Conquer Club

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=25237&p=4062852#p4062852

I can smell it. Something foul has tainted our lands, and TeeGee might be the culprit.

Is a tar and feathering in order? Or shall we wait around and get rational? I THINK NOT!!

BigBallinStalin wrote:http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=25237&p=4062852#p4062852

I can smell it. Something foul has tainted our lands, and TeeGee might be the culprit.

Is a tar and feathering in order? Or shall we wait around and get rational? I THINK NOT!!

Is it TeeGee's fault that AoG necro-necro-bumped a thread from 2007 with a one liner?

No waiting BBS, you know my style. Get the tar and feathers ready and I wont move when you throw them at me. Then we will have to figure out what to do with AoG. Maybe I could just hug him and we would be tar brothers, that is a pretty bad punishment.

can someone remind me why necrobumping (as long as it's not excessive) is bad?

I like some of these old threads, make me feel like an archaeologist.

Haggis_McMutton wrote:can someone remind me why necrobumping (as long as it's not excessive) is bad?

I like some of these old threads, make me feel like an archaeologist.

I think it becomes an issue when it becomes excessive. I seem to remember someone getting banned for necrobumping recently. They had bumped a ton of threads to prove a point or something.

In that sense they were trolling or spamming in my opinion. Thus, the punishment wouldn't be for necro, but for trolling.

Haggis_McMutton wrote:can someone remind me why necrobumping (as long as it's not excessive) is bad?

I like some of these old threads, make me feel like an archaeologist.

Necrobumping always sorted operated in a gray area. Some see it as cluttering "active discussions" (i.e. topics that haven't went dormant), and thus if "worthwhile" content isn't posted it could detract from the forum and the atmosphere. But, as pointed out, the real issue is excessive necrobumping (which is more covered by "spamming") over a single topic or two.

Necrobumping should probably go the way of the Oversized Signature guideline, i.e. taken off the minor infraction scale since its harm is pretty low, and let minor infractions for spamming take over when needed.

But these just be me humbles opinions!


--Andy

/agree with both of the above.
As long as it isn't excessive I don't see the problem. New conversations can arise from a dead thread, or us old farts can at least sit around reminiscing.

which is why I think the thread in question should be unlocked.

kentington wrote:

BigBallinStalin wrote:http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=25237&p=4062852#p4062852

I can smell it. Something foul has tainted our lands, and TeeGee might be the culprit.

Is a tar and feathering in order? Or shall we wait around and get rational? I THINK NOT!!

Is it TeeGee's fault that AoG necro-necro-bumped a thread from 2007 with a one liner?

No waiting BBS, you know my style. Get the tar and feathers ready and I wont move when you throw them at me. Then we will have to figure out what to do with AoG. Maybe I could just hug him and we would be tar brothers, that is a pretty bad punishment.

Then you two would stick together.

Could you better define your term "hug"?

Like you plan to spoon with him all night?

2dimes wrote:Could you better define your term "hug"?

Like you plan to spoon with him all night?

I'm not sure yet. At first I was really excited and all gung-ho for the idea, but now I am having second thoughts. I thought he would reply with some sweet comment, "f*ck you," and then we could hug it out put all the necro behind us, you know? But this silence is killer. Sometimes I think he doesn't even know I exist.
How should I approach this? I am really freaking out here.

You don't get to hug him till you get the tar and feathers.

AndyDufresne wrote:

Haggis_McMutton wrote:can someone remind me why necrobumping (as long as it's not excessive) is bad?

I like some of these old threads, make me feel like an archaeologist.

Necrobumping always sorted operated in a gray area. Some see it as cluttering "active discussions" (i.e. topics that haven't went dormant), and thus if "worthwhile" content isn't posted it could detract from the forum and the atmosphere. But, as pointed out, the real issue is excessive necrobumping (which is more covered by "spamming") over a single topic or two.

Necrobumping should probably go the way of the Oversized Signature guideline, i.e. taken off the minor infraction scale since its harm is pretty low, and let minor infractions for spamming take over when needed.

But these just be me humbles opinions!


--Andy

The objective of OT is lulz and serious business! The alleged necrobumping of AoG fits this criteria, thus no ban or warning is necessary. The clutter is welcome!





(Yeah, as long as it's not spammy, then sure, full agreement here. But with all this tar and feathers, we really need to find a 'willing' recipient.)

kentington wrote:

BigBallinStalin wrote:http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=25237&p=4062852#p4062852

I can smell it. Something foul has tainted our lands, and TeeGee might be the culprit.

Is a tar and feathering in order? Or shall we wait around and get rational? I THINK NOT!!

Is it TeeGee's fault that AoG necro-necro-bumped a thread from 2007 with a one liner?

