ok with it. now a few hours go by, hundreds of posts are added to the mega thread. members read every post trying to get every bit of info that they can on the subject, i know thats why i come to this board. but then a single member has an original idea, maybe its hours after the big news, maybe its the following day. he wants more specific info, he has a slightly different question. to him its important, he doesnt want it lost in the sea of posts from the other threads. it might be missed. some of the members scorn him for creating the post, he should have used the search function. but thats the point, it was important enough to him that even tho there were posts already about the subject, he fealt it deserved its own thread. some will say that this poster just thinks too highly of himself, has to see his name in lights so to speak. i dont see it that way. sometimes the threads get too big, sometimes a person might want a quick response to something thats on their mind. with this new idea, it could be decided by a moderator, that this person didnt follow the rules. he loses the ability to create new threads solely based on your opinion that what he posted wasnt worth being said. i know you would try to be objective, and not pull the trigger to fast. its just that it has to happen only one time to an undeserving individual to be unfair. seriously, is creating a post, even tho you dont like it or feel its excessive really that big of deal? Yellow, this is where we'd like to think we've earned the benefit of the doubt that we'll employ DISCRETION in applying this or any other hack. As we have said several times already. Honestly, by creating this detailed scenario you have, it suggests to me you don't think we take into accout PRECISELY the kinds of things you're talking about. We do this every single day among the staff, calling one another to task when we think someone may have merged or closed something that had merit as a stand-alone thread. It's part of moderating a board this size. All this new hack does is give us another avenue to do our jobs. It doesn't mean we'll stop doing them with our brains set to "on." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 22, 2006 Author Share Posted March 22, 2006 I completely understand wanting to cut down on repetitive threads. But basically what you're saying is that everyone should use the search function before posting. I have done that before and because my search wasn't specific enough I found nothing. So when I posted I basically got lit up by the moderators. I understand what you're meaning in this but I think you guys have gotten a little too sensitive and need to take a break for a while. Not meant to be offensive. Just chill a little. Strange. You've had two threads closed. Here's one: http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=147851 You come here saying you don't have time to look around, and you were pointed to the stuck thread at the top of the board AND answered at the same time. Here's another: http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=148641 There were exactly 12 other topics discussing the similarities between now and 2000 if any on the first two pages of the board at that very moment. It had nothing to do with searching. It had everything to do with looking. That's it. If you'd help us, we could chill. But, when you misrepresent YOUR past here, it makes us think you're a tool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowGixxer Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 well ive said my peace. thank you for taking the time to read and respond to my opinion. its apparent that the majority is happy with this idea, and even tho i am opposed to the idea, i cant argue with the percentages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westbrook36 Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 The second part of the rule is if you're a fan of another team you can't post new threads either because they'll be incorrect . :laugh: I don't need to make threads in the Stadium, but dammit, don't take Around the NFL away from me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 Strange. You've had two threads closed. Here's one: http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=147851 You come here saying you don't have time to look around, and you were pointed to the stuck thread at the top of the board AND answered at the same time. Here's another: http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=148641 There were exactly 12 other topics discussing the similarities between now and 2000 if any on the first two pages of the board at that very moment. It had nothing to do with searching. It had everything to do with looking. That's it. If you'd help us, we could chill. But, when you misrepresent YOUR past here, it makes us think you're a tool. I love these types of threads... when people make general accusatory type posts and don't think the "moderators" are going to follow up with hard facts for their counter-argument. Guys, the mods have been doing this for 5+ years... they've seen just about everything... and argued with just about everyone. If you're going to engage a moderator.... you better be prepared. They are well-versed and well-practiced :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jnhay Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 Even though I don't think I'm as annoyed with the multiple posts as other users, I do think that a "no new threads" group would be a good idea. At least you can give it a try and see how it works out. Just make sure the person who posted didn't already try a search beforehand. If the post says "I can't believe no one's posted this yet" or something like that, the person shouldn't be punished right away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingGibbs Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 The group exists and the poll here suggests we should roll with it. We probably will for a while and see if it works. People in the group will be identified for others so they will stand out making them want to get back into a normal group. If it doesn't work out, we'll just toss it and go back to read-only or banning . How about a I'm a dumbass avatar, with them wearing a dunce hat? But, of course if I screw up, I think it's a terrible idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 22, 2006 Author Share Posted March 22, 2006 Even though I don't think I'm as annoyed with the multiple posts as other users, I do think that a "no new threads" group would be a good idea. At least you can give it a try and see how it works out.Just make sure the person who posted didn't already try a search beforehand. If the post says "I can't believe no one's posted this yet" or something like that, the person shouldn't be punished right away. Agreed. Whether true or not, even a sentence like that shows you cared enough to try and look around. It'd be rare we'd wax someone like that unless it was obvious they were simply lying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sableholic Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 :laugh:I don't need to make threads in the Stadium, but dammit, don't take Around the NFL away from me. The second part of the rule is if you're a fan of another team you can't post new threads either because they'll be incorrect . Two funniest posts I've seen in a little while. Anyways on topic now, I think this is definately a great first step to improving this message boards quality. I do have one minor question, say some big news story breaks out and as is normal for this board lots of people rush to post a new topic on it. So person A goes to post about it, he searches first like a good lil boy and finds nothing so starts typing his post. Person B comes along and heard the story and he searches as well and finds nothing. Person B completes his thread before Person A and so in a sense Person A's thread will be a duplicate. Then we have the "Mega-merges" we are all so used too. Is Person A in trouble? Or is there a a "grace period"? If so how long? Also is there a way you moderators can tell if someone searched? P.S. Much better idea than the nobody with < X amounts of posts can start a new thread as Art pointed out with the Andyman example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 22, 2006 Author Share Posted March 22, 2006 I think this is answered in my first post. We're not going to get too upset with people posting the same news within a few minutes. It's when it gets 15 and 20 minutes later and you see the mega-merge X 12 and you still ignore it that we'll start to feel angry :0. Check that. Mentioned first in my THIRD post :0. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Om Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 sable, that scenario has been discussed a few times already this thread. Methinks maybe you didn't search first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sableholic Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 sable, that scenario has been discussed a few times already this thread.Methinks maybe you didn't search first. My internal search function is a little leniant I think this is answered in my first post. We're not going to get too upset with people posting the same news within a few minutes. It's when it gets 15 and 20 minutes later and you see the mega-merge X 12 and you still ignore it that we'll start to feel angry :0.Check that. Mentioned first in my THIRD post :0. Some reason the eyes just decided to glance over that post and only saw the part about posting different parts of the article. My bad. Sorry I get lazy sometimes and tend to scan the page, guess I missed it..oops Oh and you said no duplicated threads not duplicatating topics already covered inside the thread j/k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.