Forums | MacLife
You are not logged in.
#101 2005-02-05 9:12 am
#102 2005-02-05 9:54 am
- ShnickyShnack
- ::: title edited due to Satanic influences :::
- From: Rockin' out
- Registered: 2001-05-25
- Posts: 22237
Re: The Rules - Discuss
Should I ask what all this "sticky" stuff is all over MiniThink? Just what has Oats been doing?
Note: please delete this post.
Offline
#103 2005-02-05 12:38 pm
- freakoutjackson
- Neo-Con Nightmare
- From: The Jet City
- Registered: 2002-12-16
- Posts: 3711
Re: The Rules - Discuss
How about instead of disemvowelment use greeking or some kind of BS generator (irony intended).
I had a BS plug in for dreamweaver that was hilarious.
While some can ignore many will always be lured into a fight.
Offline
#104 2005-02-05 8:00 pm
- XYZ
- Banned
- Registered: 2000-07-03
- Posts: 10881
Re: The Rules - Discuss
obtuse wrote:
A quick look at the punbb site shows that implementing the delayed posting idea should actually be fairly easy. There is a variable for each group of posters that determines when they can post again. It should be very easy to create multiple groups with the only difference being that each group is has a different and longer time between posts. Then just a page or something to allow mods to move a user across groups.
The only trouble, of course, is when there is moderator bias.
I think the delay should be used very judiciously.
there's really no need for all of this
Offline
#105 2005-02-05 10:17 pm
- ShnickyShnack
- ::: title edited due to Satanic influences :::
- From: Rockin' out
- Registered: 2001-05-25
- Posts: 22237
Re: The Rules - Discuss
Moderator bias? Good Lord.
Sometimes I wonder how it is our li'l Oatie doesn't go berzerk.
Note: please delete this post.
Offline
#106 2005-02-05 10:20 pm
Re: The Rules - Discuss
ShnickyShnack wrote:
Moderator bias? Good Lord.
Sometimes I wonder how it is our li'l Oatie doesn't go berzerk.
Sometimes I wonder the same, thing, Shnicky. Sometimes I wonder the same thing. 
Offline
#107 2005-02-05 10:41 pm
Re: The Rules - Discuss
I just did a little pruning in a couple of threads. No, we haven't gotten the split topic button back, anything that is gone is gone for good, never coming back.
I'd much rather not go about the place deleting posts outright. At least TRY to get along, folks.
Offline
#108 2005-02-05 10:43 pm
Re: The Rules - Discuss
oatmeal wrote:
I just did a little pruning in a couple of threads. No, we haven't gotten the split topic button back, anything that is gone is gone for good, never coming back.
I'd much rather not go about the place deleting posts outright. At least TRY to get along, folks.
:pokes smoldering threads:
:goes looking for something flammable:
The Forum Troll Sees Own Stupidity and Raises
Offline
#109 2005-02-06 12:24 am
- ShnickyShnack
- ::: title edited due to Satanic influences :::
- From: Rockin' out
- Registered: 2001-05-25
- Posts: 22237
Re: The Rules - Discuss
obtuse wrote:
oatmeal wrote:
I just did a little pruning in a couple of threads. No, we haven't gotten the split topic button back, anything that is gone is gone for good, never coming back.
I'd much rather not go about the place deleting posts outright. At least TRY to get along, folks.:pokes smoldering threads:
:goes looking for something flammable:
:passes over a can of kerosene:
:lays countless pennies along tracks to encourage derailings:
Last edited by ShnickyShnack (2005-02-06 12:27 am)
Note: please delete this post.
Offline
#110 2005-02-06 12:27 am
#111 2005-02-06 12:32 am
- ShnickyShnack
- ::: title edited due to Satanic influences :::
- From: Rockin' out
- Registered: 2001-05-25
- Posts: 22237
Re: The Rules - Discuss
obtuse wrote:
Awww .... I always had a soft spot for that Max!
Note: please delete this post.
Offline
#112 2005-02-06 9:27 pm
- XYZ
- Banned
- Registered: 2000-07-03
- Posts: 10881
Re: The Rules - Discuss
ShnickyShnack wrote:
Sometimes I wonder how it is our li'l Oatie doesn't go berzerk.
Why?
there's really no need for all of this
Offline
#113 2005-02-06 9:41 pm
Re: The Rules - Discuss
ShnickyShnack wrote:
Delays? Tighter modding?
How about STOP RESPONDING TO TROLLS!
Crazy, I know.
Is this why people stop respond to my posts?!1?!
Spirit was crushed; now is fading, But I want to help make things right.
Because I can see and I can feel, and you can see and you can feel
So why don't we both either stand up and fight
Or at least together we'll call it a night.
Offline
#114 2005-02-06 10:02 pm
Re: The Rules - Discuss
Just fair warning: without the "Split topic" function available to me, any posts I need to remove from threads are deducted from your postcounts.
I'm more likely now to lock topics than to split things in part because of that, but mostly because mass-deleting posts has become REALLY difficult past page 1 (where the mass-delete feature actually works).
Offline
#115 2005-02-06 10:04 pm
Re: The Rules - Discuss
oatmeal wrote:
Just fair warning: without the "Split topic" function available to me, any posts I need to remove from threads are deducted from your postcounts.
What postcounts?
Just like back in Saigon! Eh, slick?
Offline
#116 2005-02-06 10:05 pm
Re: The Rules - Discuss
Steyr AUG wrote:
oatmeal wrote:
Just fair warning: without the "Split topic" function available to me, any posts I need to remove from threads are deducted from your postcounts.
What postcounts?
You can't see them, but they're still tallied.
Offline
#117 2005-02-06 10:25 pm
- Farmerkev
- Official Dementor
- Moderator
- Registered: 2003-01-03
- Posts: 18624
Re: The Rules - Discuss
oatmeal wrote:
Steyr AUG wrote:
oatmeal wrote:
Just fair warning: without the "Split topic" function available to me, any posts I need to remove from threads are deducted from your postcounts.
What postcounts?
You can't see them, but they're still tallied.
Tell me when I hit ten bajillion, it'll be time for a bathroom break.
Do your part to combat global warming.
Eat a cow.
Offline
#118 2005-02-06 10:34 pm
Re: The Rules - Discuss
By an astounding coincidence, that was it. Your ten-bajilionth post. 
Offline
#119 2005-02-07 7:40 pm
- ShnickyShnack
- ::: title edited due to Satanic influences :::
- From: Rockin' out
- Registered: 2001-05-25
- Posts: 22237
Re: The Rules - Discuss
oatmeal wrote:
By an astounding coincidence, that was it. Your ten-bajilionth post.
Headline from the Indiana Gazette: MAN DIES FROM URINATING ON MACINTOSH COMPUTER
Note: please delete this post.
Offline
#120 2005-02-15 6:27 am
Re: The Rules - Discuss
XYZ absolutely insisted that we have this rule.
11) No Zombie Threads.
- If a topic is worth discussing, it's probably worth starting a new thread with a fresh take on it.
- If you feel that an older topic has something worthwhile in it, feel free to link to the topic, the post, or quote the post.
- A topic should be considered dead if there has been no posting in it for two months or more.
Dead since 2003? Come on, really. 
Offline
#121 2005-02-15 8:17 am
- KingFred
- is enjoying his status as
- Royal Wombat
- Registered: 2002-05-09
- Posts: 7541
Re: The Rules - Discuss
You know, ONE dead thread might have been passable and I'd have said "Hmmm.. maybe there was an issue that needed revisiting" but this was an "Attack of the Zombies", yanking up four or five dead threads up from the grave just to (supposedly) show someone the topic once existed. The idea of simply linking to these threads was recommended to XYZ by a couple of us, but he completely ignored this possibility as though the suggestion was never made.
Gah. Some people and their egos. 
Exploring the intertubes
Offline
#122 2005-02-15 10:19 am
Offline
#123 2005-02-15 11:00 pm
- XYZ
- Banned
- Registered: 2000-07-03
- Posts: 10881
Re: The Rules - Discuss
It takes a lot bigger ego to delete topics that are perfectly relevant and post harrassing spam in them. Fred, if you're going to be concerned with ego, look in the mirror before pointing fingers elsewhere.
Despite my effort to bring Debbie up to speed, she has compared my point that mentioned the Vatican's propaganda package with its section saying gay parents do violence to their children by raising them with the Easter Bunny.
I've been through the debate about so-called "zombie" topics here and elsewhere. Different people have different ideas about the concept. In one forum, a topic that's two days old is considered a zombie and in another, a topic that's two years old is still fair game for new posts. The former is run by teenagers and the latter by adults in their 40s and 50s.
This forum suffers from short attention span syndrome. That is the origin of the "zombie" nonsense. It's a catchy-gimmicky-glamous way to refer to the idea that we're stuck in perpetual forward motion with no ties to the past. We're not. Only fools life as if nothing has gone before. I think you're both foolish.
Oatmeal, it would be nice if you were more consistent with your "Rules". The last time I read your "zombie thread" rule, you said that it's OK to bring back a topic that's been idle for a long time as long as a poster posts why the topic has been brought back. All the arbitrary changes to the "Rules" are really getting old fast.
there's really no need for all of this
Offline
#124 2005-02-15 11:02 pm
#125 2005-02-15 11:02 pm
- XYZ
- Banned
- Registered: 2000-07-03
- Posts: 10881
Re: The Rules - Discuss
As Blondie-Wan noted.. this forum is over-moderated. It seems to be a trend that has little end in sight. Locking topics is no longer good enough, and neither is editing posts with a note. Now, things just vanish. Topics. Posts. Everything.
It's like the loss of the year, in slow motion.
there's really no need for all of this
Offline
