-->
Welcome,
Guest
. Please
login
or
register
.
October 31, 2024, 11:21:03 PM
1 Hour
1 Day
1 Week
1 Month
Forever
Login with username, password and session length
Search:
Advanced search
News:
The Smiley Smile Message Board
Non Smiley Smile Stuff
The Sandbox
Old-Threadiquette (tm)
Pages:
1
[
2
]
Go Down
« previous
next »
Author
Topic: Old-Threadiquette (tm) (Read 13782 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
RangeRoverA1
Smiley Smile Associate
Offline
Posts: 4347
Did somebody smile today? Not this tawny guy.
Re: Old-Threadiquette (tm)
«
Reply #25 on:
February 19, 2014, 05:22:51 AM »
Many people revive threads. Relax.
«
Last Edit: July 07, 2019, 03:11:21 PM by RangeRoverA1
»
Logged
Lime is food? Yep.
Mandarin and Clementine went to meet the entire citrus gang, nobody ate people.
musicismylife101
Smiley Smile Associate
Offline
Posts: 383
The introverted phlegmatic ecapist
Re: Old-Threadiquette (tm)
«
Reply #26 on:
February 19, 2014, 09:28:25 AM »
Revive one or two threads with relevant and useful/interesting information = fine with that
Revive a bunch of threads with comments that do not add to the discussion or are unnecessary = no.
Only revive an old thread if you feel that your input would really add something to it. Also if you see an old thread full of batshit crazy stuff such as arguments that have escalated DO NOT revive it by putting in comments like "That should've been locked" or "What was going on here?" or something like that. Those threads should be dead and buried. It shouldn't be that hard to understand.
Logged
Wattpad:
http://www.wattpad.com/user/peacecoastflower
Side blog:
http://peace-coast-island.tumblr.com/
bgas
Smiley Smile Associate
Offline
Posts: 6372
Oh for the good old days
Re: Old-Threadiquette (tm)
«
Reply #27 on:
February 19, 2014, 09:47:34 AM »
Quote from: musicismylife101 on February 19, 2014, 09:28:25 AM
Only revive an old thread if you feel that your input would really add something to it. Also if you see an old thread full of batshit crazy stuff such as arguments that have escalated DO NOT revive it by putting in comments like "That should've been locked" or "What was going on here?" or something like that. Those threads should be dead and buried. It shouldn't be that hard to understand.
But where's the fun in that? Tis is still part of a BBs site and they're all about fun fun fun, right?
Logged
Nothing I post is my opinion, it's all a message from God
♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇
Pissing off drunks since 1978
Global Moderator
Offline
Posts: 11849
🍦🍦 Pet Demon for Sale - $5 or best offer ☮☮
Re: Old-Threadiquette (tm)
«
Reply #28 on:
February 19, 2014, 11:13:34 AM »
Quote from: musicismylife101 on February 19, 2014, 09:28:25 AM
Revive one or two threads with relevant and useful/interesting information = fine with that
Revive a bunch of threads with comments that do not add to the discussion or are unnecessary = no.
Only revive an old thread if you feel that your input would really add something to it. Also if you see an old thread full of batshit crazy stuff such as arguments that have escalated DO NOT revive it by putting in comments like "That should've been locked" or "What was going on here?" or something like that. Those threads should be dead and buried. It shouldn't be that hard to understand.
That's how I feel too. Hell on some forums people get warnings for doing that. Not here, though. I myself got a week long ban for bumping old threads, over on a Lost message board
Logged
Need your song mixed/mastered? Contact me at
fear2stop@yahoo.com
. Serious inquiries only, please!
SloopJohnB
Smiley Smile Associate
Offline
Posts: 947
Re: Old-Threadiquette (tm)
«
Reply #29 on:
February 19, 2014, 12:14:34 PM »
Quote from: RangeRoverA1 on February 19, 2014, 05:22:51 AM
2 both
SloopJohnB
&
pixletwin
: you are entitled to your own opinion as much as anyone here, but those were weak & pointless points. pixletwin, you say that retrokid wanted to get attention by a mere "Brian's a musical genius" comment? But wasn't it called "Brian
Appreciation
Thread" & she expressed her own, well, appreciation of Brian? Also, I don't see the difference between posting this short bit on an old thread & starting a new one by saying so. Even if retrokid was seeking for attention, it's definitely not for herself, but rather other folks coming in & share their own thoughts on Brian. In the Music section, Luther very rightly noted that making a thread doesn't mean owning it (or sth. along the lines). Each can contribute & enlighten it adding more useful information, therefore, raise the direction of the thread from silly rant to interesting discussion. So, instead of bashing a newbie someone could post crucial piece of information as you, SloopJohnB, worded it (for example, some stories relating the meeting with a Beach Boy).
