You mean you actually spend time reading the cesspool that is tarom.net???

Actually, it certainly does not seem to be that at all. I count 5 posters (now 6) who have jumped in here to either oppose the bombardment of forums by one poster or to defend one of those opposing bombardment. All seems perfectly on topic. Yes, doc and gaza seem to have violated the TOS repeatedly, and that might be a reason to lock it, but not for a lack of on-topic support for the thread.

Talk about statements that people have copied and ready to paste. When one poster bombards a forum, it is not the people complaining who are too lazy to go to the next page, but the fact that most others do not, and the thread dies, unless the interested parties go out of their way to bump it up.

Next, I don't know about you, but after I post to a thread, I hate to hit back, back, back, back, back (yes, it takes 5 page loads to return to page 2 using the back button). Instead, I press the jump to forum link, but guess what page that takes you to? Page 1! The whole system is designed to make it easy to participate on page 1 threads, and harder to participate on page 2 threads.

I, personally, don't mind that it makes it harder if people are having vibrant conversation that overflows the first page, but I do mind if they are posts which generate little, if any, participation from others. I also mind that those discussionless threads mean that many other posters will no longer read them out of their laziness.

I suppose we could all go around bumping the threads whihc interest us, adding nothing new?

Sadly, no http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/frown.gif

Have a great day! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

---

I've repeatedly violated the TOS in this thread? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

Really? Are we reading the same "stuff?"

How so did I repeatedly violate the TOS, pray tell?

Please direct me to where doc has violated the TOS? I see plenty of instances where Gaza has. Frankly, his display here has been rude, crude and socially unaccepable. He has attacked, insulted and just proven himself unworthy of human companionship.

I don't worship any member of this community nor do I wish to get close enough to them to determine ... as Gaza suggests... whether their s**t stinks http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/confused.gif or not.

If people have such a huge problem with other members, so much so that it interfers with their enjoyment of FlyerTalk overall, then they really need to consider whether this is a good place for them to spend time.

I don't hope to get along with everyone here but I will do my best to treat every member with the respect I would hope to receive myself. Even those I don't necessarily agree with.

If this proves to be too difficult, close your eyes and pretend the person is standing right in front of you. Then open your eyes and see if the words you thought to speak, haven't changed.


------------------
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Ben Franklin

[This message has been edited by tazi (edited 06-26-2003).]

didn't missydarlin just answer this very question? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/confused.gif

Sadly, yes! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/frown.gif

Thanks for asking it again, though! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

Actually no I wasnt.

Quote:

---

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">
No, just in case I was ever unclear, I do not see my posts as even remotely "disruptive," by any means

---

Sadly, I'll have to disagree. I believe that when any members actions are enough to cause multiple threads to be started as to whether the behavior is acceptable is at the very least disruptive.

Quote:

---

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">
The tone is also quite clear as well, i.e. to be as respectful as humanly possible - and to not violate the rules that we have all agreed to abide by! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

---

In your own words.. these rules seem to be

Quote:

---

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">

From the TOS, we are all urged to:

"...Be Tolerant -- Respect the beliefs and opinions of others.

..."avoid the use of bitterness or ridicule..."

"...Keep it friendly -- Any posts that come across as a put-down may be deleted..."

---

Yet I can't help but interpret some of the other comments you've made just in this thread..which I'm sure arent far off from some of the other comments floating out there..as unfriendly and ridiculing.

Quote:

---

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">
You are just perfect, incredibly so, and I'm glad to hear it!

Wow! Super post! Caught me with the goods again, you did! There is clearly no foolin' you!

You figured me out so very easily! Surely you must be a genius? Or is it so very obvious to all?

Frankly, IMHO, this post reveals quite a bit about you, sadly!

but I am increasingly finding your post(s), while admittedly somewhat amusing, to also be a bit embarrassing to FT! And rather shameful as well, to be frank!

Just as with backsides, seems everybody has one!

Perhaps you should simply be asking yourself, no? After all, you seem to have all the answers, right?

You are just perfect, incredibly so, and I'm glad to hear it!

Yet, you'll please hopefully excuse me, if I admit to being somewhat grateful that I'm perhaps a bit different than you are!

You are just perfect, incredibly so, and I'm glad to hear it!

---

I think this would cover question you asked about multiple TOS violations.

Quote:

---

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">
And if you actually think that I "retaliated," then truly you do not know me at all - which, of course, you do not! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

---

If you will be so kind as to reread the entire sentence..it said do not respond or retaliate. Fueling the fire is just as much a TOS violation as starting it.

Quote:

---

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">And yes, again to be clear, I was respectful, IMHO, and most certainly so, on a relative or comparative basis!
You don't think so?

---

There is no provision for relative or comparative in the TOS. If you feel the TOS has been violated against you, then its your responsibility to bring it to the attention of Randy and Co. rather than respond or retaliate.

Quote:

---

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">You think Lex did not violate the TOS?

Hey, I certainly respect your opinion, even IF it is is extremely misguided, IMHO.

---

If Lex's original post is a violation of the TOS then so is Tazi's. And for that matter so is your calling my opinion misguided. You have no knowledge of what guides my opinion.

Quote:

---

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">
Why not try putting yourself in my position!

---

You obviously have a loyal following who could be easily served without disrupting those who have strong feelings in the other direction. If I were in your position, I'd either A) start an email list of those who are interested in your clipping service B) start my own website or C) Ask Randy for my own forum

Quote:

---

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">
And also, remember please just exactly why we are having this discussion - I was flamed yet AGAIN, sadly! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/frown.gif

---

And AGAIN, I'd like to refer you and those who'd like to support your position to the section of the TOS that urges you to "contact a TalkAssist Volunteer" if you feel that you've been the recipient of a personal attack.



