Starkers! A walk down memory lane is nice but...
Sheeeeeesh!!!
Friday, April 15, 2005 by Double Zero | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
Dude!,, LoL..As Jafo tried to point out, your bringing up threads that have been over and done with for like ages! and unfortunately burying other "new" threads in the process before some people get to see them..
Not alot of people click on the "More" button so some of the new threads get wiped of the entry page before they get a chance to be replied to by some that would have very valid replies...
Personally, I have enjoyed reading some of the threads that you have brought to the surface, and have almost replied to a couple until I notice the originating date..
Start a new thread on a topic that interests you or at least reply to more current events..
Just my own suggestions and I am in no way trying to act as any moderator, I am just starting to get a little irritated to find so many threads that have been done a long time ago coming to the surface when clearly there is no shortage of "recent events"
Take care Starkers,
And please do not take this personal,
it's just a "hopeful suggestion by a dedicated board reader,
Zero.
Not alot of people click on the "More" button so some of the new threads get wiped of the entry page before they get a chance to be replied to by some that would have very valid replies...
Personally, I have enjoyed reading some of the threads that you have brought to the surface, and have almost replied to a couple until I notice the originating date..
Start a new thread on a topic that interests you or at least reply to more current events..
Just my own suggestions and I am in no way trying to act as any moderator, I am just starting to get a little irritated to find so many threads that have been done a long time ago coming to the surface when clearly there is no shortage of "recent events"
Take care Starkers,
And please do not take this personal,
it's just a "hopeful suggestion by a dedicated board reader,
Zero.
Fuzzy Logic
Reply #2 Friday, April 15, 2005 12:48 PM
Reply #2 Friday, April 15, 2005 12:48 PM
I've had a really stressful day at work. I come home for a bit of relaxation only to find the messageboard full of threads which should have remained in the past. It's made me tetchy.
If you are reading this Starkers, you need to learn a little more about messageboard protocol before participating further. I'd like to not see anymore resurrected threads in the near future. WC is always delighted to welcome new members to the site, but there are right and wrong ways of getting noticed 
aufisch
Reply #3 Friday, April 15, 2005 4:25 PM
Reply #3 Friday, April 15, 2005 4:25 PM
What starker most likely doesn't know, is that Stardock Central still suffers from Alzheimer's and long gone threads are actually labelled as new threads if they get resurrected again.
I have spent the last two mornings reading some of the threads thinking that I suffered from some weird deja-vu phenomenon just to find out that they are actually several months old.
I have spent the last two mornings reading some of the threads thinking that I suffered from some weird deja-vu phenomenon just to find out that they are actually several months old.
Cavan1
Reply #4 Friday, April 15, 2005 7:21 PM
Reply #4 Friday, April 15, 2005 7:21 PM
Starkers, your profile shows member since 5/14/2004. Active member when threads active, if you did not feel the need to reply then let them RIP.
Jafo
Reply #5 Friday, April 15, 2005 8:11 PM
Reply #5 Friday, April 15, 2005 8:11 PM
There's nothing particularly 'wrong' with dragging the odd thread back from the dungeons....but when a lot of them are dragged up they will push the more timely and relevant ones back from prominence....so a little moderation is desirable...
Any that had already genuinely 'run their course' should remain where they were...
Bichur
Reply #6 Friday, April 15, 2005 8:44 PM
Reply #6 Friday, April 15, 2005 8:44 PM
okay. that should be enough.
everybody, please hang back and wait 3 weeks.
just outta curiosity, can there not be a function of some kind that locks a post after a certain length of inactivity?
everybody, please hang back and wait 3 weeks.
just outta curiosity, can there not be a function of some kind that locks a post after a certain length of inactivity?
starkers
Reply #7 Friday, April 15, 2005 11:10 PM
Reply #7 Friday, April 15, 2005 11:10 PM
Sorry people, I've not long been visiting the forum and wasn't aware there was a time factor involved. When I see an article of interest, and its not ancient history to me, I sometimes like to reply with my own comments for the interest of those who might follow certain threads. In some cases there was relatively recent activity and I saw no reason not to comment.
I can now see that frequent forum visitors want to move forwards, but what about infrequent visitors who look up older threads through interest in other's views? I guess it's a matter of what one wants and doesn't want to read, but I will try to be more selective regarding older threads.
I can now see that frequent forum visitors want to move forwards, but what about infrequent visitors who look up older threads through interest in other's views? I guess it's a matter of what one wants and doesn't want to read, but I will try to be more selective regarding older threads.
Sugaree
Reply #8 Friday, April 15, 2005 11:16 PM
Reply #8 Friday, April 15, 2005 11:16 PM
Guess you just got to visit here more often.
More often than not...Old threads die for a reason
More often than not...Old threads die for a reason
Jafo
Reply #9 Friday, April 15, 2005 11:26 PM
Reply #9 Friday, April 15, 2005 11:26 PM
starkers ....some of them did not warrant being revived as they related to issues now dispensed with and/or resolved.
If you read some of them through...including their responses you'll see they were 'over'.
As I mentioned elsewhere...one or two ancient revivals is fine...but they do cause confusion...some people fail to notice exactly how irrelevant they remain, revived or not...
starkers
Reply #10 Saturday, April 16, 2005 12:17 AM
Reply #10 Saturday, April 16, 2005 12:17 AM
WOW!!!! I no sooner apologise to all for dragging out threads from The Dark Ages, and I stumble across a Jurassic Age one by admin Jafo, regarding Frank Zappa. Nothing unusual about that, hey, Double Zero. What is unusual, given the comments to my threads, is that there are replies to this 2002 one from as recently as April 2005, 3 years down the track. Personally, I see nothing wrong with that if people are still interested in the subject at hand. However, it seems this kettle has been called black by a few burnt pots 
Now I'm not complaining here, and I don't mind being put in my place by those righteous enough to do so, but fair suck of the sav. I'm guilty as charged, but should I stand alone before the jury? I think not!
People will exercise their democratic right to freedom of speech, and they will sift through the available information to further their own interests, so surely one can skip threads of no interest to them and pursue those that do. Perhaps then threads wouldn't get "buried". Make any sense?
Besides, knowing where we've been helps us to know where we're going, or so my history teacher told me
Now I'm not complaining here, and I don't mind being put in my place by those righteous enough to do so, but fair suck of the sav. I'm guilty as charged, but should I stand alone before the jury? I think not!
People will exercise their democratic right to freedom of speech, and they will sift through the available information to further their own interests, so surely one can skip threads of no interest to them and pursue those that do. Perhaps then threads wouldn't get "buried". Make any sense?
Besides, knowing where we've been helps us to know where we're going, or so my history teacher told me
Jafo
Reply #11 Saturday, April 16, 2005 12:31 AM
Reply #11 Saturday, April 16, 2005 12:31 AM
| People will exercise their democratic right to freedom of speech, |
Doesn't apply on a private website...
If you are alluding to the 'People will hit me, but...' thread...check its history...count the comments...note its 'currency'...
starkers
Reply #13 Saturday, April 16, 2005 2:15 AM
Reply #13 Saturday, April 16, 2005 2:15 AM
I take your point, Admin Jafo: and once again I apologise to all for ressurrecting ancient threads to be considered irrelevant by the majority. It was never my intention to inconvenience those who are too lazy to click on the more button. Thanks to Double Zero for pointing that out to me as I'd never have considered that my threads were burying more important opinions. However, whilst it was kindly pointed out that freedom of speech doesn't apply on a private web site, it seemed to me that it operated in a democratic manner, and as such, I assumed individuals were able to comment on topics of interest to them. I just wasn't aware that subjects, old or new, could be considered closed by a few individuals unless they breached the code of conduct and the realms of decency. My mistake!
In answer to citizen Cavan1: there's so much cool stuff to navigate through on this site and the forum took some time to get to when I was without my computer a few times since joining. Perhaps I should have made a greater effort to get here sooner to post my threads.
Oh well, gotta go now
In answer to citizen Cavan1: there's so much cool stuff to navigate through on this site and the forum took some time to get to when I was without my computer a few times since joining. Perhaps I should have made a greater effort to get here sooner to post my threads.
Oh well, gotta go now
Double Zero
Reply #14 Saturday, April 16, 2005 3:15 AM
Hey there Starkers, I never meant to say that what you had to say was any less important than what anyone else had to say, I am sorry if thats how you took it. The threads are only less important because they a "old news" and the newer threads are next in line to be answered and should be given the chance to remain in the "light" for a reasonable amount of time.
Jafo did say that one or two older posts being brought forth was not much of an issue, but lets be honest Starkers, You have replied to more than say "1 or 2" in the past couple days now havent you? threads over 2 weeks old..::laughs::
As I said, I have enjoyed reading some of them that you have replied to, and I have enjoyed reading your comments as well..but it just isnt fair to keep bringing forth threads that no one has been interested in for weeks, to replace fresh new posts that perhaps are being writtin by people with valid and somewhat urgent concerns, is it?
As for the whole...
Perhaps it is or isnt, I dont know, I do know that it is a fair place to speak your mind and almost anything can be said, within reason, and keeping in mind the sites ToS rules. If it isnt "Democratic" it is at least more than fair, and no one is here to tell you what to believe, do, or say...
I dont think anyone is telling you not to post or answer threads Starkers, just to let "sleeping dogs lay"...
Ah well, for me it's late and I need to get to bed,(waaay past my bedtime!)
Hope your not upset Starkers and I do look forward to reading some more of your comments..::laughs:: I do admit they are a bit more colorful than others.
Take Care,
Zero.
Reply #14 Saturday, April 16, 2005 3:15 AM
| Thanks to Double Zero for pointing that out to me as I'd never have considered that my threads were burying more important opinions. |
Hey there Starkers, I never meant to say that what you had to say was any less important than what anyone else had to say, I am sorry if thats how you took it. The threads are only less important because they a "old news" and the newer threads are next in line to be answered and should be given the chance to remain in the "light" for a reasonable amount of time.
Jafo did say that one or two older posts being brought forth was not much of an issue, but lets be honest Starkers, You have replied to more than say "1 or 2" in the past couple days now havent you? threads over 2 weeks old..::laughs::
As I said, I have enjoyed reading some of them that you have replied to, and I have enjoyed reading your comments as well..but it just isnt fair to keep bringing forth threads that no one has been interested in for weeks, to replace fresh new posts that perhaps are being writtin by people with valid and somewhat urgent concerns, is it?
As for the whole...
| operated in a democratic manner, and as such, I assumed individuals were able to comment on topics of interest to them |
Perhaps it is or isnt, I dont know, I do know that it is a fair place to speak your mind and almost anything can be said, within reason, and keeping in mind the sites ToS rules. If it isnt "Democratic" it is at least more than fair, and no one is here to tell you what to believe, do, or say...
I dont think anyone is telling you not to post or answer threads Starkers, just to let "sleeping dogs lay"...
Ah well, for me it's late and I need to get to bed,(waaay past my bedtime!)
Hope your not upset Starkers and I do look forward to reading some more of your comments..::laughs:: I do admit they are a bit more colorful than others.
Take Care,
Zero.
starkers
Reply #15 Saturday, April 16, 2005 4:51 AM
Reply #15 Saturday, April 16, 2005 4:51 AM
No worries Zero, I'm not upset, and yes, i will contribute other threads now I've caught up on all the old stuff. As for all the comments, well I guess I deserve them for being such a late arrival here and so slow off the blocks. In looking back, I can see a couple of subjects had been well and truly covered, but then I've seen other old ones with recent threads that also seem pointless, but then that's just my opinion. We're all entitled to our own views, which was my point to begin with, and my question was: how can a few, perhaps a minority, decide when an issue is dead if another wants to contribute to it, then others want to view it?
Correct me if I'm wrong: if I'm free to form an opinion here, isn't it also true that others are free to not read it if they so choose? Precisely, and if my threads are later attached to ones that are considered done to death anyway, then it was the choice of the reader to go there in the first place, A discerning consumer does not go to a burger joint to purchase a computer, and so on.... Sorry, but like my mother and siblings, I'm so easily drawn into a debate. Genetics
Anyhow, thanks to all those who pointed out the error of my ways, I'll try to keep up with the times now, ok
Correct me if I'm wrong: if I'm free to form an opinion here, isn't it also true that others are free to not read it if they so choose? Precisely, and if my threads are later attached to ones that are considered done to death anyway, then it was the choice of the reader to go there in the first place, A discerning consumer does not go to a burger joint to purchase a computer, and so on.... Sorry, but like my mother and siblings, I'm so easily drawn into a debate. Genetics
Anyhow, thanks to all those who pointed out the error of my ways, I'll try to keep up with the times now, ok
starkers
Reply #16 Saturday, April 16, 2005 6:41 AM
Reply #16 Saturday, April 16, 2005 6:41 AM
Sorry, Zero, but after another browse through the forum, i've changed my mind. There's no encouragement for me to contribute further when one seemingly impatient and intolerant individual has taken particular exception to my posts: whose comments on them has seemingly influenced more recent contibutors than I - contibutors who seemed happy to otherwise participate. So how old is too old for a thread, 1 month or 2? And if it's truly dead, why is it still one the boards to add to?
Given that all forum postings, new and old, are still available to all who choose to look for them, I see those comments as an unnecessary bitch about nothing too important. Forum visitors can easily navigate away from dead threads and my comments if they don't wanna read 'em, and like minded ones can if they like.
So how old is too old for a thread, 1 month or 2 ? Last time I looked, people were still finding relevance in the bible and other old writings, as perhaps some on Wc were in mine.
Just as well we don't throw the baby out with the bathwater because it went cold.
Given that all forum postings, new and old, are still available to all who choose to look for them, I see those comments as an unnecessary bitch about nothing too important. Forum visitors can easily navigate away from dead threads and my comments if they don't wanna read 'em, and like minded ones can if they like.
So how old is too old for a thread, 1 month or 2 ? Last time I looked, people were still finding relevance in the bible and other old writings, as perhaps some on Wc were in mine.
Just as well we don't throw the baby out with the bathwater because it went cold.
Jafo
Reply #17 Saturday, April 16, 2005 8:53 AM
Reply #17 Saturday, April 16, 2005 8:53 AM
Citizen starkers ....I locked one of the ancient threads resurrected for the simple reason its last comment prior to the revival was 'this topic was resolved in #5 any and all subsequent posts were/are irrelevant...time to move on".
Had you read that, and had you been sympathetic it would have stayed as 'past history' where it belonged.
Next time you drag one screaming from the past....indicate clearly that it is in fact ancient history so others are not led down the garden path of irrelevance. Really....what topicality is there in a thread left dormant for three months anyway?....
#9 in this thread covers the situation already.
Likewise....time to move on here as well....
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
Reply #1 Friday, April 15, 2005 11:46 AM