Locking for alleged necrobumping wasn't necessary. That only hampers the enjoyment of OT, but it probably happened because someone complained about the title.

The "necrobumping" of that thread uncovered some CC history, the origin of "Honibaz." All praise for AoG's wise bumping of relevant matters to the OT. His effort shall forever be described as "Totes Awesome."

Haggis_McMutton wrote:/agree with both of the above.
As long as it isn't excessive I don't see the problem. New conversations can arise from a dead thread, or us old farts can at least sit around reminiscing.

which is why I think the thread in question should be unlocked.

I don't see why it should be unlocked(even though I posted in it, it was pretty spammy I must admit) but I don't see any reason for a ban either, if one is in the works. I was under the impression it was locked over the bringing up of wicked.
And BBS, that thread wasn't explaining Honibaz, it was if anything muddying the matter.

But this whole forum is pretty much spam. We're angry that one more spammy thread was dug up to add to the spamminess?

-TG

TA1LGUNN3R wrote:But this whole forum is pretty much spam. We're angry that one more spammy thread was dug up to add to the spamminess?

-TG

Is it spam which causes the anger? Or anger that causes the spam?


Pardon me for a second:

BBS, I'd prefer:




--Andy

Standing while shitting is uncouth, sir.

My very first warning was for necrobumping a thread that was 8 or 9 months old. The last poster had left the site and then returned. I asked a question in the thread for the returned poster to answer and I got a warning. I eventually received my first ban.

BK Barunt recently returned to the site before AoG bumped the thread in question.

Necrobumping should not be a crime.

All posters that received warnings and or bans should have the black mark removed and receive an apology from Idi Admin. This site's administration is populated by power hungry gestapo style thugs and bullies. They probably have small dicks too and domineering wives that beat them within an inch of their lives.

REDO THE RULES!!!!!

TA1LGUNN3R wrote:But this whole forum is pretty much spam. We're angry that one more spammy thread was dug up to add to the spamminess?

-TG

But dude, this was pure undadulterated SPAMMM!

BigBallinStalin wrote:Standing while shitting is uncouth, sir.

Yes, but when in Rome...

Guys and girls if any are present,

The thread I locked is not looking at any serious banning for AoG, all I am waiting for is an explanation as to why he bumped THAT thread. The title does probably fall inside the current line of punishment, but back in wicked's day it looks like it was OK.
if it was indeed to reveal some OT history and the use of the mysterious Honibaz, I will look at unlocking provided the current admins are OK with the title, a hyperlink would have probably been a better choice

But, I like all you guys, you add some life to the forums and give me an occasional laugh, I would hate to see any punishment dished out, so its better to lock the thread for now to prevent the big guys coming down on you (and me for letting it get out of hand )

If you still feel the need to tar and feather.. can I just say, I prefer honey to tar

IcePack wrote:

Yeah, welcome to OT lol.

BigBallinStalin wrote:

kentington wrote:

BigBallinStalin wrote:http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=25237&p=4062852#p4062852

I can smell it. Something foul has tainted our lands, and TeeGee might be the culprit.

Is a tar and feathering in order? Or shall we wait around and get rational? I THINK NOT!!

Is it TeeGee's fault that AoG necro-necro-bumped a thread from 2007 with a one liner?

Locking for alleged necrobumping wasn't necessary. That only hampers the enjoyment of OT, but it probably happened because someone complained about the title.

The "necrobumping" of that thread uncovered some CC history, the origin of "Honibaz." All praise for AoG's wise bumping of relevant matters to the OT. His effort shall forever be described as "Totes Awesome."

+1

Necrobumping implies a lack of reason for the bump. AOG had a reason. A good reason.

TeeGee wrote:Guys and girls if any are present,

The thread I locked is not looking at any serious banning for AoG, all I am waiting for is an explanation as to why he bumped THAT thread. The title does probably fall inside the current line of punishment, but back in wicked's day it looks like it was OK.
if it was indeed to reveal some OT history and the use of the mysterious Honibaz, I will look at unlocking provided the current admins are OK with the title, a hyperlink would have probably been a better choice

But, I like all you guys, you add some life to the forums and give me an occasional laugh, I would hate to see any punishment dished out, so its better to lock the thread for now to prevent the big guys coming down on you (and me for letting it get out of hand )

If you still feel the need to tar and feather.. can I just say, I prefer honey to tar

He bumped it because b.k. barunt (a CC user and forum goer) recently rejoined the forum. One of his schticks (for lack of a better term) is that he signs his posts "Honibaz." AoG wanted to know where "Honibaz" came from. It came from the allegedly necrobumped thread.

Funkyterrance wrote:

IcePack wrote:

Yeah, welcome to OT lol.

You undo yourself, sir.

-TG