The comment I was referring to
was
weak and pointless. Mine had a point: to show an example of what is pointless.
You say you "
don't see the difference between posting this short bit on an old thread & starting a new one by saying so
". Well, you see, there's no difference. Just as you shouldn't dig up a thread from 2006 to say "Brian is a musical genius", you shouldn't start a new thread either. It would be like going on an automotive message board and starting a thread just to say "I like cars".
Billy is right, there are messageboards where that kind of behavior would lead to bans. I'm not saying we should do this here. I just want to say that it's annoying.
Logged
I don't know where, but their music sends me there
P
l
e
a
s
u
r
e
I
s
l
a
n
d
!!!!!!!
and a slice of
cheese
pizza
.
pixletwin
Smiley Smile Associate
Offline
Posts: 4934
Re: Old-Threadiquette (tm)
«
Reply #30 on:
February 19, 2014, 12:25:44 PM »
Quote from: RangeRoverA1 on February 19, 2014, 05:22:51 AM
2 both
SloopJohnB
&
pixletwin
: you are entitled to your own opinion as much as anyone here, but those were weak & pointless points. pixletwin, you say that retrokid wanted to get attention by a mere "Brian's a musical genius" comment? But wasn't it called "Brian
Appreciation
Thread" & she expressed her own, well, appreciation of Brian? Also, I don't see the difference between posting this short bit on an old thread & starting a new one by saying so. Even if retrokid was seeking for attention, it's definitely not for herself, but rather other folks coming in & share their own thoughts on Brian. In the Music section, Luther very rightly noted that making a thread doesn't mean owning it (or sth. along the lines). Each can contribute & enlighten it adding more useful information, therefore, raise the direction of the thread from silly rant to interesting discussion. So, instead of bashing a newbie someone could post crucial piece of information as you, SloopJohnB, worded it (for example, some stories relating the meeting with a Beach Boy).
What does "sth" mean. You include that in nearly every post you make.
Logged
rab2591
Smiley Smile Associate
Online
Posts: 5951
"My God. It's full of stars."
Re: Old-Threadiquette (tm)
«
Reply #31 on:
February 19, 2014, 12:31:57 PM »
Quote from: pixletwin on February 19, 2014, 12:25:44 PM
Quote from: RangeRoverA1 on February 19, 2014, 05:22:51 AM
2 both
SloopJohnB
&
pixletwin
: you are entitled to your own opinion as much as anyone here, but those were weak & pointless points. pixletwin, you say that retrokid wanted to get attention by a mere "Brian's a musical genius" comment? But wasn't it called "Brian
Appreciation
Thread" & she expressed her own, well, appreciation of Brian? Also, I don't see the difference between posting this short bit on an old thread & starting a new one by saying so. Even if retrokid was seeking for attention, it's definitely not for herself, but rather other folks coming in & share their own thoughts on Brian. In the Music section, Luther very rightly noted that making a thread doesn't mean owning it (or sth. along the lines). Each can contribute & enlighten it adding more useful information, therefore, raise the direction of the thread from silly rant to interesting discussion. So, instead of bashing a newbie someone could post crucial piece of information as you, SloopJohnB, worded it (for example, some stories relating the meeting with a Beach Boy).
What does "sth" mean. You include that in nearly every post you make.
From urban dictionary:
sth
sumthn, somethin, something
i wanna do sth fun today, im sick of this boring sh*t here
Logged
Bill Tobelman's
SMiLE site
Quote from: mtaber on September 18, 2021, 07:39:15 AM
God must’ve smiled the day Brian Wilson was born!
"ragegasm" - /rāj • ga-zəm/ : a logical mental response produced when your favorite band becomes remotely associated with the bro-country genre.
