Zeropaid Controversy: Bumping Old Posts

[Watchmen]

I was thinking maybe posts older than a month should be deleted. This seems like a good way to please everyone. What do you guys/gals think?

[RACKnRAIL]

I was thinking maybe posts older than a month should be deleted. This seems like a good way to please everyone. What do you guys/gals think?
I'm sorry, but CJ would never go for this.:error

[The Hunter]

By and large, I have no problem with old posts being bumped, and have no desire to delete them. Many of these threads are IMHO a part of the history of the site. It doesnt matter if its one of CJs fun threads, or one like this.
http://www.zeropaid.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=18600&highlight=sadness
So you see, all of these threads are a part of our history.

[The Hunter]

PS, heres another thread I wouldnt want to delete.
http://www.zeropaid.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=20785&highlight=indy

[infringer]

hrmmm yah bumped threads I like em actually cause you get to see some of the old dialouge at the forms every so often.

-infringer-

[aqlo]

old threads are good, they remind us of the continuity and how things came to be, where we came from and where we are going. I realize they annoy some people; but look at which people they are :angel

[crackerjacker]

watchmen is just feeling a little vulnerable right now.
haha

[Lord_of_the_Dense]

Yes please don't. I think it is good information that people needed to know so I am glad it was bumped.

Sorry but this seems a little confusing now. Either you're for it or against it.

[Watchmen]

Sorry but this seems a little confusing now. Either you're for it or against it.

I was hoping that by making such an outrageous suggestion it might make people think about and appreciate the value of older threads. Anyone remember that post where everyone was introducing themselves and talking about their lives? Where we first met the real krell and found out his name was Robert?
Or the ZP family pictures/picnic thread?

Wouldn't it be a shame if such things no longer existed?

[Lord_of_the_Dense]

I agree that it would be a shame. Just wasn't sure where you were coming from there.

[infringer]

You know what in all actuality alqo you are very right man its so easy and people do it so often forget where things started and where they came from Mr. Bill Gates the prime canadite for forgetting where he came from he crys over a pirated copy of windows hrmmm cough .... well windows was a borderline pirated OS to begin with.

-infringer-

[Potato]

It can be annoying. I like the old threads though... they make for great reference.

[evilmegaman]

I wish I could find my first post...

Anyways. I like the old stuff :)

I never realized krell was robert too.. Weird

[Sephiroth]

I was thinking maybe posts older than a month should be deleted. This seems like a good way to please everyone. What do you guys/gals think?

why not just close them. Then they couldnt get "rebumped" to the top again..

[wingnut2600]

why not just close them. Then they couldnt get "rebumped" to the top again..

<irrelevant statement>

BTW... I like old threads... they are alive for a reason. People can still contribute something to them. I am oft reminded of a poster with whom I used to be friends. Like Matsao... or Gorphon... people missed but not forgotten... they are the reason ZP is great... not me or grab or the Spud... it is the people that have put their indelible mark on the way that people have posted.... it will not be forgotten.


Please refrain from the unnecessary remarks. Thank you.

[grab_grab_the_haddock]

I am in the unfortunate position of having to agree with wingnut2600. Every time one of my old threads resurfaces i am reminded of what an excellent and well liked poster I am.

However i notice wingnut2600 has the word "banned" in his avatar settings, and would like to draw peoples attentions to forum rule number 9 " Don't put the word "banned" in your avatar settings ,if you do, you will be temp banned on the 1st offence, and permanently banned on 2nd offence!"

So it seems our moderators have no alternative but to issue wingnut with a 3 day temporary ban. He can't say he hasn't had it coming.

[Lord_of_the_Dense]

SInce this rule was just changed, we are allowing a grace period for people such as wingnut to change their avatar's back. After a more than reasonable amount of time, we will begin to ban anyone who decides to utilize the terminology.

[wingnut2600]

SInce this rule was just changed, we are allowing a grace period for people such as wingnut to change their avatar's back. After a more than reasonable amount of time, we will begin to ban anyone who decides to utilize the terminology.

That is assinine... you can ban me if you like, but this is obviously a joke. If a person is banned, it says "banned," not "banned, no really :)." If you would like, you can change it to "banned," but I think that would be foolish.

I think that the moderation is currently worried about things that are inconsequential. Extra rules only serve as a catalyst for people to test them. Moderation is best when it is not even seen...

:fire
The bouncing frog hates moderation

[infringer]

Borderline micromanagment indeed I personally do not believe that LOD is all too serious about his posting and if he is... I doubt he was the one who believes it is the problem...

That'd be a goofy rule but hey I guess its something that could stir up trouble if someone looks like there banned then a whole bunch of supporters of that charechter will get there panties all in a bunch and give the mods a hard time about it.

I guess I really have no say as I am not a moderator so take that opinon for what its worth, I dont make the rules I just follow them to the best of my ability.

-infringer-

[Lord_of_the_Dense]

And moderation is best when we're not hammered with a bunch of members asking whether or not you are truly banned.

Yes, this is all truly asinine. If you want to run with it, be my guest. It won't be my decision alone when we start treating the "banned" members like they want to be treated. I for one know you are above this.

[MoonMan]

And moderation is best when we're not hammered with a bunch of members asking whether or not you are truly banned.


I really wonder about this. Just how many members actually PM you guys or just skip the middleman and ask the "accused" themselves ? I'm sure it is a minor inconvience for you.. at worst.

You actually believe it deserves a ban?