Master Index of Archived Threads


Rules of the CPF discussion thread

KC Jul 06 2006 01:51 PM

Spun off from the poll today on # of forums (I refuse to use the word fora) ... TOM: >>>No changes. Too many rules here as it is.<<< There are rules here? Name three. Name one that you find excessive. This place, by other standards, is pretty much lawless and self-governing. I'm not going to go into past example of crap I've seen over eight years of posting on Mets' boards - but this place in my opinion does not have "too many rules".

Edgy DC Jul 06 2006 02:12 PM

I just responded to that and, and thought, "Do we really have too many rules? I thought the social contract pretty much governs this place." Then I saw this thread title and thought, "Oh, no, rules."

TheOldMole Jul 06 2006 03:51 PM

I didn't mean to seem snippy or ungrateful for the incredible work the moderators do here. I sometimes get a little out of joint when I post something and someone informs me (superciiliously, or so it seems to me) that we already have a thread for that and I should have been posting to it. This doesn't bother me so much any more, because I've now been trained to look back three or four pages and make sure there isn't some vaguely relevant post I could attach my new note to. But... TOM????? I think of myself as more of a Jerry type.

Frayed Knot Jul 06 2006 04:38 PM

The problem isn't that there are too many rules here; there aren't. It's that some think there are a lot of rules here and that the non-existant sargeant-at-arms will come by and whack you if you don't obey these non-existant rules. As far as I'm concerned the only one we have here is to use common sense and that the CPF 'tradition' of being even slightly diligent about thread use is that the forum that preceded this one was often flooded with duplicate threads from posters who were either too lazy to see if the topic was already being discussed, or too enamored with seeing their name under 'Thread Started By' and their post totals go up. But that doesn't mean that the opposite extreme is any better. I personally think that we've become too married to the 'All-Purpose' thread and that we wind up losing some creativity and variety by burying a lot of topics and sub-topics in the midst of multi-page threads that could legitimately stand on their own. There's nothing wrong with threads on more narrow or time-specific topics that live and die in the same day. If someone tweaks you because your post is in the "wrong" place and h/se's right, say "my bad"; if he's wrong, say "too bad". Either way the discussion can still move ahead.

Elster88 Jul 06 2006 04:54 PM

]This doesn't bother me so much any more, because I've now been trained to look back three or four pages and make sure there isn't some vaguely relevant post I could attach my new note to. That's a good thing. It's actually the thread-police-assholes-with-no-real-authority like myself who bust balls over that, not the mods.

KC Jul 06 2006 05:34 PM

E88: >>>thread-police-assholes<<< I've come to affectionately think of you as "the mayor", not "the t-p-a". *grin*