Ever want to hear some Beach Boys songs mashed up together like The Beatles' 'LOVE' album? Check out my mix!
RangeRoverA1
Smiley Smile Associate
Offline
Posts: 4347
Did somebody smile today? Not this tawny guy.
Re: Old-Threadiquette (tm)
«
Reply #32 on:
February 24, 2014, 05:31:38 AM »
Quote from: musicismylife101 on February 19, 2014, 09:28:25 AM
Only revive an old thread if you feel that your input would really add something to it. Also if you see an old thread full of batshit crazy stuff such as arguments that have escalated DO NOT revive it by putting in comments like "That should've been locked" or "What was going on here?" or something like that. Those threads should be dead and buried. It shouldn't be that hard to understand.
What you said is fair & I certainly didn't get Rei's logic behind opening that thread you're referring to. But we talked about the "Brian Appreciation" topic, and in
there
wasn't any argument taking place; everyone simply dropped a few words about Brian. So did retrokid, but somehow she was greeted by cold & too serious advisory responses. Don't tell me it's the 1st & only "meaningless" topic having been revived in the all history of the board. I'll again reiterate: the topic could very easily be turned into sth. informative & interesting, since we all have varying degrees of BBs knowledge & different preferences as far as the type of discussion goes (some like talking fun; some analyze the various instruments played live & in the studio; some be dipped in the Mike interviews, taking his words out of context etc. etc.).
Logged
Lime is food? Yep.
Mandarin and Clementine went to meet the entire citrus gang, nobody ate people.
Niko
Smiley Smile Associate
Offline
Posts: 1617
Re: Old-Threadiquette (tm)
«
Reply #33 on:
February 24, 2014, 06:45:34 AM »
Quote from: RangeRoverA1 on February 24, 2014, 05:31:38 AM
Quote from: musicismylife101 on February 19, 2014, 09:28:25 AM
Only revive an old thread if you feel that your input would really add something to it. Also if you see an old thread full of batshit crazy stuff such as arguments that have escalated DO NOT revive it by putting in comments like "That should've been locked" or "What was going on here?" or something like that. Those threads should be dead and buried. It shouldn't be that hard to understand.
What you said is fair & I certainly didn't get Rei's logic behind opening that thread you're referring to. But we talked about the "Brian Appreciation" topic, and in
there
wasn't any argument taking place; everyone simply dropped a few words about Brian. So did retrokid, but somehow she was greeted by cold & too serious advisory responses.
Don't tell me it's the 1st & only "meaningless" topic having been revived in the all history of the boar
d
. I'll again reiterate: the topic could very easily be turned into sth. informative & interesting, since we all have varying degrees of BBs knowledge & different preferences as far as the type of discussion goes (some like talking fun; some analyze the various instruments played live & in the studio; some be dipped in the Mike interviews, taking his words out of context etc. etc.).
I don't think its so much the fact an old thread was bumped, its the
consistent
bumping of threads, or going into an old thread to tell everyone it should have been locked. Its comes across as trying to get attention.
Its ok if you have something interesting to add to an old discussion, or if some new light has been shed on the topic since the conversation has ceased, but if its to say 'i like this!'...eh.
Logged
Check out the awesome Beach Boys mixes a few of us made:
Symphony to God:
http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,18190.0.html
Dumb Angels:
http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,18326.0.html
Hawthorne Sunset:
http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,22538.msg530237.html
filledeplage
Smiley Smile Associate
Offline
Posts: 3151
Re: Old-Threadiquette (tm)
«
Reply #34 on:
February 24, 2014, 07:06:15 AM »
Quote from: Woodstock on February 24, 2014, 06:45:34 AM
Quote from: RangeRoverA1 on February 24, 2014, 05:31:38 AM
Quote from: musicismylife101 on February 19, 2014, 09:28:25 AM
Only revive an old thread if you feel that your input would really add something to it. Also if you see an old thread full of batshit crazy stuff such as arguments that have escalated DO NOT revive it by putting in comments like "That should've been locked" or "What was going on here?" or something like that. Those threads should be dead and buried. It shouldn't be that hard to understand.
What you said is fair & I certainly didn't get Rei's logic behind opening that thread you're referring to. But we talked about the "Brian Appreciation" topic, and in
there
wasn't any argument taking place; everyone simply dropped a few words about Brian. So did retrokid, but somehow she was greeted by cold & too serious advisory responses.
