I've pissed some people off.

[flyingbrick]

So recently i dredged up two threads from the deapths of 05/07... i think.. i dunno, they were old.

These threads showed up while i was searching for particular items.

Someone gave me negative rating points ( lol, im -22 atm) for the bumping which leads me to this question poll.

Which is better?

[Usarka]

I learnt long ago that you can't please anyone any of the time, but you can always please yourself :innocent:

[flyingbrick]

your fast replies please me :buggerd:

[u4ea]

haha some people are just happiest winging aint they!!consider changing the b in your name to a p then you may make them happier..:shutup:

[flyingbrick]

haha some people are just happiest winging aint they!!consider changing the b in your name to a p then you may make them happier..:shutup:

I guess your reply puts us in the same boat then? :stupid:

[JimO]

i got a red today for a post i did on 24 june 2006

[Usarka]

And now for a serious answer:

It depends if your post added value to the old thread, or if you just posted because you thought it was an interesting subject.

ouch i vow to not do that again tonight.

[Ixion]

-23? Fark, you better have a bit of green to balance it out.

Personally I think this is one of those things were the anally minded was foolish.

Either way, what's the odds. If the previous thread has germain matter, extend it in the light of new knowledge. Otherwise start a new thread.

[Swoop]

Simply BUMPing a thread for the hell of it will invoke the ire of the mod's.

Actually adding to a thread "should be" different, but you might still invoke the ire of the mod's.

[Conquiztador]

i got a red today for a post i did on 24 june 2006

Timetravel is a reality for some ppl.

[Ixion]

And now for a serious answer:

It depends if your post added value to the old thread, or if you just posted because you thought it was an interesting subject.

Either way, what of it? If it adds new value then we are all the better for it. If it be but because he thought it interesting, why should he not be entitled to an opinion. Where in the rules does it say "Speak now, or forever hold your peace" ?

It's not even as if anything on the site COULD be very old. For Heaven's sakes, it's not even been running ten years yet. Even the oldest thread is less than that, a microsm of time. What really is the difference between commenting on a post two days after it was posted, and commenting two years after it was posted?

[Usarka]

Either way, what of it? If it adds new value then we are all the better for it. If it be but because he thought it interesting, why should he not be entitled to an opinion. Where in the rules does it say "Speak now, or forever hold your peace" ?

It's not even as if anything on the site COULD be very old. For Heaven's sakes, it's not even been running ten years yet. Even the oldest thread is less than that, a microsm of time. What really is the difference between commenting on a post two days after it was posted, and commenting two years after it was posted?

Do you realise how hard it was to have a serious thought for me tonight? And i vowed to not have another one so I won't respond by agreeing and accepting i may have mis-worded.

And I won't say that my intention was to differentiate between adding value or upping ones post count.

bum pooh farty pants.

[marty]

the 'bebo thread' post was a bit pathetic, but i see ixion posted just after you, so of course he will defend you!

[flyingbrick]

the 'bebo thread' post was a bit pathetic, but i see ixion posted just after you, so of course he will defend you!

I agree on that one. I didn't realise it was old till after :Oops:

[Ixion]

Bebo thread ? :scratch:

EDIT: Oh, I see. I didn't notice the year , just saw June and assumed it was this month. Or maybe I thought this year was 2007, one loses track after a while.

[kiwifruit]

in a New York minute, oo oo ooOoo, everything can change

[Usarka]

in a New York minute, oo oo ooOoo, everything can change

I'm sure i left a couple of towers around here somewhere.......

[Ixion]

I put them away, they were cluttering the place up.

[FROSTY]

rep--what the ferk is rep?

[Ixion]

rep--what the ferk is rep?


Either a measure of radiation (Roentgen Physical Equivalent)

"A unit of absorbed radiation dose, equal to the amount of ionizing radiation that will transfer 93 ergs of energy to 1 gram of water or living tissue."

Or a type of fabric

" A ribbed or corded fabric of various materials, such as cotton, wool, or silk."

Colloquially, a form of theatrical performance, short for repetory theatre.

Since this is not a site for seamstresses or thespians, the former definition is the most probable.

Why do you ask?

