Hey mods can you at least leave a map?

[saveliberty]

So you wouldn't do a thing. Awesome. Pretty much what I expected. Pupps has the right reply. No point in saying it again. What Iwill ad is, if you are doing the same thing over and over again without success, you need to try something else. The place is overrun with trolls and spam posters. I'd start there.

I will be looking to other boards for awhile. Seems a long time poster has little to no value here.

 

[Kat]

So you wouldn't do a thing. Awesome. Pretty much what I expected. Pupps has the right reply. No point in saying it again. What Iwill ad is, if you are doing the same thing over and over again without success, you need to try something else. The place is overrun with trolls and spam posters. I'd start there.

I will be looking to other boards for awhile. Seems a long time poster has little to no value here.

Save, we have to do something with the dupe threads. It is written in the rules for members not to make dupe threads, yet they do.
Members are the ones that report them to us generally.

I am not exactly sure what we can do to make it better.

 

[ZZ PUPPS]

So you wouldn't do a thing. Awesome. Pretty much what I expected. Pupps has the right reply. No point in saying it again. What Iwill ad is, if you are doing the same thing over and over again without success, you need to try something else. The place is overrun with trolls and spam posters. I'd start there.

I will be looking to other boards for awhile. Seems a long time poster has little to no value here.

Save, we have to do something with the dupe threads. It is written in the rules for members not to make dupe threads, yet they do.
Members are the ones that report them to us generally.

I am not exactly sure what we can do to make it better.

The best solution is to revoke the rule. Barring that, warn the dupe thread creators that do it in an intentionally disruptive manner and use the hammer where appropriate...BUT...leave the threads up - IF staff insists in keeping the rule.

That allows posters to follow the flow on a given subject in the thread of their choice. There are subjects posters want involved in but not one that's 50 pages deep. Alternative threads on the same subject provide avenues for legitimate discussion without having to wade through all the garbage.

Put the issue to a member vote. I think the majority will agree that merging threads:

1. Adds no value
2. Increases moderation workload and reduces time for value added activity
3. Makes "updating" current news changes to old threads cumbersome (no new thread)
4. Diminishes member participation and has a net negative effect

 

[Damaged Eagle]

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[the other mike]

go to your profile page and click on 'postings'. It shows your entire history, and also under postings you can scroll to the bottom and click on 'find all threads by saveliberty' and it will show all the threads you ever started. And anyone can search anyone else's post history and so on.

You can also get to your post history by scrolling over your name
so the option box appears and go to ' your content '.
( I just discovered that today )

 

[flacaltenn]

But why bother to merge them at all? If peeps wanna jump from thread to thread, let 'em. It actually creates more posts = ad revenue. Like Save, I've lost threads and have just walked away when one gets merged into a behemoth cluster that is no more than a war zone. Poor threads will die their own death, good ones can flourish - but not if they get merged into failure.

Plus, it's less work for the mods. Does the merging work really add anything? My opinion is that it has a negative overall effect.

When there's 4 identical free for alls going on -- it becomes less of a discussion. Members have to wade thru IDENTICAL Ground hog Day accusations and squabbles repeatedly.. And the rules break down and it becomes just noise and personal. Folks forget who they've already fought with..

Don't give a ratty ass about the page hits. If it's gonna BE a war zone, then let it be a fair CAGE fight. To the death if it entertains some folks.. It's a discussion board --- NOT TWITTER...

 

[flacaltenn]

Also, as far as a "map" goes --- the redirects we leave are a "crumb trail" to the start of an OP that has been merged. I'll put 3 or 5 hours on the redirect so that folks looking for THAT thread -- will SEE that it has been merged. Ideally, they are taken to the 1st post in the OLD thread, and can ignore all past posts if they wish..


Once the merge happens, EVERYONE battling in that topic is in the same room. What happened BEFORE isn't all that important.. Makes it easier to find more interesting threads and topics that would be buried by ONLY what the uber partisans want to fight about today in the listings...

 

[saveliberty]

So you wouldn't do a thing. Awesome. Pretty much what I expected. Pupps has the right reply. No point in saying it again. What I will ad is, if you are doing the same thing over and over again without success, you need to try something else. The place is overrun with trolls and spam posters. I'd start there.

I will be looking to other boards for awhile. Seems a long time poster has little to no value here.

Save, we have to do something with the dupe threads. It is written in the rules for members not to make dupe threads, yet they do.
Members are the ones that report them to us generally.

I am not exactly sure what we can do to make it better.

Unlike a lot of posters, I don't need to have mods ban me in order to stop posting. You know this very well. I found another place and may stop in from time to time to chat with certain posters and see what has changed.

 

[Kat]

So you wouldn't do a thing. Awesome. Pretty much what I expected. Pupps has the right reply. No point in saying it again. What I will ad is, if you are doing the same thing over and over again without success, you need to try something else. The place is overrun with trolls and spam posters. I'd start there.

