posted
Wow... Is this true? This is the stupidest thing I've heard in a long time if it's accurate.
Hey, I know... Let's start a message board and then prevent legitimate members who post in good standing on the board from talking about what they want in the way that they want even if the subjects are perfectly good, relevant, and stimulating!!! Yeah, that's perfect... Who needs members actual generating discussion when they desire? Certainly not this fine establishment.
Stupidity if true.
-------------------- The Crazy Old Wizard's Domain is a message board for positive discussion of many subjects. The Undiscovered Country is our Star Trek board. COWD.net is a website devoted to reporting and consolidating interesting news items. Join us.
posted
No offense Yo-Gurt, but your off your rocker. I think she is confusing the no 5 posts about the same topic(pseudo flooding rule) in a day rule with the voices in her head which twisted it to be only 5 threads a day!
Posts: 1895 | From: New Jersey | Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged |
I know if I was a mod, I'd send member-specific PMs about "posting changes" but deny everything on-board just to mess with their heads, amongst other such methods of mayhem.
Oo, I just ruined any chance, didn't I..?
Posts: 15386 | From: Des Moines, IA, USA | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Human Torch: I can say that posting 5 or more threads that are related to the same topic within the time that Six and I specified would be flooding.
quote:Origninally posted by NumberSix: 2. The arbitrary limit has been set. One person. Five articles. 24-hour period. Already mentioned and, apparently, overlooked or forgotten.
It was my understanding that it is limited to not more than five on the same subject. Six's quote was in direct relation to Kwan (and anyone's) news articles. I could be wrong though.
I don't think they are being narrow minded Yogie, just trying to cut down on things like the news threads; which YOU wanted taken care of. And no, it is not nightly wide. At least not yet. However I do have a similar rule regarding straight RPG on SWC. Other than that, I haven't needed, yet.
posted
It doesn't really matter to me. I am lucky if I posted 5 on the whole board per day.
-------------------- "Wanna buy some death-sticks?" "You don't want to sell me death-sticks." "I don't want to sell you death-sticks." "You want to get off the computer and rethink your life." "I want to get off the computer and rethink my life." Posts: 13152 | From: Springfield, Missouri | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
Yeah, five threads per person that are related to the same topic. I think I forgot that piece of info in my reply to Yogie when she posed the question in a thread a few days ago. Sorry about the confuzzlation Yogie. My bad...
quote:Originally posted by Master Pimp: So let me get this straight. I can only post 5 threads a day about how Yoggie is a confused, bitter old German quack?
In the Cantina, that is correct. Whether or not you are limited in expressing this opinion multiple times in multiple threads in other forums is left to the discretion of said forums' respective moderators.
posted
All jokes aside, I have to defend Yogie here... her confuzzlation (yes I use that word because I can't spell confusion) was all due to my screw up.
quote:Originally posted by Master Pimp: So let me get this straight. I can only post 5 threads a day about how Yoggie is a confused, bitter old German quack?
Yes!
As much as I can only post 5 threads talking about what an full-of-crock little nincompoop you are
PRAISE THE GOOD LORD, or rather THT and N6, for their wisdom to stem and nip hate innthe butt while it's in its infancy!
-------------------- Proud Master of Padawan Torva Kenari *Forever Master to Knights OWL, Yodie, J.Jenna, Lady Palpatine, and VLAmidala!
posted
I know it may sound like I'm completely reversing my position here, but I'm not... I don't know why you'd allow more than one thread on the same topic to be posted by a single member in a specific forum. Often times duplicate concept threads are closed down in other forums even when composed by different members, why on earth would you allow up to five threads regarding the same thing to exist at all, let alone if they were written by one person?!?! Without the clarification subsequently given in this thread it's no wonder people assumed the Moderators were talking about any topic... It's absolutely ridiculous to allow more than one thread on a given topic by a given member. So that begs the question... Why set the limit at 5 when the common limit among several posters is normally 1... Why even give the option for multiple threads regarding the same thing by any member???
