Why are there time limits on thread posts?

I just saw the Booty Poppin Nooner thread in Indy Reviews. Back in February it was noted that this provider used porn star photos, changed her name a lot, et cetera. Then the topic came up again recently, a few posts, and then it was closed.

But why wouldn't you want all that information in one thread? Isn't an extended pattern of behavior more useful information than arbitrarily isolated incidents?

The guidelines are no posts on REVIEW threads older than 30 days. It was about 150 days past that. The thread is locked and can be viewed by all. If its needed, one can start a thread. The link provided in the review thread can just as easily have been posted in alert or whatever the case may be...........

Had beaglebeagle posted that link in a NON-REVIEW thread such as an alert, etc it could have continued for an indefinite period of time if the information is relevant per ECCIE guidelines.

sixx

The guidelines are no posts on REVIEW threads older than 30 days.
sixx Originally Posted by sixxbach

Why?

Those are guidelines established by the owners of the board. If this information is that important, it can be posted in a coed or alert forum. Anyone can still view this thread and any information beaglebeagle felt was important

sixx

Those are guidelines established by the owners of the board. If this information is that important, it can be posted in a coed or alert forum. Anyone can still view this thread and any information beaglebeagle felt was important

sixx Originally Posted by sixxbach

I understand that. My question, why, is an attempt to learn the reasoning behind the guidelines. For what reason should one not post on a review thread more than 30 days after the last post?

That is a question that should go to those who make the guidelines.........

sixx

This is one of the many things learned from hard experience on various boards.

Without a 30 day rule, white knights will bump their favorite's reviews up to the top of the forum. Or black knights will bump up their enemies bad reviews. Urinary olympics contests ensue.

This is one of the many things learned from hard experience on various boards.

Without a 30 day rule, white knights will bump their favorite's reviews up to the top of the forum. Or black knights will bump up their enemies bad reviews. Urinary olympics contests ensue. Originally Posted by GneissGuy

Eeeeeggs-ACtly! I saw this happen on ASPD at times.

The theory for this "rule" is as stated below:

#13 - In our review forums, be mindful of the 'maturity' of threads you are posting to, ie. the date of the last item posted. We ask that you refrain from posting to a review in which the last post was made 30 or more days ago. Some exceptions may apply if you are providing relevant, valuable or updated information about the provider, but as a general rule of thumb, this can best be accomplished by writing a new review altogether and avoiding the bumping of old ones. This applies to our review forums, in particular, as discussion threads are often allowed to flow for an unspecified length of time.

The sticky entitled "ECCIE Forum Guidelines" is posted at the top of each forum. Usually when a member has questions with regard to why we do things a certain way, the answer can be found in this sticky.
Spacemtn
AustinModStaff

The theory for this "rule" is as stated below:
Originally Posted by Spacemtn

#13 - In our review forums, be mindful of the 'maturity' of threads you are posting to, ie. the date of the last item posted. We ask that you refrain from posting to a review in which the last post was made 30 or more days ago. Some exceptions may apply if you are providing relevant, valuable or updated information about the provider, but as a general rule of thumb, this can best be accomplished by writing a new review altogether and avoiding the bumping of old ones. This applies to our review forums, in particular, as discussion threads are often allowed to flow for an unspecified length of time.

This paragraph asserts that writing new reviews is better than posting to old ones. It does not explain why. It does acknowledge that exceptions exist.

The sticky entitled "ECCIE Forum Guidelines" is posted at the top of each forum. Usually when a member has questions with regard to why we do things a certain way, the answer can be found in this sticky.
Spacemtn
AustinModStaff Originally Posted by Spacemtn

No, explanations are very hard to come by. Gneissguy took his shot. I don't see why pissing matches wouldn't happen with equal facility in either format, except of course that it's easier to post than to write a review, but that friction would apparently hamper the transmission of any information, useful or not.

No, explanations are very hard to come by. Gneissguy took his shot. I don't see why pissing matches wouldn't happen with equal facility in either format, except of course that it's easier to post than to write a review, but that friction would apparently hamper the transmission of any information, useful or not.
Originally Posted by 78704

There's a lot less reason to post in an old review thread than there is to post in an old coed thread, so it's easier to draw a black and white line and make it a rule in the review forums.

Pissing matches do happen both ways. However, experience on other boards was that review bumping with ulterior motives tends to be more of a problem than bumping of non-review threads.

The ownership and staff of this board wisely learns from some of the lessons learned on other boards, rather than having to deal with the same old problems on this board. They also try to do certain things differently and better.

Sure. This particular case clearly wasn't a pissing match, though; habit - policy - trumping observation and thinking being one of my least favorite forms of you know what. If a rule explicitly states exceptions exist then a moment's thought might suggest this was one of them.

If you make a rule and follow it, some people will whine that you should not blindly stick to a process instead of making a judgment call.

If you make a judgment call, many of the same people will complain of moderator favoritism, write long e-mails to the mod staff, allege corruption, write long e-mails to the mod staff, claim you're getting freebies from certain providers, write long e-mails to the mod staff, complain to the board management, write long e-mails to the mod staff, make long rants on the board about it, write long e-mails to the mod staff, start their own boards or blogs, write long e-mails to the mod staff, write long e-mails to the mod staff, etc.

Then they'll write long e-mails to the mod staff.

Are you seriously arguing that if 6 had done nothing you'd expect people to bitch *more* than me? ;-)

The guidelines are no posts on REVIEW threads older than 30 days. It was about 150 days past that. The thread is locked and can be viewed by all. If its needed, one can start a thread. The link provided in the review thread can just as easily have been posted in alert or whatever the case may be...........

Had beaglebeagle posted that link in a NON-REVIEW thread such as an alert, etc it could have continued for an indefinite period of time if the information is relevant per ECCIE guidelines.

sixx Originally Posted by sixxbach

Sorry, mates. I thought of starting a new thread for it, but felt that the information could easily be lost over time and so decided to sneak the question into the review and link it to the BP compilation. It was really just a trivial detail, but something that would be nice getting an updated intel for.