Stop 'merging' every topic and player on this forum

[rush]

Is it just me or does anyone else find this annoying. I dont need to see Deledio 140 pages then Martin 130 pages old. Why cant we
just keep it topical and up to date, who cares if there are numerous posts about the player. Im not admin I know but I think the
current format makes this forum boring

 

[SfB_AkA._DeLiCiOuS]

doesn't bother me...keeps things tidy this way.

 

[Disco08]

If you think this forum is boring because of the way we run it, don't let the door hit your butt on the way out.

 

[Baloo]

Prefer it merged.

 

[mld]

I'm sure there is another complaint thread this can be merged with.

 

[Streak]

I'm sure there is another complaint thread this can be merged with.

:hihi

 

[Rosy]

Is it just me or does anyone else find this annoying. I dont need to see Deledio 140 pages then Martin 130 pages old. Why cant we
just keep it topical and up to date, who cares if there are numerous posts about the player. Im not admin I know but I think the
current format makes this forum boring

13 posts and 11 of them new threads. What is boring about contributing on existing discussions, other than not seeing your name up in lights as the thread starter?

 

[MB78]

Prefer it merged.

100% agree.

 

[Mr Brightside]

I'm with the mods here...must be a dead set pain in the ass all the threads started on an over emotional moment where a whipping boy has made a balls up

 

[MB78]

I'm with the mods here...must be a dead set pain in the ass all the threads started on an over emotional moment where a whipping boy has made a balls up

Exactly.

And some posters just like starting threads for the sake of it without using the search function on a player. For example a new thread was started on Foley this week.

Keep up the good work mods.

 

[Baloo]

I think banning the ability to create new threads during a match and 4 hours afterwards would be a good idea and make life a tad easier for the mods on game day.

 

[skybeau]

I think banning the ability to create new threads during a match and 4 hours afterwards would be a good idea and make life a tad easier for the mods on game day.

But then we'd miss out on the "richmond vs whoever in one word" and "changes vs whoever else" threads that traditionally come into existence by the 15 minute mark of the final quarter...

 

[Baloo]

But then we'd miss out on the "richmond vs whoever in one word" and "changes vs whoever else" threads that traditionally come into existence by the 15 minute mark of the final quarter...

They can always be created by the mods when they create the game day thread.

 

[U2Tigers]

But then we'd miss out on the "richmond vs whoever in one word" and "changes vs whoever else" threads that traditionally come into existence by the 15 minute mark of the final quarter...

So because you don't like a thread, we shouldn't start it.

I start the "1 word thread" - and going by the usual 4 pages of 1 word answers, I think it justifies its position.

can't please everyone on here.

 

[TigerForce]

I'm with the mods here...must be a dead set pain in the ass all the threads started on an over emotional moment where a whipping boy has made a balls up

Agree CC. Funny how it's always the unknown or barely seen posters who open up numerous threads on the same issue. Game Day mania.

 

[Rosy]

I think banning the ability to create new threads during a match and 4 hours afterwards would be a good idea and make life a tad easier for the mods on game day.

Banning posting altogether in that situation would make our life even easier.

 

[skybeau]

So because you don't like a thread, we shouldn't start it.

I start the "1 word thread" - and going by the usual 4 pages of 1 word answers, I think it justifies its position.

can't please everyone on here.

You certainly can't. Especially when I didn't express an opinion on either of those threads or the posters who create them. Funny that you automatically make that assumption that I don't like your threads.

For the record, I don't care one way or the other, I don't read the "one word" threads, but others obviously do. And if thread creation was disabled, then your thread would have to wait until later, by which time everyone would have calmed down and intellectualised their responses. Would that make it less interesting, do you think?

Suppose the next logical step is banning posting completely for a period of time following a game.

 

[Rosy]

I start the "1 word thread" - and going by the usual 4 pages of 1 word answers, I think it justifies its position.

A few people have started similar post game one word threads over the years. The funny thing this week was you jumped the gun and posted it well before the game ended didn't you?

The cyber fisticuffs over the game day thread are amusing too. As are the thread titles in stand out capital letters. It seems people get pretty protective about starting threads.

As long as someone starts them and they generate new discussion then all's good.

 

[TigerForce]

A few people have started similar post game one word threads over the years. The funny thing this week was you jumped the gun and posted it well before the game ended didn't you?

The cyber fisticuffs over the game day thread are amusing too. As are the thread titles in stand out capital letters. It seems people get pretty protective about starting threads.

As long as someone starts them and they generate new discussion then all's good.

Does Nitro get a special reward? ;D

 

[Rosy]

You can't say his threads aren't original. :hihi