NEO_PhyteWe need shirtgons!Join Date: 2003-12-16Member: 24453Members, Constellation
with the recent outbrake of pointless spam bumps, i felt the need to bring this thread back to emphasize that its OK to bump threads if you have something <span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'><b><span style='color:red'>MEANINGFUL</span></b></span> to add
NEO_PhyteWe need shirtgons!Join Date: 2003-12-16Member: 24453Members, Constellation
edited January 2005
<!--QuoteBegin-Swiftspear+Nov 16 2004, 02:37 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Swiftspear @ Nov 16 2004, 02:37 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Postcount +1 <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> its the things like this (as was said earlier in the thread) that leads to the locking of most revived threads, not the reviving itself
<!--QuoteBegin-NEO Phyte+Jan 18 2005, 06:55 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (NEO Phyte @ Jan 18 2005, 06:55 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Swiftspear+Nov 16 2004, 02:37 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Swiftspear @ Nov 16 2004, 02:37 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Postcount +1 <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> its the things like this (as was said earlier in the thread) that leads to the locking of most revived threads, not the reviving itself <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> And it's posts like these, repetitive and useless, that get threads locked. We KNOW +1 posts are useless. They're like "First post!" on Slashdot or "No, I don't know what's wrong" answers to questions on IRC.
<!--QuoteBegin-NEO_Phyte+Nov 11 2004, 09:00 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (NEO_Phyte @ Nov 11 2004, 09:00 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-NEO_Phyte+Nov 10 2004, 04:44 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (NEO_Phyte @ Nov 10 2004, 04:44 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Defiance+ Oct 27 2004, 12:23 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Defiance @ Oct 27 2004, 12:23 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If it was a once popular thread, and you have something worthwhile to contribute to it to revive it, so be it, go ahead.
But doing so without good content is lame and shouldn't be done.
In before the TychoCelchuuu</span></span> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I agree. If someone has a truely worthwhile and relevant addition to a thread, they should be able to post it, regardless of the age<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> hilight the entire quote, and you will find the true meaning of my bump
/me wonders how all you guys didnt notice, even with some strong hints <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I did, in fact, hilight the entire quote and I still had no idea what you were talking about. Then I went back and edited it with mod hax and saw that the poster you quoted had posted a tiny, black "<_< >_>". Which, although silly, STILL doesn't explain to me the point of your post.
NEO_PhyteWe need shirtgons!Join Date: 2003-12-16Member: 24453Members, Constellation
edited January 2005
<!--QuoteBegin-BobTheJanitor+Jan 18 2005, 10:17 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (BobTheJanitor @ Jan 18 2005, 10:17 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-NEO_Phyte+Nov 11 2004, 09:00 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (NEO_Phyte @ Nov 11 2004, 09:00 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-NEO_Phyte+Nov 10 2004, 04:44 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (NEO_Phyte @ Nov 10 2004, 04:44 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Defiance+ Oct 27 2004, 12:23 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Defiance @ Oct 27 2004, 12:23 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If it was a once popular thread, and you have something worthwhile to contribute to it to revive it, so be it, go ahead.
But doing so without good content is lame and shouldn't be done.
In before the TychoCelchuuu</span></span> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I agree. If someone has a truely worthwhile and relevant addition to a thread, they should be able to post it, regardless of the age<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> hilight the entire quote, and you will find the true meaning of my bump
/me wonders how all you guys didnt notice, even with some strong hints <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I did, in fact, hilight the entire quote and I still had no idea what you were talking about. Then I went back and edited it with mod hax and saw that the poster you quoted had posted a tiny, black "<_< >_>". Which, although silly, STILL doesn't explain to me the point of your post. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> bob. you missed a critical line in all of that. specifically, the line AFTER those <_< >_> you did notice
(and i put those there, not the person i quoted)
:edit: to end the confusion, i edited the size tags of the relevent part of this quote tree :edit2: and the color tags
NEO_PhyteWe need shirtgons!Join Date: 2003-12-16Member: 24453Members, Constellation
<!--QuoteBegin-im lost+Jan 18 2005, 10:49 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (im lost @ Jan 18 2005, 10:49 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> And we only had to wait two months for an explanation. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> i didnt realize it would take you guys so long
/me lowers expectations for the next attempt at cleverness
<!--QuoteBegin-NEO Phyte+Jan 18 2005, 11:51 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (NEO Phyte @ Jan 18 2005, 11:51 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-im lost+Jan 18 2005, 10:49 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (im lost @ Jan 18 2005, 10:49 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> And we only had to wait two months for an explanation. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> i didnt realize it would take you guys so long
/me lowers expectations for the next attempt at cleverness <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I caught it back when it was originally posted, I just figured it wasn't proper for me to post it, or I wasn't in the posting mood, or it was nearing the bottom of the page... there was some reason I avoided posting, but I don't recall it at the moment.
Hey CWAG posted on this thread....I miss the ol' guy <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Mullet+Jan 19 2005, 05:04 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Mullet @ Jan 19 2005, 05:04 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Hey CWAG posted on this thread....I miss the ol' guy <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Ya, I just knowticed that too...
<!--QuoteBegin-TychoCelchuuu+Aug 19 2004, 09:05 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TychoCelchuuu @ Aug 19 2004, 09:05 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Windelkron+Aug 5 2004, 10:16 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Windelkron @ Aug 5 2004, 10:16 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Still, lots of threads are locked when an old topic is bumped, but the necromancer hasn't added any new information to it. I don't think it's right to auto-lock these things. People on the boards who had never seen that topic before (perhaps because it fell to the bottom too quickly, or they weren't registered, etc) will notice it because it's on page 1. That's really the point of the message boards, for users to be receiving all these ideas. So what if an old topic is raised to the top with a simple "Bump!" instead of a "You know, I think this issue has new ramifications in 3.0 Beta 4?" It's still offering the old topic to people who haven't seen it before. And when it's promptly locked, nobody will be able to see it again because it can't be bumped. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> It's not like it's someone's duty to continually bump every thread on the forum so everyone can read it. Missing a thread won't kill you, and there's no need to keep reviving old ones so new people can read them. If they're so essential you can just get someone to do a search for it or something, without having to clutter up the front page. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Unfortunately search doesn't work for some people, so you have to bump certain threads so others can read them. Depending on the topic and post, some threads should be bumped at times but others shouldn't be bumped. Threads like <a href='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=307' target='_blank'>these</a> shouldn't be bumped.
How did I ever miss this one? In answer to the question, nothing. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Petco+May 27 2005, 08:15 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Petco @ May 27 2005, 08:15 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-TychoCelchuuu+Aug 19 2004, 09:05 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TychoCelchuuu @ Aug 19 2004, 09:05 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Windelkron+Aug 5 2004, 10:16 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Windelkron @ Aug 5 2004, 10:16 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Still, lots of threads are locked when an old topic is bumped, but the necromancer hasn't added any new information to it. I don't think it's right to auto-lock these things. People on the boards who had never seen that topic before (perhaps because it fell to the bottom too quickly, or they weren't registered, etc) will notice it because it's on page 1. That's really the point of the message boards, for users to be receiving all these ideas. So what if an old topic is raised to the top with a simple "Bump!" instead of a "You know, I think this issue has new ramifications in 3.0 Beta 4?" It's still offering the old topic to people who haven't seen it before. And when it's promptly locked, nobody will be able to see it again because it can't be bumped. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> It's not like it's someone's duty to continually bump every thread on the forum so everyone can read it. Missing a thread won't kill you, and there's no need to keep reviving old ones so new people can read them. If they're so essential you can just get someone to do a search for it or something, without having to clutter up the front page. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Unfortunately search doesn't work for some people, so you have to bump certain threads so others can read them. Depending on the topic and post, some threads should be bumped at times but others shouldn't be bumped. Threads like <a href='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=307' target='_blank'>these</a> shouldn't be bumped. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Valid point, this thread for example serves the purpose of letting people know what's acceptable necromancy and what is not.
And you are so tempting me to bump that thread... I'd suggest a mod lock it before too long...
<!--QuoteBegin-Caboose+May 27 2005, 10:27 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Caboose @ May 27 2005, 10:27 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Petco+May 27 2005, 08:15 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Petco @ May 27 2005, 08:15 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-TychoCelchuuu+Aug 19 2004, 09:05 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TychoCelchuuu @ Aug 19 2004, 09:05 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Windelkron+Aug 5 2004, 10:16 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Windelkron @ Aug 5 2004, 10:16 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Still, lots of threads are locked when an old topic is bumped, but the necromancer hasn't added any new information to it. I don't think it's right to auto-lock these things. People on the boards who had never seen that topic before (perhaps because it fell to the bottom too quickly, or they weren't registered, etc) will notice it because it's on page 1. That's really the point of the message boards, for users to be receiving all these ideas. So what if an old topic is raised to the top with a simple "Bump!" instead of a "You know, I think this issue has new ramifications in 3.0 Beta 4?" It's still offering the old topic to people who haven't seen it before. And when it's promptly locked, nobody will be able to see it again because it can't be bumped. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> It's not like it's someone's duty to continually bump every thread on the forum so everyone can read it. Missing a thread won't kill you, and there's no need to keep reviving old ones so new people can read them. If they're so essential you can just get someone to do a search for it or something, without having to clutter up the front page. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Unfortunately search doesn't work for some people, so you have to bump certain threads so others can read them. Depending on the topic and post, some threads should be bumped at times but others shouldn't be bumped. Threads like <a href='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=307' target='_blank'>these</a> shouldn't be bumped. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Valid point, this thread for example serves the purpose of letting people know what's acceptable necromancy and what is not.
And you are so tempting me to bump that thread... I'd suggest a mod lock it before too long... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> might as well, it will be bumped sooner or later anyways.
<!--QuoteBegin-Petco+May 27 2005, 07:15 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Petco @ May 27 2005, 07:15 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-TychoCelchuuu+Aug 19 2004, 09:05 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TychoCelchuuu @ Aug 19 2004, 09:05 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Windelkron+Aug 5 2004, 10:16 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Windelkron @ Aug 5 2004, 10:16 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Still, lots of threads are locked when an old topic is bumped, but the necromancer hasn't added any new information to it. I don't think it's right to auto-lock these things. People on the boards who had never seen that topic before (perhaps because it fell to the bottom too quickly, or they weren't registered, etc) will notice it because it's on page 1. That's really the point of the message boards, for users to be receiving all these ideas. So what if an old topic is raised to the top with a simple "Bump!" instead of a "You know, I think this issue has new ramifications in 3.0 Beta 4?" It's still offering the old topic to people who haven't seen it before. And when it's promptly locked, nobody will be able to see it again because it can't be bumped. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> It's not like it's someone's duty to continually bump every thread on the forum so everyone can read it. Missing a thread won't kill you, and there's no need to keep reviving old ones so new people can read them. If they're so essential you can just get someone to do a search for it or something, without having to clutter up the front page. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Unfortunately search doesn't work for some people, so you have to bump certain threads so others can read them. Depending on the topic and post, some threads should be bumped at times but others shouldn't be bumped. Threads like <a href='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=307' target='_blank'>these</a> shouldn't be bumped. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> And by saying "this thread that I'm linking to should not be bumped," you guaranteed that it would be bumped. You managed to necromance two threads at once.
<!--QuoteBegin-im lost+May 27 2005, 09:45 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (im lost @ May 27 2005, 09:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> And by saying "this thread that I'm linking to should not be bumped," you guaranteed that it would be bumped. You managed to necromance two threads at once. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> He's becoming too powerful a Necromancer! Soon he will send his legions of undead threads to overpower us!
Because in customization, they dont follow the rules and bump for stupid reasons like 'omg dead link' instead of PMing the author. Nobody wants to see the same old stuff once its old, thats what the offical release topic is for. Personally, I think mods should be a bit harsher on noobs, like the CDG forums. Notice how their forums are nice and tidy? Not a single forum post out of place? I wonder why that is, hmm?
Now that search apparently does search any topics older than 6 months, we shouldn't lock any bumped threads that were created one year ago. Since the NS forums were down for almost one year. I mean if people bumped a thread three months ago BEFORE the forums went down, saying something like "Yeah, I agree", then that thread should be locked.
But since the forums were down for almost a year (2005 August and now it's open for consties to test July 2006), we shouldn't lock any threads that were made in Augest 2005. I mean if someone says "Yeah, I agree" to a thread that was made in August 2005, we shouldn't lock it, since technically it should have stayed on the page if it weren't for the forum outage.
PS: I'm incredibly awesome because I found this thread without using the power of search, reward plz k thx.
Comments
<span style='color:orange'>Postcount slapped down by a not-so-arbitrary -39 for spam.</span>
[edit]Cold-Nite will be thrilled marik.
its the things like this (as was said earlier in the thread) that leads to the locking of most revived threads, not the reviving itself
:edit:
this was my 1000th post. w00t me.
its the things like this (as was said earlier in the thread) that leads to the locking of most revived threads, not the reviving itself <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
And it's posts like these, repetitive and useless, that get threads locked. We KNOW +1 posts are useless. They're like "First post!" on Slashdot or "No, I don't know what's wrong" answers to questions on IRC.
But doing so without good content is lame and shouldn't be done.
<span style='color:black'><span style='font-size:0pt;line-height:100%'><_<
>_>
In before the TychoCelchuuu</span></span>
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree.
If someone has a truely worthwhile and relevant addition to a thread, they should be able to post it, regardless of the age<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
hilight the entire quote, and you will find the true meaning of my bump
/me wonders how all you guys didnt notice, even with some strong hints <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I did, in fact, hilight the entire quote and I still had no idea what you were talking about. Then I went back and edited it with mod hax and saw that the poster you quoted had posted a tiny, black "<_< >_>". Which, although silly, STILL doesn't explain to me the point of your post.