Don't tell me it's the 1st & only "meaningless" topic having been revived in the all history of the boar
d
. I'll again reiterate: the topic could very easily be turned into sth. informative & interesting, since we all have varying degrees of BBs knowledge & different preferences as far as the type of discussion goes (some like talking fun; some analyze the various instruments played live & in the studio; some be dipped in the Mike interviews, taking his words out of context etc. etc.).
I don't think its so much the fact an old thread was bumped, its the
consistent
bumping of threads, or going into an old thread to tell everyone it should have been locked. Its comes across as trying to get attention.
Its ok if you have something interesting to add to an old discussion, or if some new light has been shed on the topic since the conversation has ceased, but if its to say 'i like this!'...eh.
Woodstock - I would agree that it is often problem of "consistent bumping..." Just because you can...a lot of older threads are meaningful, and, perhaps for a new member, who might not realize a "good" question has been answered well and by people who have a lot of good information, there is some profound aspect to add to the discussion, instead of a redundant +1. If you're a newbie, you might not realize some topic "new to you" might have been debated, discussed and resolved.
And, I "lurked" about two years before I dove into the sometimes intimidating shark tank.
Logged
Niko
Smiley Smile Associate
Offline
Posts: 1617
Re: Old-Threadiquette (tm)
«
Reply #35 on:
February 24, 2014, 07:11:43 AM »
I lurked for quite a while as well, though I'm still a newcomer even including that time (my first visit was when TWGMTR came out). I spent a lot of time just reading through older threads, trying to understand just "how do people really do feel about Bruce Johnston"
Logged
Check out the awesome Beach Boys mixes a few of us made:
Symphony to God:
http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,18190.0.html
Dumb Angels:
http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,18326.0.html
Hawthorne Sunset:
http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,22538.msg530237.html
Heysaboda
Smiley Smile Associate
Offline
Posts: 1054
Son, don't wait till the break of day....
Re: Old-Threadiquette (tm)
«
Reply #36 on:
February 25, 2014, 11:58:17 AM »
Quote from: musicismylife101 on February 19, 2014, 09:28:25 AM
Revive one or two threads with relevant and useful/interesting information = fine with that
Revive a bunch of threads with comments that do not add to the discussion or are unnecessary = no.
Only revive an old thread if you feel that your input would really add something to it. Also if you see an old thread full of batshit crazy stuff such as arguments that have escalated DO NOT revive it by putting in comments like "That should've been locked" or "What was going on here?" or something like that. Those threads should be dead and buried. It shouldn't be that hard to understand.
I enjoy seeing the zombie threads revived -- I haven't been on Smiley Smile Dot Net forever, and there is a lot that I've missed. It's pretty easy to skip the ones that are just "too silly"........
By the way, is "necroposting" a real word? I've not seen that one before! Cool!
EDIT:
Apparently it is!
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=necro%20post
Logged
Son, don't wait till the break of day 'cause you know how time fades away......
RangeRoverA1
Smiley Smile Associate
Offline
Posts: 4347
Did somebody smile today? Not this tawny guy.
Re: Old-Threadiquette (tm)
«
Reply #37 on:
February 28, 2014, 06:37:25 AM »
Quote from: Woodstock on February 24, 2014, 06:45:34 AM
I don't think its so much the fact an old thread was bumped, its the
consistent
bumping of threads,
or going into an old thread to tell everyone it should have been locked.
Its comes across as trying to get attention.
Its ok if you have something interesting to add to an old discussion, or if some new light has been shed on the topic since the conversation has ceased, but if its to say 'i like this!'...eh.
I feel like we are going in circles now. I've already explained myself on every angle of this old threadiquette discussion. Let's just agree to amicably disagree (except the super-black bit).
Logged
Lime is food? Yep.
Mandarin and Clementine went to meet the entire citrus gang, nobody ate people.
bgas
Smiley Smile Associate
Offline
Posts: 6372
Oh for the good old days
Re: Old-Threadiquette (tm)
«
Reply #38 on:
February 28, 2014, 02:46:01 PM »
Quote from: RangeRoverA1 on February 28, 2014, 06:37:25 AM
Quote from: Woodstock on February 24, 2014, 06:45:34 AM
I don't think its so much the fact an old thread was bumped, its the
consistent
bumping of threads,
or going into an old thread to tell everyone it should have been locked.