[This message has been edited by missydarlin (edited 06-27-2003).]

[This message has been edited by tazi (edited 06-27-2003).]

Excuse me? Where did I use ignoramus in any of my replies here?



------------------
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Ben Franklin

Pardon my misquote. The term you used was "anyone with three brain cells to rub together"

Needless to say, Missy, I disagree - and vehemently so. Forgive me please if I may go so far as to question your objectivity here, or rather lack thereof! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

---

---

Actually I believe the record will show that
you are incorrect here. She's merely quoted "Lex."

As you may recall:

"In the News" should be renamed the "Doc News Network".

Anybody with three brain cells to rub together checks the news sites interesting to them. Doc either posts uninteresting sites or ones they have already checked. This is a form of trolling. But he gets away with it through huge post counts. Driving interesting posters away seems less important than attracting the ignoramuses who cannot find their own news sources, but THIS DOES drive up hits. Duh.[/QUOTE]

---

What more can I say, really? Nothing, sadly! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/frown.gif

Have a great day all! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

And that violates the TOS how? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/confused.gif



------------------
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Ben Franklin

Perhaps this says it best

[This message has been edited by missydarlin (edited 06-27-2003).]

missydarlin

Do you feel as if you are striking your head against a wall yet?

tazi

Remember, skipping someone's posts and threads is not always as easy as it sounds.

Thisnk about the Pro-TSA member that you could just not ignore?

Thing about the web is that it remembers what we write really well.

I have a feeling that some members will regret some of the things they've written here.

Suggestion for some folks, which y'all will take or leave: bang out your message but then wait a few minutes and cool off and consider whether your post is something you'll be proud of later, and whether it is helpful or harmful to the community.

I still have no idea what you are talking about. All I did was use Lex's own words to show a different view. I'm not sure what doc's comments have to do with my post violating the TOS http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/rolleyes.gif



------------------
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Ben Franklin

Very different situation I think. Skipping over threads you have no interest in isn't the same as ignoring comments by someone in a thread you are both already involved in.

At any rate, I am done here.


------------------
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Ben Franklin

[This message has been edited by tazi (edited 06-27-2003).]

"It's better to have loved and lost then to never have loved at all"?

If a person posts 100 times and has just 1 post that is a jem, should that person continue to post or stop? How about 1 in 1000, 10,000 or 50,000?

Personally, I would tolerate the 49,999 for the one good one but that's just me.

My point is, that you felt Lex's own words were a violation of the TOS, yet it was OK for you to use them yourself. Precisely why Doc's comments about his post be should be just as applicable to yours.

No missy, I didn't think they were in violation. I said they were close.




------------------
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Ben Franklin

I'm very serious with the suggestion that a "doc" only news forum should be created.

I don't have anything personal against doc, I just don't care to see the same news from Yahoo repeated on Delta and Northwest and Continental... those of us who care have already looked at it on Yahoo...

But if we give doc his own forum, he can post to his heart's content, and those of you who find his posts valuable can find them all at one place!

Win-win, I would say.

Have to agree with gleff pretty much.

The FT TOS specifically says there is no limit upon how many posts anyone can make.

Randy has posted doc provides a valuable service to FT in his opinion. That is surely the only person whose opinion will count in this matter. Anyone who wants to set up their own BB in parallel to FT is clearly free to do so.

I can think of two such boards set up by active FT'ers that have basically died from lack of interest. Tells us all a story perhaps? But it is a free world out there.

doc's threads all have very specific headings that make them easy to not click on if one does not wish to. I find that easy to do.

Others that do not might like to start their own board write their own TOS for it, and invite their friends to join.

And while doing that, FT can steam ahead as always - and log up its two millionth post. A milestone Randy seems very proud of. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/thumbsup.gif http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/thumbsup.gif http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/thumbsup.gif http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/thumbsup.gif

"Posters bombarding forums"

I know these are different kind of posts, and well meaning in fact, but I was taken aback nonetheless to see this 200 post long series today for the first time.

All of this is an attack on doc. What some of you have against someone who puts newslinks in FT is beyond my understanding. I'm glad to see that Randy has been silent on this bizarre attack as voicing even a word would somehow give attention and credence to those who have nothing else better to do than to besmirch doc.

Keep posting the news, doc. Many of us like it. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

From ozstamps:
Seems evident to me too.



[This message has been edited by Analise (edited 07-01-2003).]

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/confused.gif

What on earth was attacking about this calm, clear question?

pinniped said nothing personal and made it perfectly clear what was troubling about the posts, without getting emotional or resorting to name-calling.

How nice of you to add your charactrization of an "attack" and that you find these people "bizarre" and accusing people of "besmirch[ing]" innocent doc.

The question you ask has been asked and answered so many times, that you really must be avoiding seeing the answer, or you really just want to launch another attack on doc's critics. I have posted that I disagree with the separate forum proposal, but I'll still come back and defend the innocent against attacks like this.

Wow...I had forgotten that I started this thread. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

My original query was related to news articles posted in forums other than In The News. In this case, I'm pretty sure the forum was OMNI, and I don't think it matters who the poster was.

I don't have anything against news cross-posts. I find many of the news posts interesting and frequently participate in those threads. My only question was whether there was a policy about hitting the same board with MANY news posts in rapid succession. It now seems clear to me that there is not a specific rule against this.

I still hold that it's poor etiquette, and am still of the opinion that Randy should discourage this type of posting, but hey...that's just an opinion and it's Randy's board.

We all know how to use the Search function, we all know how to avoid topics that don't interest us, and we all know how to dig through Pages 2 and beyond to get what we need. We do all of those things regularly as a normal part of using the boards: I'm simply proposing that good etiquette with regards to cross-posts might allow everyone to do it a bit less. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif