threAD's and you

I know how to settle it.

Anything that Deejah posted was a threAD. OK! Nuff said. Originally Posted by Boltfan

She was one of the main reasons I turned off viewing sig lines. Like many ladies, she'd post a single sentence so her 15 line "signature ad" would show up. To be honest, that happens a lot more than the threADs everyone complains about, and it's even more annoying.

I guess I'm in the minority that doesn't care, huh?

Was Bubba's thread a threAD? I don't care. I saw it, thought "cool", looked at the profile, and moved on. An argument for it being a threAD - I do the same thing when a provider posts something I think is interesting (and no - the "I agree" and "me too" don't qualify).

For the rest, I just move on. I've got talent like that.


Besides... until I can post both my services and rates together I don't care what anyone else does.

There is a little box "Show your signature" that can be unchecked when you reply. Sometimes it's irritating when providers post a few sentences or words, then below it you see a three inch signature that is really nothing more than a glorified ad.

It makes one wonder, did she really have something to contribute to the thread, or did she just want to get her signature line out there as many times as possible?

Whats a threAD

HI my name is Look at me.


HI Guys, do you like bj's..........

Insert my pictures

Insert my phone number or links in the post.

Sig line so big it needs a billboard

Personally it does not bother me, do I think its right, nope, ladies are going to do it anyway. Guys go for it, think its cute and they call her. So I guess it works, its just not my cup of tea. I use the ad section.

It sucks because not many females are participating any more.

Bubba you posted a threAD for April. Will mods do this for every provider who disappears and comes back. When guys saw that and contacted her, she has you to thank for you. Not every provider has that going for her. Will you go see her, of course other guys will go see her now, especially since a mod posted her welcome back thread and has shown his approval of her.

I just giggled when I saw the threAD, some people are just special. I wonder will Soulmanike post a threAD for me when I go to Houston. Im thinking no though. (Giggling).

So, once again, you would rather attack me than answer a simple and direct question. What constitues a ThreAD?

If you dont know or cannot expalin it, then why not just admit you have no idea what your talking about instead of trying to deflect things back at me? Originally Posted by Bubba3452

Just look at the one you created.. that is pretty much the clear definition of what one is. You already know that though. Speaking of deflecting.. that's what you've been doing since everyone called you out. Your response above and after it is just continuing it.

You knew you were promoting April with that threAD. Again, the fact that you are a mod doing it and refusing to acknowledge a conflict by doing so is pathetic. You should not be a mod with how you act.

So if someone waited until the 2ed or 3rd post in a thread to post the same exact info, its not an ad? Originally Posted by Bubba3452

Fair point. I usually see it with someone starting a thread. But, I suppose you could have a subsequent post that adds nothing to the discussion that is also a thinly veiled ad and I'd call that a threAD as well. Honestly, that doesn't annoy me as much, however, because I'm already reading that thread and it's easy to skip past it versus a new thread that keeps popping up on the discussion forum page.

And yes, what are the critical componets that make it an ad? No copouts trying to define something by simpy reusing the same words. You can do better than that. It like defining an automobile as a car. Does not really help does it? Originally Posted by Bubba3452

I woulda thought you knew how to use a dictionary or google. Not that you asked politely with all the unnecessary stuff about "copouts" and the condescending "you can do better than that", but I'll play along with you.

Here's a couple of online definitions of the word "advertisement":

ad·ver·tise·ment

   [ad-ver-tahyz-muhnt, ad-vur-tis-muhnt, -tiz-] Show IPA
noun 1. a paid announcement, as of goods for sale, in newspapers or magazines, on radio or television, etc.

2. a public notice, especially in print.

