Jump to content

Forum feature suggestion for kfools ...


Recommended Posts

The number of posts by any poster on a thread should be limited to no more than the number of posts the originator of the thread has made to that point.  

 

This would go a long ways towards limiting the spamming that certain posters are doing on threads just to disrupt them (you know who they are).

  • Thumb up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BeAChooser said:

I suggest that the number of posts by any single poster on a thread be limited to no more than the number of posts the originator of the thread has made on the thread.  

 

This would go a  long ways towards limiting the spamming that certain posters are doing on threads just to disrupt them.

Obviously another Fabian plot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, BeAChooser said:

The number of posts by any poster on a thread should be limited to no more than the number of posts the originator of the thread has made to that point.  

 

This would go a long ways towards limiting the spamming that certain posters are doing on threads just to disrupt them (you know who they are).

Insane rule. No way 

  • Thumb up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, lucifershammer said:

Insane rule.

 

Why is it insane?  Why should someone like dontlooknow or 5x5 be allowed to take over a thread with nonsense posts just to disrupt it?  I see no benefit whatsoever in allowing trolls like them to do that.   So what makes this rule insane, lh?   This would keep that from happening and It could be easily automated in software (i.e., require no moderator oversight).   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BeAChooser said:

 

Why is it insane?  Why should someone like dontlooknow or 5x5 be allowed to take over a thread with nonsense posts just to disrupt it?  I see no benefit whatsoever in allowing trolls like them to do that.   So what makes this rule insane, lh?   This would keep that from happening and It could be easily automated in software (i.e., require no moderator oversight).   

Because I have enough whiners counting threads now give them  a reason to whine and count posts.?

  • Thumb up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, lucifershammer said:

Because I have enough whiners counting threads now give them  a reason to whine and count posts.?

 

I said the feature should be automated which should be relatively easy to do.   At least suggest it to the provider of your software as a future feature.   Unless of course you want threads to be disrupted by the likes of dln and 5x5?   Maybe all you care about, lh, is post count?   In which case, you must love those two.  And by the way, I *thought* people like me were doing you folks a favor in notifying you about posters violating forum rules.   But you've made it quite clear such help isn't welcome, despite what kfools and teacher might have said.   I think we've discovered who has the real power around here ... and it's apparently not kfools or teacher.  It's the bureaucrat they stuck between them and the members as a buffer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, lucifershammer said:

Because I have enough whiners counting threads now give them  a reason to whine and count posts.?

I have to agree here.  It's too hard to moderate.  Just put the offenders on ignore, then their posts won't disrupt the thread for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, BeAChooser said:

 

Why is it insane?  Why should someone like dontlooknow or 5x5 be allowed to take over a thread with nonsense posts just to disrupt it?  I see no benefit whatsoever in allowing trolls like them to do that.   So what makes this rule insane, lh?   This would keep that from happening and It could be easily automated in software (i.e., require no moderator oversight).   

what happens when the original talking point becomes inaccurate factually relative to life working self evidently in plain sight and historically been incomplete translation ancestrally acted upon socially?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, BeAChooser said:

 

I said the feature should be automated which should be relatively easy to do.   At least suggest it to the provider of your software as a future feature.   Unless of course you want threads to be disrupted by the likes of dln and 5x5?   Maybe all you care about, lh, is post count?   In which case, you must love those two.  And by the way, I *thought* people like me were doing you folks a favor in notifying you about posters violating forum rules.   But you've made it quite clear such help isn't welcome, despite what kfools and teacher might have said.   I think we've discovered who has the real power around here ... and it's apparently not kfools or teacher.  It's the bureaucrat they stuck between them and the members as a buffer. 

If you see just how petty some of the reports get you would understand. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Skans said:

I have to agree here.  It's too hard to moderate. 

 

If it's automated, AS I SUGGESTED, then it wouldn't require any moderation.   It's simply numbers of posts being counted by the software and acted upon BY THE SOFTWARE.   If a poster tries to post more posts than the OP author has made in the thread, the software doesn't allow it.   Why is the ignore filter the only solution you can offer?  And what good does it really do if you're trying to influence minds as this forum *claims* to be about?   You might not see the hundred idiotic posts by tommy or 5x5 on your thread but they'll still be there, making it almost impossible for anyone else to participate in the thread ... to even see the posts that matter.   That's tommy and 5x5's purpose, so they've won even if you don't see their posts.   I still don't see the downside of this at all.  Unless of course altering the software, or getting the provider of the software to incorporate such a feature is beyond the ability of the management of this forum.   If that's the case, just admit it.   Quite trying to hide behind unfriendly excuses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, lucifershammer said:

If you see just how petty some of the reports get you would understand. 