-------------------- The Crazy Old Wizard's Domain is a message board for positive discussion of many subjects. The Undiscovered Country is our Star Trek board. COWD.net is a website devoted to reporting and consolidating interesting news items. Join us. Posts: 4069 | From: Maryland | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
D-Ray Kenobi
et unuhuinë elessar aran utúlien
Member # 5186
posted
Actually, what I originally said was, "One person. Five threads. 24 hours." Topic, to me, was irrelevant.
Posts: 18143 | From: Indianapolis | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay... then I say again that that is stupid. Isn't that exactly what Yogie said and was corrected? Either way, this is stupid.
On the one hand, you are attempting to limit a member's ability to post on a message board (which makes no fundamental sense... if they're flooding that's different, but setting an arbitrary limit based not on the content or merit of threads but simply on a random number is stupid). On the other hand, you would be giving members the ability to post 5 different threads per day on a single topic. Either way, both options are ridiculously stupid and fundamentally the wrong things to be doing...
And I don't think I was talking to you D-Ray.
-------------------- The Crazy Old Wizard's Domain is a message board for positive discussion of many subjects. The Undiscovered Country is our Star Trek board. COWD.net is a website devoted to reporting and consolidating interesting news items. Join us.
quote:Originally posted by D-Ray Kenobi: GK, shut up.
Kids these days...*Tsk Tsk*
-------------------- Proud Professor of the Dark Arts@ Hogwarts! For Registration into Hogwarts, Please Sign Up here! Join the Magic of Witchcraft and Wizardry w/Harry Potter!
quote:Originally posted by General Kenobi: On the one hand, you are attempting to limit a member's ability to post on a message board (which makes no fundamental sense... if they're flooding that's different...
The remaining clause in that sentence is unnecessary. We've arbitrarily defined five as our per-day flooding limit because folks in the past lacked the common sense to control themselves. The rule was designed largely for those sorts of extreme cases.
Since that limit was set, precisely one person has violated it (with posts that should have been PMs in the first place), and precisely one other person has whined about it (who would just find something else to whine about anyway). Therefore, in my mind, it's a non-issue.
quote:On the other hand, you would be giving members the ability to post 5 different threads per day on a single topic.
You are now making incorrect inferences based on other people's garbled misinterpretations.
You are now making incorrect inferences based on other people's garbled misinterpretations.
Really?
quote:Originally posted by The Human Torch: Yeah, five threads per person that are related to the same topic.
So I guess the "people" whose "garbled misinterpretations" I was going by was mainly your partner...
And quite frankly it doesn't matter to me in a specific way since I find the Cantina a hive of stupidity anyway... but this decision (whether it has been violated by anyone or everyone) just adds to that level of stupidity. Quite frankly I would've expected more from you guys... particularly a more reasonable approach than limiting everyone (even if most people or all people have yet to post 5 threads of particular merit in one day is irrelevant) for the indescretions of a few morons... I dunno... I thought your job as a Moderator meant that you were supposed to police, not establish arbitrary rules that could potentially hinder the actual point of Nightly (namely discussion) just so you don't have to control the people who do flood or get out of hand... Silly me though... I also think we preserve the First Amendment in the United States at all costs because dealing with pornographers is better than persecuting journalists... But, Nightly isn't public and if you guys want to hinder actual posting because you're lazy or just too busy to enforce flooding common sensically, by all means... continue and pay me no mind.
[ 09-09-2001: Message edited by: General Kenobi ]
-------------------- The Crazy Old Wizard's Domain is a message board for positive discussion of many subjects. The Undiscovered Country is our Star Trek board. COWD.net is a website devoted to reporting and consolidating interesting news items. Join us. Posts: 4069 | From: Maryland | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think it's that big of a deal, especially on the Cantina. Hardly anyone posts more than five a day anyway except for those said members that Six was referring to. Just my opinion.
Posts: 27303 | From: Atlanta, GA | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by General Kenobi: So I guess the "people" whose "garbled misinterpretations" I was going by was mainly your partner...
