[ARCHIVED THREAD] - If i start a thread (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 6/20/2011 7:51:57 AM EDT
|
and there were other threads about but i didnt know, why is it called a dupe and then locked? im supposed to spend my time searching to find out? system message you suck ass!
Oh and IBTL 
|
|
Quoted: becuase no one here seems to understand that duplicate threads are perfectly fine. SPAM threads are not. we have yet to actually get that through peoples heads around here. Quoted: Multiple threads on an identical topic are not allowed simply to keep the discussion in one place––and concise. There is no point in wasting bandwidth and having good/pertinent/relevant information posted in one thread, but not in the other six.  Staff disagreeing with each other! To the pit with you!  |
|
Quoted: Quoted: becuase no one here seems to understand that duplicate threads are perfectly fine. SPAM threads are not. we have yet to actually get that through peoples heads around here. Quoted: Multiple threads on an identical topic are not allowed simply to keep the discussion in one place––and concise. There is no point in wasting bandwidth and having good/pertinent/relevant information posted in one thread, but not in the other six. Staff disagreeing with each other! To the pit with you! the comment from TBK1 is what I remember EdSr saying one time. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
becuase no one here seems to understand that duplicate threads are perfectly fine. SPAM threads are not. we have yet to actually get that through peoples heads around here. Quoted:
Multiple threads on an identical topic are not allowed simply to keep the discussion in one place––and concise. There is no point in wasting bandwidth and having good/pertinent/relevant information posted in one thread, but not in the other six. Staff disagreeing with each other! To the pit with you!
the comment from TBK1 is what I remember EdSr saying one time. It's correct. TBS was a GD moderator for a long time, so I'm sure he just mis-typed, as he knows this. If things were as stated we wouldn't have GD mods locking dozens of dupe threads daily. I posted to clarify. 
I really don't do much around here these days save acting as the "keeper of rules and protocols" as I seem to be fairly handy at keeping this stuff remembered.
|
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: becuase no one here seems to understand that duplicate threads are perfectly fine. SPAM threads are not. we have yet to actually get that through peoples heads around here. Quoted: Multiple threads on an identical topic are not allowed simply to keep the discussion in one place––and concise. There is no point in wasting bandwidth and having good/pertinent/relevant information posted in one thread, but not in the other six. Staff disagreeing with each other! To the pit with you! the comment from TBK1 is what I remember EdSr saying one time. It's correct. TBS was a GD moderator for a long time, so I'm sure he just mis-typed, as he knows this. If things were as stated we wouldn't have GD mods locking dozens of dupe threads daily. I posted to clarify. I really don't do much around here these days save acting as the "keeper of rules and protocols" as I seem to be fairly handy at keeping this stuff remembered. 8.) Posting repeat topics with similar or slightly varying titles. While it may seem to be funny, the "spamming" of the community in this manner results in problems for users and management. (Multiple topics on important issues or discussions are acceptable, this only applies to topics which waste resources for no other reason except personal enjoyment or humor.) i win 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
becuase no one here seems to understand that duplicate threads are perfectly fine. SPAM threads are not. we have yet to actually get that through peoples heads around here. Quoted:
Multiple threads on an identical topic are not allowed simply to keep the discussion in one place––and concise. There is no point in wasting bandwidth and having good/pertinent/relevant information posted in one thread, but not in the other six. Staff disagreeing with each other! To the pit with you!
the comment from TBK1 is what I remember EdSr saying one time. It's correct. TBS was a GD moderator for a long time, so I'm sure he just mis-typed, as he knows this. If things were as stated we wouldn't have GD mods locking dozens of dupe threads daily. I posted to clarify.
I really don't do much around here these days save acting as the "keeper of rules and protocols" as I seem to be fairly handy at keeping this stuff remembered. 8.) Posting repeat topics with similar or slightly varying titles. While it may seem to be funny, the "spamming" of the community in this manner results in problems for users and management. (Multiple topics on important issues or discussions are acceptable, this only applies to topics which waste resources for no other reason except personal enjoyment or humor.) i win That's talking about something entirely different. Look at the OP's thread, then at the ten other threads with the same link/article, and see if you find any differences between his situation and the rule you cite.