 

Are you illiterate?   I'm not asking anyone to report anyone.   I'm asking that a FEATURE be added to the software ... a FEATURE that would be AUTOMATED.   Is that clear enough for you, having said it 3 times now, lh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, BeAChooser said:

Why is it insane? 

 

Because often a thread will morph into a good discussion of a related topic.  If the OP is not interested in that discussion and moves on...it basically locks the thread.

 

Now...giving the thread originator the ability to delete non-responsive post in their thread?  That one, I would like to see.  That one would allow the originator to keep idiots like Scout in check, who simply refuse to answer questions or provide support for their allegations.  If they don't want to answer a question or provide support, their useless post could be deleted.

 

I would also like to see a number on each post in a thread. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BatteryPowered said:

Because often a thread will morph into a good discussion of a related topic. 

 

What I'm suggesting doesn't prevent that, BP.   What gives you that idea?   What I suggest merely prevents scores of nonsensical, off any topic posts be added to every thread we start ... by the likes of 5x5, dln, benson or all the other trolls on this forum ... whose ONLY purpose is disrupt any real debate and conversation.  

 

Just now, BatteryPowered said:

If the OP is not interested in that discussion and moves on...it basically locks the thread.

 

Not sure what you mean by this.   Explain.

 

Just now, BatteryPowered said:

Now...giving the thread originator the ability to delete non-responsive post in their thread?  That one, I would like to see.

 

If you want moderators flooded with complaints, do that.  

 

Because then every thread that leftists start will have any conservative rebuttals deleted as *non-responsive* posts.  Poof!

 

Just now, BatteryPowered said:

That one would allow the originator to keep idiots like Scout in check, who simply refuse to answer questions or provide support for their allegations.

 

And Scout will use that feature to make sure you can't post rebuttals on his thread.  What will you do then?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, BeAChooser said:

 

If it's automated, AS I SUGGESTED, then it wouldn't require any moderation.  

Liberalforum.org is a pretty basic forum format.  What makes you think this kind of technology is easily switched on to do what you want it to?

8 minutes ago, BeAChooser said:

It's simply numbers of posts being counted by the software and acted upon BY THE SOFTWARE.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the feature needs to already exist in the forum builder.  Otherwise, you're asking Kfools, who probably feels he paid too much for this forum right about now, to spend $$$$ to screw with a few liberal dicks.

8 minutes ago, BeAChooser said:

 Why is the ignore filter the only solution you can offer?  And what good does it really do if you're trying to influence minds as this forum *claims* to be about?  

Because, it's about the only thing I can control as to seeing or not seeing stupid shit posted by insane a-holes.

8 minutes ago, BeAChooser said:

You might not see the hundred idiotic posts by tommy or 5x5 on your thread

Trust me, I don't.

8 minutes ago, BeAChooser said:

 Unless of course altering the software, or getting the provider of the software to incorporate such a feature is beyond the ability of the management of this forum.

That's where I'm placing MY bet!  At least without spending $$$$.....I ADMIT IT.....I ADMIT IT....I ADMIT IT....I ADMIT IT.... (how's that for not hiding?):)

 

  • Thumb up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, BeAChooser said:

Not sure what you mean by this.   Explain.

 

Let's say you start a thread about Electoral College and you are involved in some back and forth...making three additional post.  Then, for some reason find yourself in a situation where you cannot comment in that thread for 36 hours.  During that time the thread morphs into a discussion of the Popular Vote Compact that idiots...I mean liberals...are pushing.  Your absence would keep people from keeping that discussion going because they would be limited to 4 post in that thread.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, BeAChooser said:

 

Are you illiterate?   I'm not asking anyone to report anyone.   I'm asking that a FEATURE be added to the software ... a FEATURE that would be AUTOMATED.   Is that clear enough for you, having said it 3 times now, lh?

I was explaining the reports.  Your idea is censorship,  it goes against the basic tenants of this forum. If you're that irritated use the ignore feature. 

  • Thumb up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Skans said:

Liberalforum.org is a pretty basic forum format.  What makes you think this kind of technology is easily switched on to do what you want it to?