3. the action of making generally known; a calling to the attention of the public: The news of this event will receive wide advertisement.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/advertisement






ad·ver·tise·ment

noun
\ˌad-vər-ˈtīz-mənt; əd-ˈvər-təz-mənt, -tə-smənt\


Definition of ADVERTISEMENT

1
: the act or process of advertising

2
: a public notice; especially : one published in the press or broadcast over the air



http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/advertisement

My query here is why do ad rules apply to some but not others? I do understand the mods have their plates completely full, no disrespect. It's just a little annoying when I get a hand slap for posting in subcities along with my main ad but I see girls doing it every single day that are left alone. And they do it every week... I do not RTM because I don't care THAT much. But it does bug.

Ad: a public announcement from a service provider (indicating some or all of the following: availability, services, rates, pictures, contact information) for the purpose of attracting attention and encouraging prospective customers/clients to engage her services.

ThreAD: a post (whether the first or a later post in a given thread)

• by a service provider or by someone else on her behalf;
• providing information similar to that provided in an ad, and apparently for the same purpose of attracting attention and encouraging prospective customers/clients to see her;
• posted in a discussion forum (e.g., to avoid restrictions on ads) rather than an ad forum; and
• which, taken as a whole, lacks significant value other than the "ad purpose" described above

[That last is analogous to the Supreme Court's definition of obscenity in Miller v. California, designed to avoid the common practice for porn in those days to skirt the obscenity laws by including a very short discussion of, say, Shakespeare in the movie. It would also, in my opinion, exclude reviews posted in the review fora, recommendations/endorsements in response to honest inquiries (which serve the same function as reviews), and most posts by the ladies in the discussion fora, even if some of that "ad" information is in their signature line. But if there is no significant content in a lady's post itself and ad information is in the signature line, that may suggest that it meets the criteria.]

My interpretation; may not be anyone else's. Obviously, it is a standard/guideline rather than a precise, bright-line rule; its use requires the application of judgment. But the same is true of most of the rules on a board like this.

Personally, if it were up to me (which it most assuredly is not), I wouldn't treat such posters too harshly. The harm is relatively minimal -- unless other ladies feel competitive pressures to do the same thing and they start to proliferate and overwhelm the real discussions in the discussion fora. Gentle discouragement may be appropriate to prevent that from happening. And setting a good example, of course.

My opinion; YOMV.

In common law legal systems, a precedent is a legal case establishing a principle or rule that a court or other judicial body may utilize when deciding subsequent cases with similar issues or facts. ECCIE has its forum rules. And it has its unwritten precedent case laws, i.e., no threAD's, no linking (or even mention of) the site which shall not be named.

The precedent laws are as "pointable/bannable" as the written rules. I know; I have received points from Bubba for breaking them.

That is why it is especially obtuse for one who is tasked with enforcing these rules to hide behind the question of, "what exactly are the rules?" And that is what all the hubub is about: a Mod who won't apply the rules to himself though he is judge, jury, & executioner to the rest of us.

Hence my previous post of why IMO, mods should carry on as mods in this forum and that's that. Perhaps a witty chime-in here and there but, no reviews, no OP's, nadda. Similar to the military and other institutions, fraternizing between moderators of a website and those that the website supports including both providers and hobbiest, should be forbidden at least as far as open communications on this website.

This ensures an observed-fairness, and helps eliminate abuse of power.

A) this would ensure mods are mods because they have earned the right to be so, and B) saves a mod from such a clear and obvious mis-use of the board.

The precedent laws are as "pointable/bannable" as the written rules. I know; I have received points from Bubba for breaking them.

That is why it is especially obtuse for one who is tasked with enforcing these rules to hide behind the question of, "what exactly are the rules?" Originally Posted by SlapAndTickle

And, as usual, your are worng. I am not asking about what a rule is because there is not a strict rule against threADS. I am asking people to define what they think a threAD is as there seems to be a wide range of reaction to them and what they are.

