my SSM threads - why close them?
Feb 25, 2004 | 8:33 am
#1
Original Poster
Moderator, Argentina and FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: MIA / EZE
Programs: Lord of Malbec & all Wines Argentine. AA EXP / Marriott Lifetime Gold / Hyatt Explorist / Hertz PC
Posts: 36,204
my SSM threads - why close them?
The PPP is at is again...
This is OMNI, right? Apart from some bozo comment attacking me personally, all these threads had no TOS violations. Why close them?
------------------
Gaucho100K
Feb 25, 2004 | 8:59 am
#2
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Programs: HH Diamond, SPG Gold, PC Platinum Ambassador, Marriott Silver
Posts: 15,249
It's called selective moderation. In order to prevent your threads from being locked down, you will need to become a gay activist and Bush-basher.
Feb 25, 2004 | 9:03 am
#3
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 44,555
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by cactuspete:
It's called selective moderation. In order to prevent your threads from being locked down, you will need to become a gay activist and Bush-basher.</font>
It's called selective moderation. In order to prevent your threads from being locked down, you will need to become a gay activist and Bush-basher.</font>
Feb 25, 2004 | 9:20 am
#4
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Digital Nomad Wandering the Earth - Currently in VIENNA, AUSTRIA!
Posts: 61,923
Has the originater asked that it be closed???
Feb 25, 2004 | 9:21 am
#5
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sextants--> A constellation in the equatorial region of the sky south of Leo. The place is full of deviants!
Programs: The mile high club
Posts: 2,252
Gaucho100K baby, you know you are being a bad boy. You need a proper spanking!!! 
------------------
OMNI's reluctant, albeit premier, SEX deviant.
It was the wet t-shirt contest that did it, wasn't it? Well, I did for the miles.
------------------
OMNI's reluctant, albeit premier, SEX deviant.
It was the wet t-shirt contest that did it, wasn't it? Well, I did for the miles.
Feb 25, 2004 | 9:25 am
#6
In Memoriam
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 35,554
oooo oooooo
did someone say spanking?
did someone say spanking?
Feb 25, 2004 | 9:29 am
#7
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: IAD
Programs: AA Lifetime Platinum
Posts: 27,068
I usually don't have a problem with people starting threads. However I do object when a highly prolific poster starts complaining about other people starting threads.
Feb 25, 2004 | 9:35 am
#8
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
Some FlyerTalkers are more equal than others. 
Feb 25, 2004 | 9:40 am
#9
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: MCI
Programs: AA Gold 1MM, AS MVP, UA Silver, WN A-List, Marriott LT Titanium, HH Diamond
Posts: 53,010
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by PG:
I usually don't have a problem with people starting threads. However I do object when a highly prolific poster starts complaining about other people starting threads.</font>
I usually don't have a problem with people starting threads. However I do object when a highly prolific poster starts complaining about other people starting threads.</font>
IMHO, it amounts to hijacking the board for one's own political agenda. The forum is certainly open to a SSM discussion thread, but it shouldn't be open to dozens of them.
Feb 25, 2004 | 6:14 pm
#10
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: PHL (and sometimes BKK)
Programs: aa/ua gold; mar titanium. SPG till I die.
Posts: 15,649
maybe because a lot of us are sick and tired of seeing gay-related/SSM threads?
Feb 25, 2004 | 6:28 pm
#11
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 8,227
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by civicmon:
maybe because a lot of us are sick and tired of seeing gay-related/SSM threads?</font>
maybe because a lot of us are sick and tired of seeing gay-related/SSM threads?</font>
Feb 25, 2004 | 11:54 pm
#12
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: San Francisco
Programs: AA 3mm Plat
Posts: 10,068
Ummmmm, maybe because it was clear you were not sincere. You had just posted a topic complaining about the subject being overexposed. Within moments the multiple threads opened by you sure seemed like they were designed to blow away the discussions which annoyed you by "talking over them" and diluting them rather than adding to them.