 

For one, a lot of changes have been made to the software in the past and recently.   Second, this is basic stuff (I've programmed for a living) that I'm sure the maker of the software could and might add ... if the users requested it.   And it's a feature that might be widely liked, if you ask me.

 

Quote

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the feature needs to already exist in the forum builder.


Well that's what I asked in my earlier post.   DOES IT?   The response I got was "that's insane."  

 

If the capability doesn't exist, then just tell us that.  Don't insult us by calling what might be a good feature "insane".    

 

If it's not available, then ask the forum software builder to add it.   He/she might not, but then also might.

 

Quote

Otherwise, you're asking Kfools ... snip .. to screw with a few liberal dicks.

 

You mean the guy who just a few hours ago started a thread titled "You rotten,dirty,filthy,liberal scum"?

 

You think he wouldn't enjoy adding a feature that did what you suggest?

 

Quote

Because, it's about the only thing I can control as to seeing or not seeing stupid shit posted by insane a-holes.

 

That's true, but it doesn't change the fact that "stupid shit" is still visible to everyone else, making it almost impossible to find your posts on the thread or make sense of a thread you started.   The only person who got what they wanted in that case is the guy posting the "stupid shit".  NOT YOU.   I'm trying to change that.

 

Quote

Trust me, I don't.

 

Fine, you don't, but most of the people visiting threads you start or post on don't see YOUR posts either ... because of the "stupid shit" which they have not put on ignore.   So effectively dln and 5x5 have killed threads and discussion with this behavior and you're apparently content to let them get away with it.    I see.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, BatteryPowered said:

 

Let's say you start a thread about Electoral College and you are involved in some back and forth...making three additional post.  Then, for some reason find yourself in a situation where you cannot comment in that thread for 36 hours.  During that time the thread morphs into a discussion of the Popular Vote Compact that idiots...I mean liberals...are pushing.  Your absence would keep people from keeping that discussion going because they would be limited to 4 post in that thread.

 

 

I suggest if that happens those posters start a new thread discussing that topic by itself.   One reason is that discussions buried inside non-related threads are almost impossible to locate using the browser software.      It would be much easier for interested parties to find that discussion if the thread title reflected it and carried on from there.  And perhaps the OP author does not want to discuss that topic ... but keep the topic of his/her thread what it was.   Again, it's not fair to the person who goes to the trouble of starting a thread to simply have it taken over by other for whatever reason.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BeAChooser said:

 

I suggest if that happens those posters start a new thread discussing that topic by itself.   One reason is that discussions buried inside non-related threads are almost impossible to locate using the browser software.      It would be much easier for interested parties to find that discussion if the thread title reflected it and carried on from there.  And perhaps the OP author does not want to discuss that topic ... but keep the topic of his/her thread what it was.   Again, it's not fair to the person who goes to the trouble of starting a thread to simply have it taken over by other for whatever reason.    

There was clean debate for that but it got buried awhile ago. If you would like that room back that can be arranged. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, lucifershammer said:

I was explaining the reports.  Your idea is censorship,  it goes against the basic tenants of this forum. If you're that irritated use the ignore feature. 

 

And BAC calls other people *snowflakes* LOL.

 

You have it exactly right: It goes against the basic tenets of this forum.

 

Bill

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, lucifershammer said:

Your idea is censorship

 

BS.   If tommy or dln want to start threads on any topic they want, let them.    I DON'T CARE.  

 

But they are trying to censor others by flooding their threads with nothing but noise.  

 

If you can't understand or see that, you don't know the meaning of censorship.  

 

Speaking of which, lh, tell me if you think Netflix, Facebook and the MSM media have censored anyone?   Call it a litmus test.

 

12 minutes ago, lucifershammer said:

If you're that irritated use the ignore feature. 

 

You're obviously not even trying to understand or listen to what I'm saying.  Frankly, I see a pattern of that with you.   Oh well.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, kfools said:

Actually I'm working on a feature to allow members to moderate thier own threads.

 

Most of the new add ons are not software add ons but third party apps. 

 

What you want to do here (Limiting spam by post locking at X amount) can be done with a click of the mouse in your thread. 

 

Great!  

 

I assume you mean by that last statement we'll be able to do that in the feature you're working on.   It's not working yet, though?

 

Thanks for your response, kfools.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...