Bumping Threads

Correct me if I'm wrong! I've been led to believe that it's only review threads where bumping a thread past thirty days is strongly discouraged. The Mods are kept plenty busy enough to not have to worry about closing these relatively harmless threads. There's plenty of threads that deserve reporting, these are not among them. Get a life and stop encouraging Over - Modherating of the normally harmless threads in Co-ed and other non-review threads.

I would have banned the complainer for excessive anal in my modherator days

I would have banned the complainer for excessive anal in my modherator days Originally Posted by JONBALLS

That's why you will always be my favorite Modherator JB!

I guess I'm guilty of bumping the shit thread recently by an excess of one or two days.

I'm sad to see it closed. It was one of the few threads here that was just silly fun. The thread contained no arguments, whining, complaining, outing, disrespectful behavior (well...ok), threatening, etc...

So long shit thread

no problem whosdair will have to dump a load again soon

In an attempt to clearly explain the 30 day cutoff on threads.

While it is always better to start a new thread, as a general rule, the 30 day cutoff only really applies to review threads. Personally, I would enforce a no bumping of a thread which is not a review thread if I think that too much time has gone by to warrant it being bumped. I figure that 3 months should be a standard for non review threads to no longer be able to be bumped. Think that would be a fair point?

Then let's get this shit rolling.

All valid points, not shitty in the least! so I will excuse myself and offer a Mea culpa! which as everyone knows is a Latin phrase that translates into English as "my mistake" or "my fault". To emphasize the message, the adjective "maxima" may be inserted, resulting in "mea maxima culpa," which would translate as "my most [grievous] fault."

DD

Citizen DD- It's ok...

"Errare humanum est"

In an attempt to clearly explain the 30 day cutoff on threads.

While it is always better to start a new thread, as a general rule, the 30 day cutoff only really applies to review threads. Personally, I would enforce a no bumping of a thread which is not a review thread if I think that too much time has gone by to warrant it being bumped. I figure that 3 months should be a standard for non review threads to no longer be able to be bumped. Think that would be a fair point? Originally Posted by brutusbluto

No I don't! We've been subjected to too many closed threads lately, Rule 13 specifically states:


#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.

jymie/brutusbluto let's not get too arbitrary even with a ninety day rule. The only thing wrong with the thread was that a whiny bitch complained!

Valid point of view.

Originally Posted by offshoredrilling

even better

I personally dont see the big deal on bumping threads, even the reviews. What does it hurt? Its not like this board is so busy and its bumping "important" threads out of the way..

I think the moderators should mainly worry about outing info, let people hash and say it as long as no outing goes on. Forum boards would have no traffic without some episodes of the Days of Our Lives.. or what fun would it be without any nonsense threads? Thats part of the dynamic with social interactions in the net capacity on forums.

Ya know what I mean jelly bean?

Never really cared for the 30 day rule.