Problem with New Threads

andy1282 · 10-26-2006, 12:39 PM

OK, folks. I'll admit i jumped on the backs of the mods unfairly. I appreciate the work they do. (That means you Matty) My message should me aimed more at the over-zealous posters who bash the unfortunate souls who happen to create a redundant thread. To me, its just not that big of a deal.

That Guy · 10-26-2006, 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andy1282

You guys don't know me, i barely ever make a post, although I check the website every day. It has come to my attention that many of the senior members of the website have a problem with users creating new threads. To me, you all sound like big whiny babies. I am sorry that some users ignorantly make new threads about why Brunell should be benched, but that dosent give you the right to insult the poor person who dosen't understand the correct "etiquette." Mods, if you don't like it, don't let users create new threads at all. Maybe you should just decide new threads yourself. That way we can only talk about what you want. (I hope you catch the sarcasm) So when a user wants to create an a list that may be important to a few, you can shut him up. Who in the hell really uses the search function to see if there is a three year old thread listing the worst fans in the league?!
To me, if i don't want to read a redundant thread, guess what? I WONT READ IT! You guys need to either get off your high horses, or just start restricting our speech. Some of the "problem posters" maybe twelve or younger. It's great to see some of senior user's curse them and question their sexualtiy. Very mature.
After this post, i will go back to not posting at all, and reading the threads that I find interesting. One of which, by the way, is which uniforms the team should wear. Thank you.

so you're going to spend 2 pages whining about how you think other people shouldn't whine?

i don't know how long or how many boards you've been a part of, but if you let people spam freely without saying anything, guess what happens? it gets worse and more people decide to jump on in on that hot spamming action. If you'd like to post examples you're welcome to, but seriously, i think 14 concurrent brunell related threads is probably enough for most people.

MTK · 10-26-2006, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andy1282

OK, folks. I'll admit i jumped on the backs of the mods unfairly. I appreciate the work they do. (That means you Matty) My message should me aimed more at the over-zealous posters who bash the unfortunate souls who happen to create a redundant thread. To me, its just not that big of a deal.

I do understand what you're saying.

I don't like to see people jumping all over newbies, but then again I'm guilty of it myself sometimes.

I'm looking into not allowing newbies to post new threads until they have X amount of posts. Perhaps that will force them to ease into things a bit rather than just jumping in with both feet.

Schneed10 · 10-26-2006, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andy1282

OK, folks. I'll admit i jumped on the backs of the mods unfairly. I appreciate the work they do. (That means you Matty) My message should me aimed more at the over-zealous posters who bash the unfortunate souls who happen to create a redundant thread. To me, its just not that big of a deal.

And to me, it's just not that big of a deal to bash someone. So, they get yelled at and scolded. So? Are we that concerned about people's feelings? Sheesh, so he got scolded for duplicating a thread. I think he'll be OK one of these days. He might need some counseling, but with help and through sheer determination, I think he'll be fine.

Are you one of those people who think the game of tag should be banned from our schools?

ArtMonkDrillz · 10-26-2006, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I do understand what you're saying.

I don't like to see people jumping all over newbies, but then again I'm guilty of it myself sometimes.

I'm looking into not allowing newbies to post new threads until they have X amount of posts. Perhaps that will them to ease into things a bit rather than just jumping in with both feet.

I think we'd all be down for that, especially in the wake of 0421kidwell's multiple Coffee Talk threads. (who came up with that name? that person is fantastic)

illdefined · 10-26-2006, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I'm looking into not allowing newbies to post new threads until they have X amount of posts. Perhaps that will them to ease into things a bit rather than just jumping in with both feet.

that'd be a good move. even if its just 50 or 100. and andy, i like the uniform threads too heh, never gets tired!

Daseal · 10-26-2006, 01:59 PM

Unfortunately, every thread becomes a Campbell / Brunell thread now. I'm totally for different threads if they're each on subtle differences of the argument, because once a thread gets past 7 pages, it's the same 4-5 people discussing and others are either too lazy to read everything or just don't comment.