It wouldn't be the first time I had to slap him with my sailor cap.
quote:... particularly a more reasonable approach than limiting everyone...
To me, it's like Bush creating a law stating that people who own talking pet rocks can only polish them once a month. If nobody owns a talking pet rock, who cares? If you think you own a talking pet rock, and you think it needs to be polished every hour on the hour, then something's just wrong with you, and you need someone to provide a blunt diagnosis anyway.
quote:...for the indescretions of a few morons...
The existence of morons necessitates the existence of laws. If everyone had enough common sense to know What Was Right, moderators would be unnecessary.
quote:...I thought your job as a Moderator meant that you were supposed to police, not establish arbitrary rules that could potentially hinder the actual point of Nightly (namely discussion)...
Anyone who honestly thinks they need more than five brand new threads a day to express themselves is seriously overestimating their own talents.
Part of encouraging discussion also includes discouraging poor discussions. I don't care if you're Dave Barry, Neil Gaiman, or Robin Williams--at any rate over five threads a day (and that's being ridiculously generous), you're gonna stop breaking new ground and start spinning your wheels in one place.
Not to mention the community in general gets ticked off whenever they see any one person in general hogging all the bandwidth, whether said person is genuinely creative or not.
quote:... But, Nightly isn't public and if you guys want to hinder actual posting because you're lazy or just too busy to enforce flooding common sensically, by all means... continue and pay me no mind.
Most of this section of your post is redundant, pseudo-patriotic drivel. Your need to snipe at the end of every post--your craving to conclude with a "zinger" each time--never fails to unimpress, and never fails to undermine any and every remotely serious point you come this close to making.
The rule as phrased as "Five threads, per person, per day (24 hours) that are related to the same topic..." simply means that if James Bond posted a thread titled/about "His vacation with Q" and then posted a thread titled/about "Pictures of my Vacation with Q" and then posted a thread about "The Top Ten Places to visit in Russia" and then posted titled/about "I went to Stalin's Tomb" and then posted a thread titled/about "Moscow is smaller than I thought" and then posted a thread titled/about "Q broke his led skiing!" within the 24 hour time peroid - that would be flooding because all of the 6 threads are related to each other (ie. events that happened on James' Vacation), were all posted within the 24 hour time period and in addition Six & I could (not saying we would in all cases) make note that the threads are and/or could be considered duplicates of each other (even though the topic's aren't exactly the same... hence the term "related").
And actually Six & I could (not saying we would in all cases) in fact make the statement that they are and/or could be considered duplicates of each other even before James had posted above the 5 thread/per person/24 hour time period.
Also, say Clark Kent posted a thread titled/about "Another School Shooting" and then posted a thread about titled/about "U.N. Racism Talks Stalled" and then posted a thread titled/about "Lex Luthor Runs for President" and then posted a thread titled/about "Ultimate Fighting Championship deemed too Violent, Banned" and then posted a thread titled/about "Homeless Population Doubles" and then posted a thread titled/about "Earthquake in L.A. Thousands Dead/Missing" within the 24 hour time period - that would be flooding because all of the 6 threads are related to each other (ie. news reporting) and were all posted within the 24 hour time period.
In order to avoid yet another fiasco like the Kwan News situation that raged here at Nighlty (mostly in the Cantina) for over a year... this rule was carefully created by Six and I ( with a little help from our friends ) so as to clearly explain what you cannot do.
The rule is worded loose enough to allow for flexibilty while at the same time being defined enough to stop another situation (like Kwan News) from getting out of hand and hopefully (if moderated well enough) avoiding/stopping another fiasco from happening.
I truly had hopes (still do) that this rule will allow for successful posting of news and generally any other type of thread while providing a safe and controlled enviroment for our members that visit the Cantina.
With that said and slightly off the topic, Kwan I loves ya buddie and please don't take offense at this rule or the situation that involved you being used as an example.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
*pokes you*
