ERC provides a lot of discussion topics whether you agree with his opinion or not.

(05-04-2015 02:02 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  The new rules must be doing something since the WWE has become non existent.

There is really no reason to continue posting in the WWE. The latest round of bans were all as a result of verbal confrontation in a WWE thread. So, if the WWE can't be used for what it was intended for, why use it at all?

(05-04-2015 02:28 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  ERC provides a lot of discussion topics whether you agree with his opinion or not.

This, 100%.

(05-04-2015 01:16 PM)ARandomHerdFan Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 12:53 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 12:49 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Can we do something about ERC spamming the board? Maybe limit the amount of new threads he can create weekly?

That's called censorship and he's not doing it to spam, if you'll read his threads, he's actually looking for discussion.

Actually looking for discussion?

He usually posts an article, follows it up with some comment like "DUUURRRRR all liberals hate Jews and think the Holocaust was awesome" and runs away.

Yep. Total troll.

(05-04-2015 01:29 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 12:49 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Can we do something about ERC spamming the board? Maybe limit the amount of new threads he can create weekly?

You know you don't have to partake in the threads he creates right? Instead of just not opening them, you want to censor him so that those that do want to read his threads can't do so

They take up half the board and push the threads that were interesting to page 2,3,4,etc.

(05-04-2015 02:39 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 01:29 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 12:49 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Can we do something about ERC spamming the board? Maybe limit the amount of new threads he can create weekly?

You know you don't have to partake in the threads he creates right? Instead of just not opening them, you want to censor him so that those that do want to read his threads can't do so

They take up half the board and push the threads that were interesting to page 2,3,4,etc.

Change your threads per page setting.

(05-04-2015 02:28 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  ERC provides a lot of discussion topics whether you agree with his opinion or not.

I get that and I don't want to limit the number of his or anyone else's posts whatsoever. However, when your opinion is called out you need to defend it. In fact you're basically supposed to defend it from the jump the way I understand the AUP.

His problem is that when he says all liberals this and all liberals that, there is no defense. It cannot be proven, much less the fact that it rarely applies to even a few of the liberal posters here!

(05-04-2015 02:28 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  ERC provides a lot of discussion topics whether you agree with his opinion or not.

The size of the s*** HRC took this morning is a discussion topic.


The key here is quality. do we really need multiple Bruce Jenner threads?


there is also a fine line between opinionated and flaming.

(05-04-2015 02:44 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  However, when your opinion is called out you need to defend it. In fact you're basically supposed to defend it from the jump the way I understand the AUP.

Fine to include that in a guideline. A suggestion. Not a rule.

(05-04-2015 02:39 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 01:29 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 12:49 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Can we do something about ERC spamming the board? Maybe limit the amount of new threads he can create weekly?

You know you don't have to partake in the threads he creates right? Instead of just not opening them, you want to censor him so that those that do want to read his threads can't do so

They take up half the board and push the threads that were interesting to page 2,3,4,etc.

bull****. There are threads on page one that haven't been commented on in almost 4 days.

So, GTS can take from this thread that overall his AUP and spin room controls have resulted in happier people, if only just.

I think that's a win.

(05-04-2015 07:25 AM)miko33 Wrote:  The old Spin Room was more prone to groupthink and ad-hominems. Today it's about better quality discussion. I have no idea why people have issues with the rules. Really, if you act like an ass, you will be treated like one. Remember that and no one SHOULD have any issues. Forcing people to up their game to show more data or to better flesh out their views is a GOOD thing.

This is literally the same logic used to justify the patriot act.

If you are doing nothing wrong then you won't have a problem.

Can you all not control your eyeballs? Scan on past ERC's threads if you find the world around you so offensive.

Most everyone complaining about them posts in them.

Skip them. Jeez, this rates up there pretty high on the nut scale.

(05-04-2015 02:52 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 02:28 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  ERC provides a lot of discussion topics whether you agree with his opinion or not.

The size of the s*** HRC took this morning is a discussion topic.


The key here is quality. do we really need multiple Bruce Jenner threads?


there is also a fine line between opinionated and flaming.

We need to know anytime a black person attacks a white person. Some say "where's AL?" I say "where's ERC?"

To be honest, I'd rather not have a rule made about those posters. I'd rather some of the conservatives get on their case for the lazy statements they make. It'd go a long way, and I've got the PM's to show you that I've done exactly that to Mach more than a few times when it's been needed. Most of the conservatives here are completely reasonable people who just have different ideological opinions than me, but I don't understand why they don't police their own just a little. We've had comments that amounted to saying all libs are unhappy the holocaust happened for gods sake, and mums the word.

Just a thought.

(05-04-2015 02:52 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 02:28 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  ERC provides a lot of discussion topics whether you agree with his opinion or not.

The size of the s*** HRC took this morning is a discussion topic.


The key here is quality. do we really need multiple Bruce Jenner threads?


there is also a fine line between opinionated and flaming.

So now we have to have a board QC Rep? Gimme a break.

(05-04-2015 03:22 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 02:52 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 02:28 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  ERC provides a lot of discussion topics whether you agree with his opinion or not.

The size of the s*** HRC took this morning is a discussion topic.


The key here is quality. do we really need multiple Bruce Jenner threads?


there is also a fine line between opinionated and flaming.

So now we have to have a board QC Rep? Gimme a break.

More like a common sense thing than a QC issue.

(05-04-2015 03:34 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 03:22 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 02:52 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 02:28 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  ERC provides a lot of discussion topics whether you agree with his opinion or not.

The size of the s*** HRC took this morning is a discussion topic.


The key here is quality. do we really need multiple Bruce Jenner threads?


there is also a fine line between opinionated and flaming.

So now we have to have a board QC Rep? Gimme a break.

More like a common sense thing than a QC issue.

Again.. You're saying these things, are you insinuating we need someone to monitor those things? What you consider quality and what GTS considers quality could be night and day.

So how do you decide what's a quality thread/post or common sense?

I agree if there is a thread on a subject post it in there UNLESS it changes the path of the thread, which if I remember correctly we're not supposed to do. We're supposed to stay on topic.

(05-04-2015 02:55 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  So, GTS can take from this thread that overall his AUP and spin room controls have resulted in happier people, if only just.

I think that's a win.

50% better
29% no difference
21% worse

And that's despite the inherent disadvantage change has just because it is change. Put differently ... of those that have changed their opinion ... they prefer the new setup by more than 2 to 1.

You have a strange definition of "only just".

I just wish the oppression of the liberals would end. #letmypeoplego