Its comes across as trying to get attention.
Its ok if you have something interesting to add to an old discussion, or if some new light has been shed on the topic since the conversation has ceased, but if its to say 'i like this!'...eh.
I feel like we are going in circles now. I've already explained myself on every angle of this old threadiquette discussion. Let's just agree to amicably disagree (except the super-black bit).
Maybe, just maybe now, the whole world isn't about RRA1 and the thought could apply to the rest of the board
Logged
Nothing I post is my opinion, it's all a message from God
RangeRoverA1
Smiley Smile Associate
Offline
Posts: 4347
Did somebody smile today? Not this tawny guy.
Re: Old-Threadiquette (tm)
«
Reply #39 on:
March 01, 2014, 06:54:47 AM »
Quote from: bgas on February 28, 2014, 02:46:01 PM
Maybe, just maybe now, the whole world isn't about RRA1 and the thought could apply to the rest of the board
Thank you for bringing up one of my favorite BBs songs in the post addressed towards me. It cheered me up! Seriously though, you're way off the mark, because what I did was just respond back to Woodstock that we were going to repeat ourselves, as we dropped in exact same points before in this thread. I didn't take his post about resurrection of an old topic by simpleton "I like this!" as a hint to
my
posting habit. Of course he meant that in general; a good number of folks suffer from this disease - here or other boards.
Logged
Lime is food? Yep.
Mandarin and Clementine went to meet the entire citrus gang, nobody ate people.
JK
Smiley Smile Associate
Offline
Posts: 6053
Maybe I put too much faith in atmosphere
Re: Old-Threadiquette (tm)
«
Reply #40 on:
March 01, 2014, 09:02:09 AM »
I got ticked off for resurrecting some old threads a while back. But hey, I saw this old Captain Beefheart topic and being a major Beefheart fan I went for it. And a bunch of others posters followed suit, with most sensible and enlightening posts. I think "sensible" is the key word here. (Thinks: Must resurrect it again some time.)
Logged
"Ik bun moar een eenvoudige boerenlul en doar schoam ik mien niet veur" (Normaal, 1978)
You're Grass and I'm a Power Mower: A Beach Boys Orchestration Web Series
the Carbon Freeze | Eclectic Essays & Art
JK
Smiley Smile Associate
Offline
Posts: 6053
Maybe I put too much faith in atmosphere
Re: Old-Threadiquette (tm)
«
Reply #41 on:
March 16, 2014, 11:39:48 AM »
As evidence that resurrecting old threads with red warning messages need not be a bad thing, see the "Favorite Instrumentals" topic, which I dug up yesterday.
Logged
"Ik bun moar een eenvoudige boerenlul en doar schoam ik mien niet veur" (Normaal, 1978)
You're Grass and I'm a Power Mower: A Beach Boys Orchestration Web Series
the Carbon Freeze | Eclectic Essays & Art
Pages:
1
[
2
]
Go Up
« previous
next »
Jump to:
Please select a destination:
-----------------------------
Smiley Smile Stuff
-----------------------------
=> BRIAN WILSON Q & A
=> Welcome to the Smiley Smile board
=> General On Topic Discussions
===> Ask The Honored Guests
===> Smiley Smile Reference Threads
=> Smile Sessions Box Set (2011)
=> The Beach Boys Media
=> Concert Reviews
=> Album, Book and Video Reviews And Discussions
===> 1960's Beach Boys Albums
===> 1970's Beach Boys Albums
===> 1980's Beach Boys Albums
===> 1990's Beach Boys Albums
===> 21st Century Beach Boys Albums
===> Brian Wilson Solo Albums
===> Other Solo Albums
===> Produced by or otherwise related to
===> Tribute Albums
===> DVDs and Videos
===> Book Reviews
===> 'Rank the Tracks'
===> Polls
-----------------------------
Non Smiley Smile Stuff
-----------------------------
=> General Music Discussion
=> General Entertainment Thread
=> Smiley Smilers Who Make Music
=> The Sandbox
Powered by SMF 1.1.21
|
SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Page created in 4.525 seconds with 21 queries.