rigorousintuition.ca

psynapz wrote:What about "View active topics"?

That's what I mean. I don't get that after logging in. I get "View your posts," but not "View active topics."

Also, since we're still (hopefully) in speakeasy mode here, why do you ever prefix and suffix your posts with a punctuation on a line by itself? What is it intended to convey, or otherwise produce for effect? Beeline does it this too on occasion, but I want to hear it from the masta.

It conveys that I like to see margins around the text, especially before the first sentence. Otherwise it gets all crowded up. (A couple of people have asked about that as though it's some secret code.)

.

IanEye wrote:

barracuda wrote:Is everyone done here yet?

I just want to say I appreciate the way MinM bumps old threads with new info.

+1

I think I'd like to see the Google-bot banned. It would kind of suck to have to use the phpBB search function exclusively, but the privacy of not being indexed by Google would be worth it, IMO.

Just an idea. Shouldn't the FBI Watch and Cop Watch threads be moved to the Data Dump since there is no actual discussion occuring?

I tend to agree, Perelandra.

Good thinking, I'm on it.

Would it be rude to ask about a wikileaks subject forum where wiki-fans can worship privately without boring the eyeballs out of the unfaithed?

lupercal wrote:Would it be rude to ask about a wikileaks subject forum where wiki-fans can worship privately without boring the eyeballs out of the unfaithed?

Poor little wolf cub. Totally forced to click on threads that hurt your nocturnal eyes. Why don't you kick one of the several excellent Wikileaks attack threads that bear your screen name as OP?

JackRiddler wrote:Poor little wolf cub. Totally forced to click on threads that hurt your nocturnal eyes. Why don't you kick one of the several excellent Wikileaks attack threads that bear your screen name as OP?

Because I'm not astroturfing. You see Jack, rehearsing the same boring talking points 63 times in the same thread doesn't make them a particle less ridiculous and it doesn't make for a very interesting forum, either.

.

Can someone PLEASE tell a certain frequent starter of new threads, whose identity should be obvious, that there is no shame in

a) ...producing complete, grammatical, correctly spelled thread titles that are not cut off mid-word and make us all look like idiots?

b) ...sticking an explanation or at least an excerpt in the OP, rather than just an undecorated link to some unspecified article, which I'd have to be an idiot to waste my time clicking on?

c) ...seeing if there are other threads running on the same subject before starting a new one?

d) ...consolidating news stories about an issue one is interested in (to take a random example: FBI abuses) into a single thread, which creates a running archive and gets about 10 times the attention?

e) ...not flooding the board by always ignoring c and d?

Can someone do that?

.

Soooo agreed Jack.

What I truly do not understand is, why aren't the mods more aggressively merging threads?

If it's mere sloth, then... couldja please?

Kthx,
Telexx

Merging them under what auspices, exactly? fruhmenschen has two dedicated data-dump threads, and, as far as I can tell, uses them liberally. We're considering a dedicated sub-forum for his causes, but that's just sending him to the gulag.

WRT his formatting and subject line selections, please feel free to pm him with your suggestions. We already have.

Also, fwiw, he has just one thread on page one of G.D. at the moment, so it seems like a bit of fuss over not much of a problem. The main issue I have with fruhmenschen is that he's not very engaged even within the scope of his single-mindedness, which is too bad, because when he does enter conversations he seems kinda interesting.

But yes, his posting style sucks. I'm not sure if I want to begin evaluating members in that regard too intensely, though.

.

Actually, I now regret the display of my cultural airs and middle-class conditioning. Okay, so certain thread titles are miserably incomprehensible, misspelled, misleading, or otherwise not up to my impeccable Chicago Manual of Style standards. It's not like I posted it, right? And I generally don't post in them. And I'm pretty sure there once was a time when I didn't care about this stuff. So never mind. Long as I don't get one of *mine* force-merged under a dumb title, it's okay. (What I'd really like is to have permanent editing powers restored for me in particular, because it kills me to read some of these old posts of mine with glaring mistakes and stylistic barbarisms. Even though, well, it's irrelevant, because no one else reads'em or else they don't care. Do you see now how hard it is to be me?! O, woe!)