[Hitcher]

Contributing to relevant previous threads is generally the preferable option to starting a new one, particularly if the subject matter is relevant and if the latest addition continues the flow of the the thread's discussion, even if that discussion may have been dormant for a while.

Bumping old threads for the hell of it, such as when some (unnamed) members are looking for new and innovative ways of continuing a LOTPIHGAD discussion is a no-no.

Similarly posting new threads of identical or extremely similar content to those previously posted is also actively discouraged. This is the crime of the "Repost", once actively policed by Sheriff Sniper and his QRF.

Applying a bit of intellect before hitting the "submit" button is generally all that is required.

[Joni]

Contributing to relevant previous threads is generally the preferable option to starting a new one, particularly if the subject matter is relevant and if the latest addition continues the flow of the the thread's discussion, even if that discussion may have been dormant for a while.

Bumping old threads for the hell of it, such as when some (unnamed) members are looking for new and innovative ways of continuing a LOTPIHGAD discussion is a no-no.

Similarly posting new threads of identical or extremely similar content to those previously posted is also actively discouraged. This is the crime of the "Repost", once actively policed by Sheriff Sniper and his QRF.

Applying a bit of intellect before hitting the "submit" button is generally all that is required.Yup as is so often the case hitch is right!

Dredging an old thread to say "cool" or "I agree" is stupid... but valid input is fine, in fact better than starting a new thread.

re rep: Forget about it, some people take things way to seriously, if they feel red repping you was vital to their happiness, then surely its their problem not yours? Because it is pretty silly.

[Matt Bleck]

What where you thinking??!!!!

[Badjelly]

Dredging an old thread to say "cool" or "I agree" is stupid... but valid input is fine, in fact better than starting a new thread.

I agree. I think it would be good practice, when reviving an old thread, to make specific mention of this. Otherwise, in the timeless world that is KB, people just start piling on, don't notice the big time gap and may not be aware that in the meantime most of the earlier participants may have died of old age.

[Tank]

When you bump a three year old thread - knowing its old


Old thread.. lol, but....

nathans_e_mail@hotmail.com

of course your going to annoy people.

And the Bebo post was just (as already mentioned) pathetic.

Best way to get past the -22 is simply to do write some good post adding value to the discussion - the green will flow.

Good luck and welcome.

[Coyote]

Bumping old threads for the hell of it, such as when some (unnamed) members are looking for new and innovative ways of continuing a LOTPIHGAD discussion is a no-no.
You're just sour since you got 'moderated' out of the new version. :bleh:

As funny as it was, I don't agree with the ban.

[slimjim]

O they're colour !? fuck thankfully my licence states i'm colour blind yeah like it say's only need of yourself to please

[flyingbrick]

Sweet jesus. Ive had like 13 green squares since this thread was started. Thanks all hahahaha.

-Nathan

[SPman]

Don't say we aren't a loving, caring bunch................:yawn:

[marty]

talking about how much green rep you have could very well earn you another red.......

[Usarka]

you shouldnt add shit comments to old threads

:whistle:

[flyingbrick]

hahahahahahahahahahahahhaa.

I was like LOL untill i came in here and saw the whistle face.

[Number One]

Simply BUMPing a thread for the hell of it will invoke the ire of the mod's.

Actually adding to a thread "should be" different, but you might still invoke the ire of the mod's.
Ok so the site should be about ready to peter out....IF we 'shouldn't really' repost and we 'shouldn't really' bump old threads...I'd suspect that in the time that KB has been running almost all the shit than can be talked must've been by now :whistle:

[Number One]

you shouldnt add shit comments to old threads

:whistle:
But that's one of my things!!! Dammit

[Trudes]

Ok so the site should be about ready to peter out....IF we 'shouldn't really' repost and we 'shouldn't really' bump old threads...I'd suspect that in the time that KB has been running almost all the shit than can be talked must've been by now :whistle:

REPOST!!:lol:

[Number One]

REPOST!!:lol:
You be quiet in the cheap seats long tongue!

[James Deuce]

I learnt long ago that you can't please anyone any of the time, but you can always please yourself :innocent:

Pass the hand cream.

[The Pastor]

Where Is The Option, Who Really Cares?

[stevewederell]

:confused:What the hell is bumping?