But doing so without good content is lame and shouldn't be done.
<span style='color:white'><span style='font-size:7pt;line-height:100%'><_<
>_>
In before the TychoCelchuuu</span></span>
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree.
If someone has a truely worthwhile and relevant addition to a thread, they should be able to post it, regardless of the age<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
hilight the entire quote, and you will find the true meaning of my bump
/me wonders how all you guys didnt notice, even with some strong hints <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I did, in fact, hilight the entire quote and I still had no idea what you were talking about. Then I went back and edited it with mod hax and saw that the poster you quoted had posted a tiny, black "<_< >_>". Which, although silly, STILL doesn't explain to me the point of your post. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
bob. you missed a critical line in all of that. specifically, the line AFTER those <_< >_> you did notice
(and i put those there, not the person i quoted)
:edit:
to end the confusion, i edited the size tags of the relevent part of this quote tree
:edit2: and the color tags
i didnt realize it would take you guys so long
/me lowers expectations for the next attempt at cleverness
i didnt realize it would take you guys so long
/me lowers expectations for the next attempt at cleverness <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I caught it back when it was originally posted, I just figured it wasn't proper for me to post it, or I wasn't in the posting mood, or it was nearing the bottom of the page... there was some reason I avoided posting, but I don't recall it at the moment.
Ya, I just knowticed that too...
Ya, I just knowticed that too... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Noticed ^
Sorry... spelling annoyed me ¬_¬
It's not like it's someone's duty to continually bump every thread on the forum so everyone can read it. Missing a thread won't kill you, and there's no need to keep reviving old ones so new people can read them. If they're so essential you can just get someone to do a search for it or something, without having to clutter up the front page. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Unfortunately search doesn't work for some people, so you have to bump certain threads so others can read them. Depending on the topic and post, some threads should be bumped at times but others shouldn't be bumped. Threads like <a href='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=307' target='_blank'>these</a> shouldn't be bumped.
It's not like it's someone's duty to continually bump every thread on the forum so everyone can read it. Missing a thread won't kill you, and there's no need to keep reviving old ones so new people can read them. If they're so essential you can just get someone to do a search for it or something, without having to clutter up the front page. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Unfortunately search doesn't work for some people, so you have to bump certain threads so others can read them. Depending on the topic and post, some threads should be bumped at times but others shouldn't be bumped. Threads like <a href='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=307' target='_blank'>these</a> shouldn't be bumped. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Valid point, this thread for example serves the purpose of letting people know what's acceptable necromancy and what is not.
And you are so tempting me to bump that thread... I'd suggest a mod lock it before too long...
It's not like it's someone's duty to continually bump every thread on the forum so everyone can read it. Missing a thread won't kill you, and there's no need to keep reviving old ones so new people can read them. If they're so essential you can just get someone to do a search for it or something, without having to clutter up the front page. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Unfortunately search doesn't work for some people, so you have to bump certain threads so others can read them. Depending on the topic and post, some threads should be bumped at times but others shouldn't be bumped. Threads like <a href='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=307' target='_blank'>these</a> shouldn't be bumped. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Valid point, this thread for example serves the purpose of letting people know what's acceptable necromancy and what is not.
And you are so tempting me to bump that thread... I'd suggest a mod lock it before too long... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
might as well, it will be bumped sooner or later anyways.
It's not like it's someone's duty to continually bump every thread on the forum so everyone can read it. Missing a thread won't kill you, and there's no need to keep reviving old ones so new people can read them. If they're so essential you can just get someone to do a search for it or something, without having to clutter up the front page. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Unfortunately search doesn't work for some people, so you have to bump certain threads so others can read them. Depending on the topic and post, some threads should be bumped at times but others shouldn't be bumped. Threads like <a href='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=307' target='_blank'>these</a> shouldn't be bumped. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
And by saying "this thread that I'm linking to should not be bumped," you guaranteed that it would be bumped. You managed to necromance two threads at once.
He's becoming too powerful a Necromancer! Soon he will send his legions of undead threads to overpower us!
THESE ARE THE END DAYS!!
But since the forums were down for almost a year (2005 August and now it's open for consties to test July 2006), we shouldn't lock any threads that were made in Augest 2005. I mean if someone says "Yeah, I agree" to a thread that was made in August 2005, we shouldn't lock it, since technically it should have stayed on the page if it weren't for the forum outage.
PS: I'm incredibly awesome because I found this thread without using the power of search, reward plz k thx.