|
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: becuase no one here seems to understand that duplicate threads are perfectly fine. SPAM threads are not. we have yet to actually get that through peoples heads around here. Quoted: Multiple threads on an identical topic are not allowed simply to keep the discussion in one place––and concise. There is no point in wasting bandwidth and having good/pertinent/relevant information posted in one thread, but not in the other six. Staff disagreeing with each other! To the pit with you! the comment from TBK1 is what I remember EdSr saying one time. It's correct. TBS was a GD moderator for a long time, so I'm sure he just mis-typed, as he knows this. If things were as stated we wouldn't have GD mods locking dozens of dupe threads daily. I posted to clarify. I really don't do much around here these days save acting as the "keeper of rules and protocols" as I seem to be fairly handy at keeping this stuff remembered. 8.) Posting repeat topics with similar or slightly varying titles. While it may seem to be funny, the "spamming" of the community in this manner results in problems for users and management. (Multiple topics on important issues or discussions are acceptable, this only applies to topics which waste resources for no other reason except personal enjoyment or humor.) i win That's talking about something entirely different. Look at the OP's thread, then at the ten other threads with the same link/article, and see if you find any differences between his situation and the rule you cite. you don't consider meat made from poop and important discussion? once again i point out there is no written rule about multiple topics if they are not deliberate spam. |
|
Quoted: Dude, he's like the Terminator, set this afternoon aside if you're taking him on.Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: becuase no one here seems to understand that duplicate threads are perfectly fine. SPAM threads are not. we have yet to actually get that through peoples heads around here. Quoted: Multiple threads on an identical topic are not allowed simply to keep the discussion in one place––and concise. There is no point in wasting bandwidth and having good/pertinent/relevant information posted in one thread, but not in the other six. Staff disagreeing with each other! To the pit with you! the comment from TBK1 is what I remember EdSr saying one time. It's correct. TBS was a GD moderator for a long time, so I'm sure he just mis-typed, as he knows this. If things were as stated we wouldn't have GD mods locking dozens of dupe threads daily. I posted to clarify. I really don't do much around here these days save acting as the "keeper of rules and protocols" as I seem to be fairly handy at keeping this stuff remembered. 8.) Posting repeat topics with similar or slightly varying titles. While it may seem to be funny, the "spamming" of the community in this manner results in problems for users and management. (Multiple topics on important issues or discussions are acceptable, this only applies to topics which waste resources for no other reason except personal enjoyment or humor.) i win |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Dude, he's like the Terminator, set this afternoon aside if you're taking him on.Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: becuase no one here seems to understand that duplicate threads are perfectly fine. SPAM threads are not. we have yet to actually get that through peoples heads around here. Quoted: Multiple threads on an identical topic are not allowed simply to keep the discussion in one place––and concise. There is no point in wasting bandwidth and having good/pertinent/relevant information posted in one thread, but not in the other six. Staff disagreeing with each other! To the pit with you! the comment from TBK1 is what I remember EdSr saying one time. It's correct. TBS was a GD moderator for a long time, so I'm sure he just mis-typed, as he knows this. If things were as stated we wouldn't have GD mods locking dozens of dupe threads daily. I posted to clarify. I really don't do much around here these days save acting as the "keeper of rules and protocols" as I seem to be fairly handy at keeping this stuff remembered. 8.) Posting repeat topics with similar or slightly varying titles. While it may seem to be funny, the "spamming" of the community in this manner results in problems for users and management. (Multiple topics on important issues or discussions are acceptable, this only applies to topics which waste resources for no other reason except personal enjoyment or humor.) i win we haven't had a good slap fight in awhile. excuse me while i go get my purse. |
|
Quoted: Multiple threads on an identical topic are not allowed simply to keep the discussion in one place––and concise. There is no point in wasting bandwidth and having good/pertinent/relevant information posted in one thread, but not in the other six. And yet we still have GD....
|
|
Quoted: Multiple threads on an identical topic are not allowed simply to keep the discussion in one place––and concise. There is no point in wasting bandwidth and having good/pertinent/relevant information posted in one thread, but not in the other six. Technically speaking, it doesn't consume any more bandwidth than a monolithic thread. The rest of that is spot on, though. |
|
Quoted:
becuase no one here seems to understand that duplicate threads are perfectly fine. SPAM threads are not. we have yet to actually get that through peoples heads around here. Dupe threads are fine??? Dupe threads aren't a violation of CoC, but that shouldn't mean that they are fine. Dupes cause valuable discussion to be lost amongst many threads on the same topic. I wish arfcom would incorperate a thread "combiner" and just merge duplicate threads. I also with arfcom would do a quick search of the contents about to be posted as a new topic. Then berfore a new topic can be created show the top x results and let the user chose if it is a dupe. |