I am still amused at how many personal attacks are being made on me when the question asked was what makes it a threAD. Its so much easier to not answer the question in an objective way than it is to think, I guess. All you have really done is show your true selves, and your inability to think and talk objectivly and that you will take any opp to attack or insult someone reguardless of the topic

To the few who have made some effort to define a threAD without attacking me or politly dissagreed, thanks. I am still not postive of what makes one. I see lots of grey areas in this one.

If I was not involved with the thread, I would have had to give out a LOT of points for all the thread hijacks and insults in this thread. But, I enjoy having people show themselves as asses. Its clear many of you need to stay to hobbing and avoid tasks above your capabilities. Like discussing a topic objectivily

Dude, the similarities between this and bigdog justifying his lying are eery.

Bubba, how about you define "in a tizzy" and somebody will define "ad" for you. *Secret* it has to do with promotion. Originally Posted by TheBizz

tizzy [ˈtɪzɪ]
n pl -zies Informal a state of confusion, anxiety, or excitement . Your turn, define an ad in the contex of their use here in threads

So can we post threADS now (Providers I mean).

Since there is technically not against the rules.

May bring some ladies back around here in co-ed again.

This board is weird sometimes. I see threADS all the time, in the smaller cities. No one says a word, I think its boloney, but hey, the gents doesn't seem to mind. So if there is no rule against, then......

It's quite clear, just not to you apparently, which is sad considering you are a moderator and can't see how it can cause conflicts. You see people all the time posting things exactly you did, and those were looked at previously as threADs. You could have easily seen that this would be viewed the same way.

As a moderator, you ARE held to a higher standard. Sorry if you don't care for that, but that's the way it goes when you accepted that position. Originally Posted by still-asleep

Actualy, I cannot remember EVER pointing anyone or warning them about a threAD. Some I thought were a bit over the top but since there is no definition of what one is, no action had to be taken. And, since you cannot artitulate what one is to you, all I see is BS.

You knew you were promoting April with that threAD. Again, the fact that you are a mod doing it and refusing to acknowledge a conflict by doing so is pathetic. You should not be a mod with how you act. Originally Posted by still-asleep

+1

Actualy, I cannot remember EVER pointing anyone or warning them about a threAD. Some I thought were a bit over the top but since there is no definition of what one is, no action had to be taken. And, since you cannot artitulate what one is to you, all I see is BS. Originally Posted by Bubba3452

And, as usual, your are worng. I am not asking about what a rule is because there is not a strict rule against threADS. I am asking people to define what they think a threAD is as there seems to be a wide range of reaction to them and what they are.

I am still amused at how many personal attacks are being made on me when the question asked was what makes it a threAD. Its so much easier to not answer the question in an objective way than it is to think, I guess. All you have really done is show your true selves, and your inability to think and talk objectivly and that you will take any opp to attack or insult someone reguardless of the topic

To the few who have made some effort to define a threAD without attacking me or politly dissagreed, thanks. I am still not postive of what makes one. I see lots of grey areas in this one.

If I was not involved with the thread, I would have had to give out a LOT of points for all the thread hijacks and insults in this thread. But, I enjoy having people show themselves as asses. Its clear many of you need to stay to hobbing and avoid tasks above your capabilities. Like discussing a topic objectivily Originally Posted by Bubba3452

OK, Bubba. I see you continue to use your bully pulpit to deflect.

IMHO, Chevalier & Waldo P. Emerson-Jones did a pretty good job defining an ad & specific to ECCIE, a threAD. I added to that, saying that threAD need not be defined in the written ECCIE forum rules, as precedent has defined it--like porn, you just know it when you see it. I even gave another example of a different unwritten ECCIE rule that is pointable/bannable.

And what does MODERATOR Bubba3452 do with all that info? Deflect & attack.

Deflect & attack me & the others who point out that you need to be held to the same standard that you enforce around here. With the title MODERATOR comes responsibility & accountablility.

So I will ask: Please elaborate specificly on all the pointing that you are missing out on? Are they violations of specific written ECCIE forum rules? Will you be pointing yourself for the attacks in post #41?