USAGE GUIDELINES - comment thread 3 3

[sborock]

I'd drag up the thread where the consensus was that reasonable separation of and maintenance of multiple threads based upon classification of comics was fine as long as it was reasonable. REASONABLENESS a concept that these boards occasionally forget about.

 

But that consensus was in relation to the existing 2-3 active threads mandate and why you would even split it up into more than one. It wasn't an open "you can post infinite sales threads as long as they're different enough" mandate.

 

JC-

 

Here are the rules that pertain to more than one post and bumps:

 

No spamming. Group your for sale items into as few threads as is reasonable. Attempts to take up front page real estate by creating multiple threads for no reason are not allowed.

 

Threads may be bumped three times total AND only ONE FULL DAY AFTER falling off of the front page. This does not include "sold" notices, or truly useful informational updates. Note: we CAN tell the difference between a real update and a fake bump-update. Tread that line at your own risk. If you're spam bumping, "lawyering" the rules will not save you.

 

Where was I off here?

 

[drbanner]

Where was I off here?

There was nothing wrong with your threads Steve (even JC knows it)...so keep 'em coming! (thumbs u

 

JC was just sad that someone implied the rules didn't apply to you because of who you are, so he had to express himself on this issue...and yeah, this thread isn't really the place to vent, but watcha gonna do?

[MMurdock]

I don't think even JC was necessarily saying anything was wrong with what borock did. He just objected to one or two people implying Borock could have as many threads as he wants. So, I don't think JC has a problem with anything borock did.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong.

[drbanner]

I don't think even JC was necessarily saying anything was wrong with what borock did. He just objected to one or two people implying Borock could have as many threads as he wants. So, I don't think JC has a problem with anything borock did.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Yep, Steve did nothing wrong....but JC didn't like that someone defended Steve (for not doing anything wrong?) and felt the need to carry that conversation here.

[GACollectibles]

I don't think even JC was necessarily saying anything was wrong with what borock did. He just objected to one or two people implying Borock could have as many threads as he wants. So, I don't think JC has a problem with anything borock did.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

Yep, Borock did nothing wrong....JC didn't like that someone defended Borock (for not doing anything wrong?) and felt the need to carry that conversation here.

 

Why not, this is the guidelines comment thread and saying that Borock shouldn't get the preferential treatment some were suggesting was better posted here than in his thread. So neither were wrong.

[drbanner]

I don't think even JC was necessarily saying anything was wrong with what borock did. He just objected to one or two people implying Borock could have as many threads as he wants. So, I don't think JC has a problem with anything borock did.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Yep, Borock did nothing wrong....JC didn't like that someone defended Borock (for not doing anything wrong?) and felt the need to carry that conversation here.

Why not, this is the guidelines comment thread and saying that Borock shouldn't get the preferential treatment some were suggesting was better posted here than in his thread. So neither were wrong.

Sure thing...maybe we need a guideline that states that the guidelines apply to everyone!

 

[GACollectibles]

I don't think even JC was necessarily saying anything was wrong with what borock did. He just objected to one or two people implying Borock could have as many threads as he wants. So, I don't think JC has a problem with anything borock did.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Yep, Borock did nothing wrong....JC didn't like that someone defended Borock (for not doing anything wrong?) and felt the need to carry that conversation here.

Why not, this is the guidelines comment thread and saying that Borock shouldn't get the preferential treatment some were suggesting was better posted here than in his thread. So neither were wrong.

Sure thing...maybe we need a guideline that states that the guidelines apply to everyone!

 

 

Well obviously, because at least one person stated otherwise, correct?

[divad]

I don't think even JC was necessarily saying anything was wrong with what borock did. He just objected to one or two people implying Borock could have as many threads as he wants. So, I don't think JC has a problem with anything borock did.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Yep, Borock did nothing wrong....JC didn't like that someone defended Borock (for not doing anything wrong?) and felt the need to carry that conversation here.

Why not, this is the guidelines comment thread and saying that Borock shouldn't get the preferential treatment some were suggesting was better posted here than in his thread. So neither were wrong.

Sure thing...maybe we need a guideline that states that the guidelines apply to everyone!

 

 

Well obviously, because at least one person stated otherwise, correct?

 

Hulk's. Head. Hurt.

[Green]

I don't think even JC was necessarily saying anything was wrong with what borock did. He just objected to one or two people implying Borock could have as many threads as he wants. So, I don't think JC has a problem with anything borock did.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Yep, Borock did nothing wrong....JC didn't like that someone defended Borock (for not doing anything wrong?) and felt the need to carry that conversation here.

Why not, this is the guidelines comment thread and saying that Borock shouldn't get the preferential treatment some were suggesting was better posted here than in his thread. So neither were wrong.

Sure thing...maybe we need a guideline that states that the guidelines apply to everyone!

 

 

Well obviously, because at least one person stated otherwise, correct?

 

Hulk's. Head. Hurt.

my kinda language

[Count]

Beer

[cd4ever]

Beer

Post of the day!

[EggsAckley]

I closed all of my previous underground comix selling threads. I then started a new thread to consolidate all of my unsold books from the previous threads & to add a few new ones. I almost immediately got a PM from a board member who felt I was breaking the board rules by reposting unsold books in a new thread so quickly. He said I should have continued the old threads. One thread got to be over 30 pages long & another one had 35 books sold out of about 60 books. Frankly, they were becoming a pain to navigate if one wanted to see what was available.

 

I thought I would give board members one more shot at the remaining books before moving them to a different selling venue.

 

Was I out of line?

[thirdgreenham]

Personally, I don't think so. I would have officially closed the old thread showing a link to the new thread. If your selling thread becomes a mess and hard to navigate, it would help all parties involved if you started a new one. I'm cool with what you did. (thumbs u

 

Andy

[Makmorn]

I don't think you did anything wrong, unfortunately there seems to be a lot of forum nazi lately.

 

[joe_collector]

Yep, Borock did nothing wrong....JC didn't like that someone defended Borock (for not doing anything wrong?) and felt the need to carry that conversation here.

 

Why not, this is the guidelines comment thread and saying that Borock shouldn't get the preferential treatment some were suggesting was better posted here than in his thread. So neither were wrong.

 

Exactly, people get ticked off when you start posting in a For Sale thread, yet when you take it to a "comments" thread (like you're supposed to) trolls like Banner still try to find something to complain about.

 

This guy's a real piece of work, and he follows my every board move like a love-sick puppy.

[joe_collector]

Well obviously, because at least one person stated otherwise, correct?

 

"At least" is a major understatement, and although I only quoted a couple of board members, this "some people are above the law" sentiment runs deep with the weak-minded nerds.

[GACollectibles]

I closed all of my previous underground comix selling threads. I then started a new thread to consolidate all of my unsold books from the previous threads & to add a few new ones. I almost immediately got a PM from a board member who felt I was breaking the board rules by reposting unsold books in a new thread so quickly. He said I should have continued the old threads. One thread got to be over 30 pages long & another one had 35 books sold out of about 60 books. Frankly, they were becoming a pain to navigate if one wanted to see what was available.

 

I thought I would give board members one more shot at the remaining books before moving them to a different selling venue.

 

Was I out of line?

 

My

 

We have threads here that see relevent posts/purchases 1-7 days after the last post in the thread. That's great, not everyone can review the available For Sale threads as they are posted or even within a day or two and having them accessible makes it more likely for them to be seen and possibly result in sales.

 

Now if every thread was recapped in a new thread within 1-2 days of the existing thread's last post, a couple of things may happen:

 

a) Current new threads get pushed back quicker

b) The amount of threads that someone who isn't around to see (almost) every thread as it is posted then has to weed through the multiple threads of the same books- and quite often this isn't apparent until the thread is clicked on. Use of that time may affect the views on single threads as they fall further back.

 

I don't think the reposting is a guideline violation, but being conscious of this is a way to be considerate for the decent format we have to work with on the Boards Only For Sale Forum. There are threads that are ending up on page 3 by the end of a day(depending on how many threads per page you have), and with multiple repost threads they get pushed back much quicker and possibly not viewed due to time contraints for potential buyers/thread derailers( ). There are some cool books being offered (FTs continuous thread, Dales current CGC thread, Borock's multiple offerings, and many more) that stand the chance of being buried long before they have a chance to get viewed.

 

Now I don't deny the benefit of long threads being reposted to make it easier to review what's left if the seller feels that a simple list at the end of a thread isn't good enough, but maybe there is some compromise that could be reached, maybe a certain time period before the same books get reposted in a new thread, maybe 7 days. Any thoughts?

[DrWatson]

Any thoughts?

I have ADD. That post was too long to read.

[drbanner]

...he follows my every board move like a love-sick puppy.

JC, why don't you tell us how it feels to feel that the world revolves around you? Do you feel sad, or disappointed, when others don't appear to live in the same, JC-centric universe you do? Does habitual lying make you feel better about that?

 

We'd love to hear you express your thoughts on this!

[DrWatson]

...he follows my every board move like a love-sick puppy.

JC, why don't you tell us how it feels to feel that the world revolves around you? Do you feel sad, or disappointed, when others don't appear to live in the same, JC-centric universe you do? Does habitual lying make you feel better about that?

 

We'd love to hear you express your thoughts on this!

Speak for yourself.