Few,if any of the threads added even a hint of new dimension or perspective - most had in their title exactly the same slant as had been discussed in other threads.
Not all football threads can contain all discussion about football, but how many do we need about the magnificent quarterback of the 49ers of the 1980's?
C'mon.
Few,if any of the threads added even a hint of new dimension or perspective - most had in their title exactly the same slant as had been discussed in other threads.
Not all football threads can contain all discussion about football, but how many do we need about the magnificent quarterback of the 49ers of the 1980's?
C'mon.
Feb 26, 2004 | 5:08 am
#13
At Large
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: oakville Ontario canada;AC*SE
Posts: 16,985
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Teacher49:
Ummmmm, maybe because it was clear you were not sincere. You had just posted a topic complaining about the subject being overexposed. Within moments the multiple threads opened by you sure seemed like they were designed to blow away the discussions which annoyed you by "talking over them" and diluting them rather than adding to them.
Few,if any of the threads added even a hint of new dimension or perspective - most had in their title exactly the same slant as had been discussed in other threads.
Not all football threads can contain all discussion about football, but how many do we need about the magnificent quarterback of the 49ers of the 1980's?
C'mon.</font>
Ummmmm, maybe because it was clear you were not sincere. You had just posted a topic complaining about the subject being overexposed. Within moments the multiple threads opened by you sure seemed like they were designed to blow away the discussions which annoyed you by "talking over them" and diluting them rather than adding to them.
Few,if any of the threads added even a hint of new dimension or perspective - most had in their title exactly the same slant as had been discussed in other threads.
Not all football threads can contain all discussion about football, but how many do we need about the magnificent quarterback of the 49ers of the 1980's?
C'mon.</font>
Feb 26, 2004 | 6:31 am
#14
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: IAD
Programs: AA Lifetime Platinum
Posts: 27,068
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by pinniped:
I thought the initial complaint was perfectly valid. I have had innocent threads about football get closed as duplicates - "there's another thread to go talk football in" has been the response. Yet we have dozens and dozens of SSM threads that don't get closed, even though they are more similar in nature than threads I've had canned as dupes.
IMHO, it amounts to hijacking the board for one's own political agenda. The forum is certainly open to a SSM discussion thread, but it shouldn't be open to dozens of them.</font>
I thought the initial complaint was perfectly valid. I have had innocent threads about football get closed as duplicates - "there's another thread to go talk football in" has been the response. Yet we have dozens and dozens of SSM threads that don't get closed, even though they are more similar in nature than threads I've had canned as dupes.
IMHO, it amounts to hijacking the board for one's own political agenda. The forum is certainly open to a SSM discussion thread, but it shouldn't be open to dozens of them.</font>
As an example I started a thread about Cheney saying something in the 2000 VP debate (related to SSM) and saying the exact opposite now. That deserves a new thread, and I reject the notion that there should be one SSM thread where everything should be posted.
There are a lot of threads in OMNI that I am in the least interested with, yet I should not be saying that these topics are off limits or "hijacking" the forum. If I (or you) don't like a topic don't read it.
[This message has been edited by PG (edited Feb 26, 2004).]
Feb 26, 2004 | 6:34 am
#15
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: IAD
Programs: AA Lifetime Platinum
Posts: 27,068
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by parnel:
Every SS thread in the last month wa nothing but a repeat so why pick on Gaucho----------oh he's against SSM and you're not;gee, teach do you teach that kind of equality in your courses.</font>
Every SS thread in the last month wa nothing but a repeat so why pick on Gaucho----------oh he's against SSM and you're not;gee, teach do you teach that kind of equality in your courses.</font>
If we wanted to ban duplication of information, most of FT would be closed. Most of the information is already in the airline/hotel/news web site and a lot of topics are repeat topics.
[This message has been edited by PG (edited Feb 26, 2004).]