What I like about the Warpath is I log on and there's little sifting. I read most all of the threads and then move on. I don't have to go through 0421Kidwell crap on a regular basis. The Brunell -- Campbell thing has been a bit overdone. I think everyons opinion has been firmly addressed. That said, the one schneed posted from the washington post was a new look and a breath of fresh air.

As far as Im concerned, the mods should be even more strict with how the deal with new people of the sort.

Big C · 10-26-2006, 02:40 PM

i think andy actually has a point, but im the minority on this one i suppose

hooskins · 10-26-2006, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I do understand what you're saying.

I don't like to see people jumping all over newbies, but then again I'm guilty of it myself sometimes.

I'm looking into not allowing newbies to post new threads until they have X amount of posts. Perhaps that will force them to ease into things a bit rather than just jumping in with both feet.

I agree with Andy to an extent. I do feel this would be a really good idea. I was a member at another forum that did this, seemed to work well. My personal suggestion would be to keep X somewhat low, like 20-40 ish, otherwise it might inhibit people from being members. But hey thats just my two cents.

dmek25 · 10-26-2006, 08:22 PM

im ready for another pic of hessy, and dont scold me for hijacking

12thMan · 10-26-2006, 09:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dmek25

im ready for another pic of hessy, and dont scold me for hijacking

Hess just might not be the hottest female warpather, just the loudest!!!

steveo395 · 10-26-2006, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dmek25

im ready for another pic of hessy, and dont scold me for hijacking

was there even a pic to begin with

TheMalcolmConnection · 10-27-2006, 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dmek25

im ready for another pic of hessy, and dont scold me for hijacking

You should see the Yahoo Messenger pic.

ArtMonkDrillz · 10-27-2006, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

You should see the Yahoo Messenger pic.

Here it is...

ArtMonkDrillz · 10-27-2006, 10:28 AM

Side note: While looking for that last picture I found this one...

...that guy rules.

10-26-2006, 12:39 PM	#16
andy1282 Camp Scrub Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 14	Re: Problem with New Threads OK, folks. I'll admit i jumped on the backs of the mods unfairly. I appreciate the work they do. (That means you Matty) My message should me aimed more at the over-zealous posters who bash the unfortunate souls who happen to create a redundant thread. To me, its just not that big of a deal.

10-26-2006, 01:59 PM	#22
Daseal Puppy Kicker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Arlington, Virginia Age: 41 Posts: 8,341	Re: Problem with New Threads Unfortunately, every thread becomes a Campbell / Brunell thread now. I'm totally for different threads if they're each on subtle differences of the argument, because once a thread gets past 7 pages, it's the same 4-5 people discussing and others are either too lazy to read everything or just don't comment. What I like about the Warpath is I log on and there's little sifting. I read most all of the threads and then move on. I don't have to go through 0421Kidwell crap on a regular basis. The Brunell -- Campbell thing has been a bit overdone. I think everyons opinion has been firmly addressed. That said, the one schneed posted from the washington post was a new look and a breath of fresh air. As far as Im concerned, the mods should be even more strict with how the deal with new people of the sort. __________________ Best. Player. Available.

10-26-2006, 02:40 PM	#23
Big C Mr. Brightside Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Leesburg, VA Age: 38 Posts: 4,453	Re: Problem with New Threads i think andy actually has a point, but im the minority on this one i suppose __________________ "I don't care what nobody say I'm a be me, stay hood stay real, cause I'm out here grindin'" -Joe Gibbs

10-26-2006, 08:22 PM	#25
dmek25 MVP Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: lancaster,pa Age: 63 Posts: 10,672	Re: Problem with New Threads im ready for another pic of hessy, and dont scold me for hijacking __________________ "It's better to be quiet and thought a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt." courtesy of 53fan

10-27-2006, 10:28 AM	#30
ArtMonkDrillz Franchise Player Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Ellicott City, MD Age: 42 Posts: 8,029	Re: Problem with New Threads Side note: While looking for that last picture I found this one... ...that guy rules. __________________ "Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." The Dude

Problem with New Threads

Playbook