I will be looking to other boards for awhile. Seems a long time poster has little to no value here.

Save, we have to do something with the dupe threads. It is written in the rules for members not to make dupe threads, yet they do.
Members are the ones that report them to us generally.

I am not exactly sure what we can do to make it better.

Unlike a lot of posters, I don't need to have mods ban me in order to stop posting. You know this very well. I found another place and may stop in from time to time to chat with certain posters and see what has changed.

Do not know why you are mad at me, but enjoy, save.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

But why bother to merge them at all? If peeps wanna jump from thread to thread, let 'em. It actually creates more posts = ad revenue. Like Save, I've lost threads and have just walked away when one gets merged into a behemoth cluster that is no more than a war zone. Poor threads will die their own death, good ones can flourish - but not if they get merged into failure.

Plus, it's less work for the mods. Does the merging work really add anything? My opinion is that it has a negative overall effect.

When there's 4 identical free for alls going on -- it becomes less of a discussion. Members have to wade thru IDENTICAL Ground hog Day accusations and squabbles repeatedly.. And the rules break down and it becomes just noise and personal. Folks forget who they've already fought with..

Don't give a ratty ass about the page hits. If it's gonna BE a war zone, then let it be a fair CAGE fight. To the death if it entertains some folks.. It's a discussion board --- NOT TWITTER...

What a great idea!!!

A cage fight with multiple posters down in the Taunting Arena.

We could call it Thunderdome.

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[ZZ PUPPS]

But why bother to merge them at all? If peeps wanna jump from thread to thread, let 'em. It actually creates more posts = ad revenue. Like Save, I've lost threads and have just walked away when one gets merged into a behemoth cluster that is no more than a war zone. Poor threads will die their own death, good ones can flourish - but not if they get merged into failure.

Plus, it's less work for the mods. Does the merging work really add anything? My opinion is that it has a negative overall effect.

When there's 4 identical free for alls going on -- it becomes less of a discussion. Members have to wade thru IDENTICAL Ground hog Day accusations and squabbles repeatedly.. And the rules break down and it becomes just noise and personal. Folks forget who they've already fought with..

Don't give a ratty ass about the page hits. If it's gonna BE a war zone, then let it be a fair CAGE fight. To the death if it entertains some folks.. It's a discussion board --- NOT TWITTER...

Merging 4 free for alls into a cluster singularity doesn't solve the problem. All it it does is condense it and take up moderation time. It simply doesn't address the issues of problem posters disrupting the thread and ending legitimate discussion. Multiple threads allow the potential for serious posters to exit the melee by creating a new thread. A more value added approach would be to use the non-value added time mods spend merging to enforce the rules and foster legit discussions taking place.

 

[flacaltenn]

But why bother to merge them at all? If peeps wanna jump from thread to thread, let 'em. It actually creates more posts = ad revenue. Like Save, I've lost threads and have just walked away when one gets merged into a behemoth cluster that is no more than a war zone. Poor threads will die their own death, good ones can flourish - but not if they get merged into failure.

Plus, it's less work for the mods. Does the merging work really add anything? My opinion is that it has a negative overall effect.

When there's 4 identical free for alls going on -- it becomes less of a discussion. Members have to wade thru IDENTICAL Ground hog Day accusations and squabbles repeatedly.. And the rules break down and it becomes just noise and personal. Folks forget who they've already fought with..

Don't give a ratty ass about the page hits. If it's gonna BE a war zone, then let it be a fair CAGE fight. To the death if it entertains some folks.. It's a discussion board --- NOT TWITTER...

Merging 4 free for alls into a cluster singularity doesn't solve the problem. All it it does is condense it and take up moderation time. It simply doesn't address the issues of problem posters disrupting the thread and ending legitimate discussion. Multiple threads allow the potential for serious posters to exit the melee by creating a new thread. A more value added approach would be to use the non-value added time mods spend merging to enforce the rules and foster legit discussions taking place.

How many members consider themselves "serious, reponsible posters"?? Does EVERYONE get a new a thread on "the wall" or "the shutdown" everyday? How about 2 or 3 a day? Need your advice here..

It's a necessity in these parts. Running from thread to thread with the same talking points and the same squabbles MULTIPLY the moderation time. Because that frees the "not serious, irresponsible" posters to do their work in multiple places... And that feeds BAD discussion..

We FIGHT to keep threads open.. The only thing guaranteed to get us to abandon moderating a thread is if the OP is not respecting their own topic..

 

[flacaltenn]

Merging 4 free for alls into a cluster singularity doesn't solve the problem.

Hopefully, we're up on reports and moderation BEFORE any merges occur. If the thread is brand new -- or weak or damaged by trolling, it shouldn't be included in merges by general moderation protocols..