Zeb, One of the occassions where I have to agree with you.
On Jun 19, 10:11 pm, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote: > Yer spamming BIG TIME, dude. I told you exactly what Richard did > before this. Can't you just stop posting everything you read on the > internet on this forum. Like he said, you bury everyone else's posts > and KILL ALL DEBATE. Look at the forum, fer Christ's sake. Its all (1 > of 1) posts from you and Bruce. I don't even know if I agree with you > guys or not. All I know is that I don't have the time or inclination > to read the mountain of articles you post to find out. > > On Jun 19, 7:24 pm, Travis <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I try to post items that are not from the usual sources such as NYT and > > WAPOOP. And a few cartoons as well that need no reply. I space them out > > over the day so as to not look like I am spamming which I am not doing. > > That is all. > > > On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 6:06 PM, bruce majors <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > actually the only thing that really interests me in this group are dick > > > thompson's posted links > > > > On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 6:02 PM, d.b.baker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Time to establish a thread limit? For example, if prolific posters > > >> want to aggregate/disseminate numerous news stories, it's more > > >> advantageous to the group that they be confined to one or two daily > > >> threads - as opposed to cluttering the board with numerous threads > > >> (topics). Especially when the same news topics are widely available on > > >> the net. > > > >> I try to follow this approach myself, especially when posting quotes/ > > >> links to/in a related topic. This doesn't guarantee "discussion" of > > >> the specific subject per se, but it does acknowledge and respect the > > >> fact that other members may not share a similar interest. > > > >> It's also helpful to the group when we revive dormant threads to re- > > >> address specific subject matter that's already posted, especially if > > >> the thread generated a discussion (i.e., interest). > > > >> In the end, it's a lot easier to scan a single topic/header than to go > > >> back and forth between numerous threads. > > > >> If you agree, we could to do this as a [voluntary] courtesy. > > > -- > > *~@):~{>- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
