|
|
Post by nathan on Feb 20, 2008 19:14:13 GMT
.....everyone and anyone who starts a topic covered at a previous point in time is getting a bit thin.
It raised a smile the first day, was acceptable on the second but it really is tiresome and could not be considered funny in the slightest now following months of it.
People login at different times of the day - and thus the same topic should discussable more than once.
Just leave it now, eh.....
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2008 19:15:54 GMT
It takes what, 20 seconds, to look at the threads on the page and see if someone's already posted what you were about to post?
|
|
|
|
Post by LH_SCFC on Feb 20, 2008 19:15:57 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Caerwrangonpotter on Feb 20, 2008 19:18:05 GMT
is that one of Michelins finest?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rory's Towel Boy on Feb 20, 2008 19:19:14 GMT
you did have to say tiresome didnt you LL
|
|
|
|
Post by Adster on Feb 20, 2008 19:21:28 GMT
do we "wheely" have to go on about this? ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Feb 20, 2008 19:21:59 GMT
RVD,
So what?
If people believe the topic has been done to death then just allow the thread to drift down the board.
This 'wheeling' is not even funny.
|
|
|
|
Post by boothenendboy on Feb 20, 2008 19:24:31 GMT
neither are you,but nobody asks for you to get banned.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 20, 2008 19:24:43 GMT
It's not meant to be funny at all. It's actually done to keep the message board fresh and effective for everyone to use. And that's why we have a 'General Discussion Board' too. Threads which are moved go to their new home with a minimum of fuss.
There are only fifty possible threads which can appear on page one and that's why we try to keep, as best as possible, as much order as we can.
I've noticed that most of the very best forums on the net have fewer new threads, but the ones which are there are packed with more posts and a much better standard of debate.
The worst message boards are those which have dozens and dozens of threads covering the exact same points, with just one or two replies to each. Is that the kind of board you'd prefer?
|
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Feb 20, 2008 19:27:36 GMT
Why are you making a direct comparison between a poster being banned and the discontinuation of something done to denote a subject has been previously discussed?
....and I wasn't aware one is warranting of a ban if they fail to bring a humorous element to the board. It was not made clear in the rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2008 19:27:43 GMT
It's not especially funny LL, but it's even more annoying to have 17 threads started about the same thing when for the sake of ten seconds you can just add to an existing one.
|
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Feb 20, 2008 19:33:24 GMT
It's not meant to be funny at all. It's actually done to keep the message board fresh and effective for everyone to use. And that's why we have a 'General Discussion Board' too. Threads which are moved There are only fifty possible threads which can appear on page one and that's why we try to keep, as best as possible, as much order as we can. I've noticed that most of the very best forums on the net have fewer new threads, but the ones which are there are packed with more posts and a much better standard of debate. The worst message boards are those which have dozens and dozens covering the exact same points, with just one or two replies to each. Is that the kind of board you'd prefer? What you are saying can be applied in most cases and I agree to an extent. However, there will be instances where the 'original' thread has taken a different direction to the one initially intended and thus, it is reasonable to start a new thread. Why are people unable to just inform the new thread starter that the topic has been covered without doing something that has been done to the absolute limit? It wouldn't go down too well with the wheeling squad who for whatever reason are unable to know when to draw a line. |
|
|
|
Post by boothenendboy on Feb 20, 2008 19:35:16 GMT
gets on my titties how you speak.you're not better than everyone just because you can use big words.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 20, 2008 19:37:02 GMT
...However, there will be instances where the 'original' thread has taken a different direction to the one initially intended and thus, it is reasonable to start a new thread... Only new threads tend to get wheeled. We are all as quick as we can be. Can you please show me some of these "many instances" where really good threads which have gone off in a different direction have been wheeled? |
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Feb 20, 2008 19:40:01 GMT
gets on my titties how you speak.you're not better than everyone just because you can use big words. I am grateful to you for making me aware that it is deemed 'arrogant' to use long words that express your opinions better, than to use those words of a slightly shorter length that do not express your opinion to the same standard. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by boothenendboy on Feb 20, 2008 19:41:48 GMT
its okay.
|
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Feb 20, 2008 19:45:17 GMT
First off - I am aware that it is new threads that get the treatment from the 'wheel squad'. The point I am attempting to make is that it is in the realms of possibility that a thread, the first of its kind, takes a different direction than the one intended.
It is then reasonable to start a new thread discussing the same topic.
Secondly, please do not misquote me.
I mentioned, hypothetically speaking that there could be instances where the wheeling is unnecessary.
|
|
|
|
Post by daverichards on Feb 20, 2008 19:50:51 GMT
I was under the impression, that this was the kind of thing that kept this MB so funny at times , reading down a thread after a day at work to see just what kind of tangent it might have found
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 20, 2008 19:52:14 GMT
The point I am attempting to make is that it is in the realms of possibility that a thread, the first of its kind, takes a different direction than the one intended. It is also with the realms of possibility that everything could be covered in the same thread. Otherwise why not start five new threads on every subject and hope for the best? |
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Feb 20, 2008 19:52:45 GMT
I was under the impression, that this was the kind of thing that kept this MB so funny at times , reading down a thread after a day at work to see just what kind of tangent it might have found It may be amusing - though what if someone wants to discuss what the thread was initially intended for? Is it likely to get much attention if it is in amongst 'other stuff'. |
|
|
|
Post by boothenendboy on Feb 20, 2008 19:54:12 GMT
seriously though,why would you waste time on making this thread?does it really bother you that much?
|
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Feb 20, 2008 19:54:47 GMT
The point I am attempting to make is that it is in the realms of possibility that a thread, the first of its kind, takes a different direction than the one intended. It is also with the realms of possibility that everything could be covered in the same thread. Otherwise why not start five new threads on every subject and hope for the best? What if a poster who has yet to contribute to that thread does not feel that the topic has been covered to the extent that they wish it to be? It's your board, I suppose....... |
|
|
|
Post by LH_SCFC on Feb 20, 2008 19:54:58 GMT
Smudge - surely this should be on the "General Discussion" board?  |
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Feb 20, 2008 19:56:11 GMT
seriously though,why would you waste time on making this thread?does it really bother you that much? Yes. It does. |
|
|
|
Post by boothenendboy on Feb 20, 2008 19:58:32 GMT
post on a different board then.
|
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Feb 20, 2008 20:01:59 GMT
Why are you attempting to muscle in on this conversation? You've stated your belief that slightly complex language should not be permitted - I feel it right to direct you to your 'do you like me?' thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by boothenendboy on Feb 20, 2008 20:03:58 GMT
its do you hate me actually.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sammz on Feb 20, 2008 20:06:02 GMT
Hasn't this topic been covered already?
|
|
|
|
Post by boothenendboy on Feb 20, 2008 20:06:03 GMT
why do you think i am attempting to muscle in on your conversation,i am simply posting in a thread,not trying to muscle in on yourt conversation.
|
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Feb 20, 2008 20:10:02 GMT
why do you think i am attempting to muscle in on your conversation,i am simply posting in a thread,not trying to muscle in on yourt conversation. You perceive those who use long words as arrogant. In this conversation Smudge and I are engaging in a discussion using words from the extensive English language. You are attempting to divert my attention by making comments with little relevance to the point initially made. |
|
