Thread Rating:

Gandler
Gandler
Joined: Jan 27, 2014
  • Threads: 32
  • Posts: 1555
Thanks for this post from:
Mission146
June 15th, 2021 at 3:10:44 PM permalink
Quote: Mission146

The question becomes: How do you handle combined threads?

If you count threads where a second thread was created (because threads can reach an Administratively unmanageable length), then 2016 Election Thread would have the most replies followed by Miscellaneous Discussion, Discussion About the Suspension List, Trump's Second and Third Year in Office and then Casino Chip of the Day.



I am not sure if that counts since OP was (by my interpretation) asking about single threads. Once a second thread is opened, it is a new thread in my view.
Mission146
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 132
  • Posts: 14607
June 15th, 2021 at 7:46:25 PM permalink
Quote: Gandler

I am not sure if that counts since OP was (by my interpretation) asking about single threads. Once a second thread is opened, it is a new thread in my view.



I understand, but the second thread was created because the first was so long as to be Administratively unmanageable. Certain Admin actions essentially open the whole thread all on one pageó-computers have crashed.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
redietz
redietz
Joined: Jun 5, 2019
  • Threads: 48
  • Posts: 737
Thanks for this post from:
Mission146
June 16th, 2021 at 8:45:48 AM permalink
Quote: unJon

But if you started the topic it would be to troll, right?

So . . . Where exactly is the inconsistency you are expounding on?




You're making my point for me.

The inconsistency is that the definition of "trolling" relies on you, the monitor, the owner, or the OP all being able to read my mind regarding motive and purpose. The posts themselves are open to any number of interpretations.

If what I post is "trolling" and the same thing verbatim posted by somebody else is "not trolling," then you have a really absurd inconsistency. Absurd and blatantly discriminatory.

If I post what Marcus does, I'd be suspended for "trolling." If Marcus posts what got me suspended for "trolling," he doesn't get suspended. The whole thing is defining "trolling" via mind-reading of motive.

All I have to do to evade getting suspended for "trolling" is have somebody else post my exact words without the baggage of my name and voila -- no trolling.

If the posts themselves don't contain anything that is "trolling by definition," but instead rely on some debatable interpretation of motive, well kudos to Professor Xavier, but real people can't read minds.
"You can't breathe dead hippo waking, sleeping, and eating, and at the same time keep your precarious grip on existence."

  • Jump to: