Aug 24, 2010, 8:22 AM
Post #151 of 181
(1717 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2007
Posts: 19994
Re: [Toast_in_the_Machine] Should posts be editable after they are made and if so, for how long after?
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(1 rating)
Aug 24, 2010, 1:28 PM
Post #154 of 181
(1675 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2008
Posts: 5169
Re: [philbox] Should posts be editable after they are made and if so, for how long after?
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(0 ratings)
Can't Post
philbox wrote:
Toast_in_the_Machine wrote:
Arrogant_Bastard wrote:
Toast_in_the_Machine wrote:
philbox wrote:
I hereby nominate gmburns to become a mod. He is without a doubt the greatest poster on this site!
Quoted for posterity (posterior portion)?
MISQUOTING! BANZ HIM! BANZ HIM NOW!
Mine is the real post, he edited it after I hit quote. Really. Don't ban me, I ran outta gas. I had a flat tire. I didn't have enough money for cab fare. My tux didn't come back from the cleaners. An old friend came in from outta town. Someone stole my car. There was an earthquake, a terrible flood, locust's. It wasn't my fault!! I swear to God!!
Aug 24, 2010, 10:59 PM
Post #155 of 181
(1644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 26, 2002
Posts: 13102
Re: [Toast_in_the_Machine] Should posts be editable after they are made and if so, for how long after?
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(0 ratings)
Can't Post
Toast_in_the_Machine wrote:
philbox wrote:
Toast_in_the_Machine wrote:
Arrogant_Bastard wrote:
Toast_in_the_Machine wrote:
philbox wrote:
I hereby nominate gmburns to become a mod. He is without a doubt the greatest poster on this site!
Quoted for posterity (posterior portion)?
MISQUOTING! BANZ HIM! BANZ HIM NOW!
Mine is the real post, he edited it after I hit quote. Really. Don't ban me, I ran outta gas. I had a flat tire. I didn't have enough money for cab fare. My tux didn't come back from the cleaners. An old friend came in from outta town. Someone stole my car. There was an earthquake, a terrible flood, locust's. It wasn't my fault!! I swear to God!!
I see what you did there. Well played sir.
Thank you.
Did you catch the other one as well?
Ooooh, no I didn't. [/sound of the bleeding obvious fleeing in opposite direction]
Aug 25, 2010, 5:29 AM
Post #156 of 181
(1625 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2008
Posts: 5169
Re: [philbox] Should posts be editable after they are made and if so, for how long after?
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(0 ratings)
Can't Post
philbox wrote:
Toast_in_the_Machine wrote:
philbox wrote:
Toast_in_the_Machine wrote:
Arrogant_Bastard wrote:
Toast_in_the_Machine wrote:
philbox wrote:
I hereby nominate gmburns to become a mod. He is without a doubt the greatest poster on this site!
Quoted for posterity (posterior portion)?
MISQUOTING! BANZ HIM! BANZ HIM NOW!
Mine is the real post, he edited it after I hit quote. Really. Don't ban me, I ran outta gas. I had a flat tire. I didn't have enough money for cab fare. My tux didn't come back from the cleaners. An old friend came in from outta town. Someone stole my car. There was an earthquake, a terrible flood, locust's. It wasn't my fault!! I swear to God!!
I see what you did there. Well played sir.
Thank you.
Did you catch the other one as well?
Ooooh, no I didn't. [/sound of the bleeding obvious fleeing in opposite direction]
Aug 25, 2010, 5:38 AM
Post #157 of 181
(1622 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17347
Re: [Toast_in_the_Machine] Should posts be editable after they are made and if so, for how long after?
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(3 ratings)
Can't Post
Its funny toast, I haven't heard ONE good reason why this group of site users is entitled to take my posts.
Not one.
I HAVE heard reasons, petulant, asshole reasons.
"How DARE you delete YOUR post! YOU HAVE NO RIGHT!"
Wah.
Get over yourselves. Its not your material, it will NEVER be your material. Never.
Aug 25, 2010, 12:06 PM
Post #160 of 181
(1567 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 6, 2004
Posts: 25318
Re: [NoSoup4U] Should posts be editable after they are made and if so, for how long after?
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(0 ratings)
Can't Post
NoSoup4U wrote:
Absolutely no editing. Posts quality will increase. A side benefit will be the end of the stupid quoting and re-quoting of the original posts or thread answers.
Users need to think twice before hitting the reply or post button.
Delete the campground, soap box etc. Moderate agressively to delete any non-climbing posts.
Aug 25, 2010, 12:24 PM
Post #161 of 181
(1572 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 6, 2004
Posts: 25318
Re: [jt512] Should posts be editable after they are made and if so, for how long after?
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(4 ratings)
Can't Post
jt512 wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
I guess I don't understand this crazy hard on to demand things be available online in perpetuity.
It's a forum post. Made by someone you don't know.
Where is the value in this? The value comes from knowing the user. Here, it's by online reputation. Aric developed a reputation after a while as a guy who knew something about engineering and gear testing. The only reason his posts have any value is because you have seen his whole body of work.
By preserving his entire body of work, you are forcing him against his will to remain on here. That's lame. Any one of his posts on its own has no value. They only have value when taken as a whole.
I don't understand your argument. If the bolded premises are true, they would seem to support the need for long-term on-line availability of posts. But, that said, I don't accept the premise that you need to view a large number of a user's posts in order to make an accurate judgment about the user's knowledgeability. Proof by counterexample: Read any single post by rgold and any single post by subantz.
Jay
Your vast library of posts has proved that you are a douche; this can also be determined through just one or two posts.
Aug 25, 2010, 12:55 PM
Post #163 of 181
(1557 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21792
Re: [dr_feelgood] Should posts be editable after they are made and if so, for how long after?
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(4 ratings)
Can't Post
dr_feelgood wrote:
jt512 wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
I guess I don't understand this crazy hard on to demand things be available online in perpetuity.
It's a forum post. Made by someone you don't know.
Where is the value in this? The value comes from knowing the user. Here, it's by online reputation. Aric developed a reputation after a while as a guy who knew something about engineering and gear testing. The only reason his posts have any value is because you have seen his whole body of work.
By preserving his entire body of work, you are forcing him against his will to remain on here. That's lame. Any one of his posts on its own has no value. They only have value when taken as a whole.
I don't understand your argument. If the bolded premises are true, they would seem to support the need for long-term on-line availability of posts. But, that said, I don't accept the premise that you need to view a large number of a user's posts in order to make an accurate judgment about the user's knowledgeability. Proof by counterexample: Read any single post by rgold and any single post by subantz.
Jay
Your vast library of posts has proved that you are a douche; this can also be determined through just one or two posts.
Aug 25, 2010, 1:11 PM
Post #165 of 181
(1543 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17347
Re: [jt512] Should posts be editable after they are made and if so, for how long after?
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(5 ratings)
Can't Post
jt512 wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
jt512 wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
I guess I don't understand this crazy hard on to demand things be available online in perpetuity.
It's a forum post. Made by someone you don't know.
Where is the value in this? The value comes from knowing the user. Here, it's by online reputation. Aric developed a reputation after a while as a guy who knew something about engineering and gear testing. The only reason his posts have any value is because you have seen his whole body of work.
By preserving his entire body of work, you are forcing him against his will to remain on here. That's lame. Any one of his posts on its own has no value. They only have value when taken as a whole.
I don't understand your argument. If the bolded premises are true, they would seem to support the need for long-term on-line availability of posts. But, that said, I don't accept the premise that you need to view a large number of a user's posts in order to make an accurate judgment about the user's knowledgeability. Proof by counterexample: Read any single post by rgold and any single post by subantz.
Jay
Your vast library of posts has proved that you are a douche; this can also be determined through just one or two posts.
Aug 25, 2010, 1:14 PM
Post #166 of 181
(1540 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17347
Re: [curt] Should posts be editable after they are made and if so, for how long after?
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(3 ratings)
Can't Post
curt wrote:
dingus wrote:
Its funny toast, I haven't heard ONE good reason why this group of site users is entitled to take my posts.
Not one.
I HAVE heard reasons, petulant, asshole reasons...
That's the thing about hearing. It's just so terribly difficult, if you're not willing to listen.
Curt
I read every attempt at a convincing point, from the insincerity of [ideaLs when that a couple of selfish bastards tried to take adatesman's posts, to the subsequent hand wringing, yours included.
They all amount to 'we take what we want. That's just the way the internet it.'
Its lame. Its dish water. But I heard every word, read every attempt at an argument. Not one solid point, not one.
Aug 25, 2010, 1:55 PM
Post #168 of 181
(1518 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 11, 2005
Posts: 1703
Re: [jt512] Should posts be editable after they are made and if so, for how long after?
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(4 ratings)
Can't Post
jt512 wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
jt512 wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
I guess I don't understand this crazy hard on to demand things be available online in perpetuity.
It's a forum post. Made by someone you don't know.
Where is the value in this? The value comes from knowing the user. Here, it's by online reputation. Aric developed a reputation after a while as a guy who knew something about engineering and gear testing. The only reason his posts have any value is because you have seen his whole body of work.
By preserving his entire body of work, you are forcing him against his will to remain on here. That's lame. Any one of his posts on its own has no value. They only have value when taken as a whole.
I don't understand your argument. If the bolded premises are true, they would seem to support the need for long-term on-line availability of posts. But, that said, I don't accept the premise that you need to view a large number of a user's posts in order to make an accurate judgment about the user's knowledgeability. Proof by counterexample: Read any single post by rgold and any single post by subantz.
Jay
Your vast library of posts has proved that you are a douche; this can also be determined through just one or two posts.
Aug 25, 2010, 2:49 PM
Post #169 of 181
(1503 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21792
Re: [dingus] Should posts be editable after they are made and if so, for how long after?
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(6 ratings)
Can't Post
dingus wrote:
jt512 wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
jt512 wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
I guess I don't understand this crazy hard on to demand things be available online in perpetuity.
It's a forum post. Made by someone you don't know.
Where is the value in this? The value comes from knowing the user. Here, it's by online reputation. Aric developed a reputation after a while as a guy who knew something about engineering and gear testing. The only reason his posts have any value is because you have seen his whole body of work.
By preserving his entire body of work, you are forcing him against his will to remain on here. That's lame. Any one of his posts on its own has no value. They only have value when taken as a whole.
I don't understand your argument. If the bolded premises are true, they would seem to support the need for long-term on-line availability of posts. But, that said, I don't accept the premise that you need to view a large number of a user's posts in order to make an accurate judgment about the user's knowledgeability. Proof by counterexample: Read any single post by rgold and any single post by subantz.
Jay
Your vast library of posts has proved that you are a douche; this can also be determined through just one or two posts.
Fuck you, too.
Jay
The essential JT signal.
DMT
Send me a PM at some point if you regain your sanity. In the meantime...
Aug 25, 2010, 3:01 PM
Post #170 of 181
(1495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2007
Posts: 19994
Re: [jt512] Should posts be editable after they are made and if so, for how long after?
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(1 rating)
Can't Post
jt512 wrote:
dingus wrote:
jt512 wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
jt512 wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
I guess I don't understand this crazy hard on to demand things be available online in perpetuity.
It's a forum post. Made by someone you don't know.
Where is the value in this? The value comes from knowing the user. Here, it's by online reputation. Aric developed a reputation after a while as a guy who knew something about engineering and gear testing. The only reason his posts have any value is because you have seen his whole body of work.
By preserving his entire body of work, you are forcing him against his will to remain on here. That's lame. Any one of his posts on its own has no value. They only have value when taken as a whole.
I don't understand your argument. If the bolded premises are true, they would seem to support the need for long-term on-line availability of posts. But, that said, I don't accept the premise that you need to view a large number of a user's posts in order to make an accurate judgment about the user's knowledgeability. Proof by counterexample: Read any single post by rgold and any single post by subantz.
Jay
Your vast library of posts has proved that you are a douche; this can also be determined through just one or two posts.
Fuck you, too.
Jay
The essential JT signal.
DMT
Send me a PM at some point if you regain your sanity. In the meantime...
*plonk*
Catch 22; if he knows he's insane, then he's not insane.
Aug 25, 2010, 4:14 PM
Post #172 of 181
(1479 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 26, 2002
Posts: 18043
Re: [dingus] Should posts be editable after they are made and if so, for how long after?
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(3 ratings)
Can't Post
dingus wrote:
curt wrote:
dingus wrote:
Its funny toast, I haven't heard ONE good reason why this group of site users is entitled to take my posts.
Not one.
I HAVE heard reasons, petulant, asshole reasons...
That's the thing about hearing. It's just so terribly difficult, if you're not willing to listen.
Curt
I read every attempt at a convincing point, from the insincerity of [ideaLs when that a couple of selfish bastards tried to take adatesman's posts, to the subsequent hand wringing, yours included.
They all amount to 'we take what we want. That's just the way the internet it.'
Its lame. Its dish water. But I heard every word, read every attempt at an argument. Not one solid point, not one.
DMT
Sorry Dingus, but I'm afraid you're the one here with no point at all. You can claim all you want to to the contrary (and say it as loudly as you want, and as many times as you want) but you do not have absolute control your over content here, or anywhere else, for that matter. I know this continues to upset you terribly--and I fully realize that you wish the world worked differently, but I'm afraid it is what it is.
Curt
(This post was edited by curt on Aug 25, 2010, 7:21 PM)
Aug 25, 2010, 4:25 PM
Post #173 of 181
(1475 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 6, 2004
Posts: 25318
Re: [jt512] Should posts be editable after they are made and if so, for how long after?
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(4 ratings)
Can't Post
jt512 wrote:
dingus wrote:
jt512 wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
jt512 wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
I guess I don't understand this crazy hard on to demand things be available online in perpetuity.
It's a forum post. Made by someone you don't know.
Where is the value in this? The value comes from knowing the user. Here, it's by online reputation. Aric developed a reputation after a while as a guy who knew something about engineering and gear testing. The only reason his posts have any value is because you have seen his whole body of work.
By preserving his entire body of work, you are forcing him against his will to remain on here. That's lame. Any one of his posts on its own has no value. They only have value when taken as a whole.
I don't understand your argument. If the bolded premises are true, they would seem to support the need for long-term on-line availability of posts. But, that said, I don't accept the premise that you need to view a large number of a user's posts in order to make an accurate judgment about the user's knowledgeability. Proof by counterexample: Read any single post by rgold and any single post by subantz.
Jay
Your vast library of posts has proved that you are a douche; this can also be determined through just one or two posts.
Fuck you, too.
Jay
The essential JT signal.
DMT
Send me a PM at some point if you regain your sanity. In the meantime...
*plonk*
Wow. That was almost as efficient as a NKVD death squad during the purges.
Aug 26, 2010, 7:40 AM
Post #174 of 181
(1405 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319
Re: [jt512] Should posts be editable after they are made and if so, for how long after?
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(0 ratings)
Can't Post
jt512 wrote:
dingus wrote:
jt512 wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
jt512 wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
I guess I don't understand this crazy hard on to demand things be available online in perpetuity.
It's a forum post. Made by someone you don't know.
Where is the value in this? The value comes from knowing the user. Here, it's by online reputation. Aric developed a reputation after a while as a guy who knew something about engineering and gear testing. The only reason his posts have any value is because you have seen his whole body of work.
By preserving his entire body of work, you are forcing him against his will to remain on here. That's lame. Any one of his posts on its own has no value. They only have value when taken as a whole.
I don't understand your argument. If the bolded premises are true, they would seem to support the need for long-term on-line availability of posts. But, that said, I don't accept the premise that you need to view a large number of a user's posts in order to make an accurate judgment about the user's knowledgeability. Proof by counterexample: Read any single post by rgold and any single post by subantz.
Jay
Your vast library of posts has proved that you are a douche; this can also be determined through just one or two posts.
Fuck you, too.
Jay
The essential JT signal.
DMT
Send me a PM at some point if you regain your sanity. In the meantime...
*plonk*
I think Jay might actually have a rather enjoyable RC experience once he has finally Kill Filed everyone!
People have claimed that RC's main attraction for anyone with more than a season's worth of rock climbing knowledge is "noise." Now that Angry has left and Jay is on his way to kill filing every last person (or otherwise completing his plan to phase out RC), even the banter is going to start going away! Ha, we can't even maintain that!
Aug 26, 2010, 7:20 PM
Post #175 of 181
(1353 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 26, 2002
Posts: 13102
Re: [spikeddem] Should posts be editable after they are made and if so, for how long after?
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(0 ratings)
Can't Post
spikeddem wrote:
jt512 wrote:
dingus wrote:
jt512 wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
jt512 wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
I guess I don't understand this crazy hard on to demand things be available online in perpetuity.
It's a forum post. Made by someone you don't know.
Where is the value in this? The value comes from knowing the user. Here, it's by online reputation. Aric developed a reputation after a while as a guy who knew something about engineering and gear testing. The only reason his posts have any value is because you have seen his whole body of work.
By preserving his entire body of work, you are forcing him against his will to remain on here. That's lame. Any one of his posts on its own has no value. They only have value when taken as a whole.
I don't understand your argument. If the bolded premises are true, they would seem to support the need for long-term on-line availability of posts. But, that said, I don't accept the premise that you need to view a large number of a user's posts in order to make an accurate judgment about the user's knowledgeability. Proof by counterexample: Read any single post by rgold and any single post by subantz.
Jay
Your vast library of posts has proved that you are a douche; this can also be determined through just one or two posts.
Fuck you, too.
Jay
The essential JT signal.
DMT
Send me a PM at some point if you regain your sanity. In the meantime...
*plonk*
I think Jay might actually have a rather enjoyable RC experience once he has finally Kill Filed everyone!
People have claimed that RC's main attraction for anyone with more than a season's worth of rock climbing knowledge is "noise." Now that Angry has left and Jay is on his way to kill filing every last person (or otherwise completing his plan to phase out RC), even the banter is going to start going away! Ha, we can't even maintain that!
Oh noes, people will have to start to post worthwhile content. Shock horror, Oh the humanility. The sky is falling on our heads, run, think of the children.
Was that noise or content. Yeah, noise. I'll go now and take my meds.
67 /
43%
