Bungie.net Community
This topic has moved here: Subject: A request and questions
  • Subject: A request and questions
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: A request and questions
  • gamertag: sum0ne
  • user homepage:

Thanks for Team Snipers Bungie.
Mythic Member, Legendary Member and back and forth. i just can't make up my mind!
Campaign - Halo C.E.>Halo 2>Halo 3
Multiplayer - Halo 2>Halo 3>Halo C.E.
Just about every thing I post is my opinion and nothing more. Be subjective. Respect other's opinions. Try to understand other's point of view.

The other day in the rampant Halo 3 forum I noticed a mod warning someone for bumping. The thing is they were answering and replying to post in that thread. In other words let's say I start a thread. Then 10 different people post in that thread. Normally I would answer or reply to each post separately. So I might have 3 post in a row while replying to 3 different posted questions.

I pm'ed the mod and asked if this was considered bumping. I'm not going to say who because I don't want this to seem like a mod bashing thread. It's not the purpose. The mod told me yest that it was bumping and against the rules.

Now I am all about having stricter rules in the forum with the way things are now but this might be a problem for a few reasons. First I have seen other mods and Bungie employees do this. I know this doesn't necessarily make it alright for me and that's fine. Second, let's say you haven't checked a busy thread in a few hours, maybe a day. There might be several post in the thread you want to respond to. It is a pain to open up several tabs and copy and paste to several quoted areas in one post. I'm not saying it's the hardest thing ever, I'm just saying it's a pain.

Is there any chance of a tool in the forum that could make this easier? I am not a webmaster so I don't have any idea how difficult it might be. I do realize it might be unpractical. If so, could we possibly relax the rule on bumping and let mods use their judgement. It usually is obvious when someone is responding and when they are just bumping.

I know I go back and check threads that are interesting every so often and post in them. Of course the flamers who don't agree with the opinion start saying "This thread was X days old. We know you are just bumping it." Actually this hasn't happen to me but I have witnessed it first hand. The other person wasn't even close to bumping in my opinion but hey, I am no mod.

  • 01.22.2008 12:07 PM PDT
  • gamertag: sum0ne
  • user homepage:

Thanks for Team Snipers Bungie.
Mythic Member, Legendary Member and back and forth. i just can't make up my mind!
Campaign - Halo C.E.>Halo 2>Halo 3
Multiplayer - Halo 2>Halo 3>Halo C.E.
Just about every thing I post is my opinion and nothing more. Be subjective. Respect other's opinions. Try to understand other's point of view.

That makes sense. I understand that this is subjective. Honestly, at this point in time, I would rather see the mods be overly strict in the Halo 3 forum right now. It's rare that I really get in to threads because it's just hard to have a good conversation in there right now.

I was really wondering if there are any tools that can do this. I doubt it. It would seem like a lot of work but I know there are supposedly things in the works for Bnet so who knows. Any way, thanks for the response.

  • 01.22.2008 12:21 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Mythic Member
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

The End

‘The conscious is cancerous if allowed to linger’

"Even if you're on the right track, you'll get run over if you just sit there."

I like the logic behind the moderation Recon ;-)

In regards to the thread I think it is up to the mod how they decide to deal with people, my guess is this person was new and they decided to post in the thread as a warning to somebody new as how they are expected to behave to avoid any future incidents. I think how things are run at the moment is efficient enough, there is a warning tool which mods can use already however sometimes showing their supreme orange text and flashy avatar creates a warning efffect and sends people running for the hills, I think things are fine as they are.

~TOM T 117

  • 01.22.2008 12:30 PM PDT

Sandswept Studios Design Director

Visit us and check out our games at Sandswept.net!

~~Pardon Our Dust.~~

I always figure moderating a forum is completely case-by-case, and requires the best judgment. I trust the moderators judgment with their moderation, and for the record, I trust Recon's near entirely. The man really knows what he's doing, as he's been doing it for quite some time.

  • 01.22.2008 12:50 PM PDT

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstien

Posted by: notnooborelite
That makes sense. I understand that this is subjective. Honestly, at this point in time, I would rather see the mods be overly strict in the Halo 3 forum right now. It's rare that I really get in to threads because it's just hard to have a good conversation in there right now.

I was really wondering if there are any tools that can do this. I doubt it. It would seem like a lot of work but I know there are supposedly things in the works for Bnet so who knows. Any way, thanks for the response.


A forum i go to allows you to flag a post for quoting, so that you can go through the thread and quote several people and then hit the reply button and all the posts you wanted to quote are there in the quote tags. It is a very useful tool. (neowin.net is the forum)

  • 01.22.2008 1:14 PM PDT
  • gamertag: sum0ne
  • user homepage:

Thanks for Team Snipers Bungie.
Mythic Member, Legendary Member and back and forth. i just can't make up my mind!
Campaign - Halo C.E.>Halo 2>Halo 3
Multiplayer - Halo 2>Halo 3>Halo C.E.
Just about every thing I post is my opinion and nothing more. Be subjective. Respect other's opinions. Try to understand other's point of view.

Posted by: UL7IM4 G33K
Posted by: notnooborelite
That makes sense. I understand that this is subjective. Honestly, at this point in time, I would rather see the mods be overly strict in the Halo 3 forum right now. It's rare that I really get in to threads because it's just hard to have a good conversation in there right now.

I was really wondering if there are any tools that can do this. I doubt it. It would seem like a lot of work but I know there are supposedly things in the works for Bnet so who knows. Any way, thanks for the response.


A forum i go to allows you to flag a post for quoting, so that you can go through the thread and quote several people and then hit the reply button and all the posts you wanted to quote are there in the quote tags. It is a very useful tool. (neowin.net is the forum)
Thanks. That would be pretty sweet.

  • 01.22.2008 1:21 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member
  • gamertag: Nedge
  • user homepage:

So now I'm a beta tester. Let's see where this goes.

Posted by: UL7IM4 G33K
Posted by: notnooborelite
That makes sense. I understand that this is subjective. Honestly, at this point in time, I would rather see the mods be overly strict in the Halo 3 forum right now. It's rare that I really get in to threads because it's just hard to have a good conversation in there right now.

I was really wondering if there are any tools that can do this. I doubt it. It would seem like a lot of work but I know there are supposedly things in the works for Bnet so who knows. Any way, thanks for the response.


A forum i go to allows you to flag a post for quoting, so that you can go through the thread and quote several people and then hit the reply button and all the posts you wanted to quote are there in the quote tags. It is a very useful tool. (neowin.net is the forum)
I think that would be pretty cool to have but it might cause some major spamage. Right now I'm split, but not knowing the full power of the mods tools I don't know if it would be a problem at all.

  • 01.22.2008 1:52 PM PDT

etc etc/glaringly obvious/and so on, and such <=Not redundant!
Posted by: Cr4ne Style
Taxes do nothing to affect the share of wealth, since taxes are only applied to income.

So that's not even a part of the conversation at all, so it's pointless talking about it....

"for a "best" moral to exist, there must exist the "best" moral base. If the base of morality varies from location to location, culture to culture...then there can't be an absolute moral..

i received a warning for doing exactly what the op discussed. i was told that making 'multiple posts' (consecutive posts) was against the rules and an instance of bumping. another mod banned me for the exact same posts, and he called them spamming, but he did not offer an explanation.

if it is against the rules to make consecutive posts very quickly, and if mods are going to mete out punishment for this infraction, then i think that everyone would benefit if they added this to the forum rules that appear in each forum. as of now, people are being punished for unwittingly breaking a rule.

  • 01.22.2008 8:22 PM PDT

etc etc/glaringly obvious/and so on, and such <=Not redundant!
Posted by: Cr4ne Style
Taxes do nothing to affect the share of wealth, since taxes are only applied to income.

So that's not even a part of the conversation at all, so it's pointless talking about it....

"for a "best" moral to exist, there must exist the "best" moral base. If the base of morality varies from location to location, culture to culture...then there can't be an absolute moral..

Posted by: Recon Number 54
Sure it is subjective, sure it is a matter of perspective, after all, we are assigning a motive based on text.... not an easy thing to do. But if the thread was dead for days.... then perhaps it died for a reason.


i have a question for any and all of the mods about threads that are dead for days. how long must a thread be inactive to be considered dead?

i know that many of us post in the forums and visit threads daily, but that a thread is inactive for days hardly seems dead to me. now, if a thread is dormant for days, brought back by the op, goes dormant for days, is brought back by the op, then i can see how the behavior would be called bumping. but, many people do not visit every day, many people do not post every day, and many people go on vacation or simply get to busy to post. i am curious to know how you guys go about enforcing the no bumping rule for this sort of thing, and would like to hear anything that you care to share about how you guys determine these rules.

EDIT: i just made an unintentional consecutive post. i apologize. i do not know how many minutes (or seconds) went by between my posts, buy i assure you, i was not trying to bump this thread.

[Edited on 01.22.2008 8:28 PM PST]

  • 01.22.2008 8:27 PM PDT

#2 Supporter Halocharts, #11 other account.
"Ordinary love is selfish, deeply rooted in desires and satisfactions. Divine love is without condition, without boundary, without change."
You are all loved beyond measure.
I, like you, am a light-sound-vibration complex that resonates with others. I have hopes and dreams and ambitions, just like you! I AM, and so are you! Yes, we are one and the same, you and I.

For what it's worth, ses, if you are referring to the thread I am thinking about, then I was...mildly disturbed too.

  • 01.22.2008 8:36 PM PDT

I don't think many people do quote from multiple posts.In most cases I think it is a matter of someone who can't be bothered editing in a their new messege to the old one, forgetting that they have already posted, or not noticing that no-one has replied. Therefore it is a matter of forum discipline.
Just out out of curiosity Ses, what caused you to do a double post ?

[Edited on 01.22.2008 9:13 PM PST]

  • 01.22.2008 9:12 PM PDT

etc etc/glaringly obvious/and so on, and such <=Not redundant!
Posted by: Cr4ne Style
Taxes do nothing to affect the share of wealth, since taxes are only applied to income.

So that's not even a part of the conversation at all, so it's pointless talking about it....

"for a "best" moral to exist, there must exist the "best" moral base. If the base of morality varies from location to location, culture to culture...then there can't be an absolute moral..

i am enjoying reading the forums while having a beer at the end of a long day. i read the op, and responded. i then read recon's post, and responded. it did not occur to me that after my first post i should either wait for someone else to post, and then respond to recon's post, or to click on recon's post, quote him, copy his the quote, then go back to the thread, open my post, edit it, paste his quote, and then click submit. i forgot about the status of mutiple posts when i was responding to the two different posts made by two different posters. once i had made them, i realized my error and made an edit.

each and every time that i have made multiple posts it simply involved me responding directly to posts made by different posters. that my two posts appeared consecutively within seconds or minutes never seemed odd to me for a number of reasons. i have seen many other people do this, including mods. it did not seem like bumping to me since the thread was already at the top of the front page. and, it is not posted anywhere that persons are not allowed to make consecutive posts in a short amount of time.

Posted by: Monkeyman4000
I don't think many people do quote from multiple posts.In most cases I think it is a matter of someone who can't be bothered editing in a their new messege to the old one, forgetting that they have already posted, or not noticing that no-one has replied. Therefore it is a matter of forum discipline.
Just out out of curiosity Ses, what caused you to do a double post ?

  • 01.22.2008 9:20 PM PDT

#2 Supporter Halocharts, #11 other account.
"Ordinary love is selfish, deeply rooted in desires and satisfactions. Divine love is without condition, without boundary, without change."
You are all loved beyond measure.
I, like you, am a light-sound-vibration complex that resonates with others. I have hopes and dreams and ambitions, just like you! I AM, and so are you! Yes, we are one and the same, you and I.

As far as multiple posts, this topic has been covered several times, and Shishka's input has always been of value.

Double posting is the act of repeating a post twice.

You will note that those are replies to two different posts within this thread. That's not double posting.

Thank you, drive through.

Multiple replies to different users in a short time period doesn't seem to qualify as either double posting or bumping. Especially not when it is in an active thread with substantial discussion.

  • 01.22.2008 9:40 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

There's one simple solution, a multi-quote feature. Each post would have a little tick box next to it (or something) and you could select more than one post, then when you hit reply all the posts you added to the multi-quote list would be quoted inside the reply textarea.

  • 01.22.2008 10:29 PM PDT

etc etc/glaringly obvious/and so on, and such <=Not redundant!
Posted by: Cr4ne Style
Taxes do nothing to affect the share of wealth, since taxes are only applied to income.

So that's not even a part of the conversation at all, so it's pointless talking about it....

"for a "best" moral to exist, there must exist the "best" moral base. If the base of morality varies from location to location, culture to culture...then there can't be an absolute moral..

Posted by: I Naku I
As far as multiple posts, this topic has been covered several times, and Shishka's input has always been of value.

Double posting is the act of repeating a post twice.

You will note that those are replies to two different posts within this thread. That's not double posting.

Thank you, drive through.

Multiple replies to different users in a short time period doesn't seem to qualify as either double posting or bumping. Especially not when it is in an active thread with substantial discussion.


i agree with you, and i agree with the few words that you quoted from shishka. aside from mutiple posting NOT being listed anywhere as a rules violation, i cannot fathom WHY it would be consodered a forum no-no. if posts are aimed directly to posts made by other users, i do not see why it should matter if they happen to take place quickly and without interruption from another poster.

i do not understand how or why rules are being enforced as they are as of late. i have been banned twice and warned twice in about a month. for one of the bannings, a mod kindly explained how i broke a rule (he explained multiple posts), and for another warning a mod explained that he supposed that my words (which were direct statements about the topic) were meant to imply that i was making a personal attack. as for the bannings, one was for making comments that might get people riled up (again, i responded directly to the topic and to posts made by other users), and the other was for spamming (the mod claimed that i posted the same remarks 3 times in a row, but he has not responded to mutiple pms asking for him to tell me which posts were supposedly guilty of this).

as far as i can see, some rules that are not listed as offenses are being enforced consistently by some (but not all) mods, some rules that are listed as offenses are being enforced wrongly or inconsistently by some mods. some mods will warn or ban a poster for posts in a thread, and another mod will see the exact same posts in the exact same thread and post that he does not see any rules violations at all. some mods are issuing warnings when they suppose that your statements that have clear meanings actually mean something else, and that they attack particular users, even when you do not say anything negative about that user. and, to top it all off, many accounts get permanently banned, and the banned user starts a new alt to avoid the ban, and some mods post that they know that the user is using a new alt to avoid the ban but is letting the new account remain active as long as the banned user plays nice in his new account.

while this kind of inconsistent use of punishment is being meted out, mods seem to be making fewer and fewer posts in threads explaining warnings to the entire community. these warnings are important since they alert everyone to what kinds of posts should not be made. if the mods are going to punish users for offenses (especially those that are not listed in any rules stickies), then it would be wise to draw attention to the rules by making posts explaining infractions in threads where they occur.

on a side not, i am curious to see what kind of response this post will merit. complaining about things seems like par for the course in the threads, and here i am openly complaining about how rules are being enforced in the forums. i think that various mods are doing a poor job of things for a number of reasons, and i think that the forums would be much less messy if all rules were published on the rules pages, if rules were enforced consistently, if mods made occasional posts to alert all readers of a rules violation, and if banned users were not allowed to continue to use alt accounts to avoid bans. i also think that some mods are doing a great job of enforcing rules in the threads, and they are also kind enough to answer questions through pms to fully explain how they make decisions. i also see many mods who do routinely make posts in threads to warn everyone of breaking specific rules, and i hope to see this continue. heck, if a mod thinks that this post in breaking the rules some how, i hope that he will post here to explain why.

as far as i can gather, this post does not break any of the forum rules, and i do not intend to violate any rules. but, my understanding of the rules and how they are enforced is clearly a bit sketchy, so we shall see.

  • 01.23.2008 6:03 AM PDT

etc etc/glaringly obvious/and so on, and such <=Not redundant!
Posted by: Cr4ne Style
Taxes do nothing to affect the share of wealth, since taxes are only applied to income.

So that's not even a part of the conversation at all, so it's pointless talking about it....

"for a "best" moral to exist, there must exist the "best" moral base. If the base of morality varies from location to location, culture to culture...then there can't be an absolute moral..

great! maybe you can help me out on this. could you please explain the distinction between a double post and making two posts quickly in a row? after seeing the quote from shishka that was just posted above, can you tell me why you think that what i was talking about counts as being against the rules?
Posted by: Styles P
Posted by: sesquipadelian
if it is against the rules to make consecutive posts very quickly, and if mods are going to mete out punishment for this infraction, then i think that everyone would benefit if they added this to the forum rules that appear in each forum. as of now, people are being punished for unwittingly breaking a rule.
I'm pretty damn sure there is a rule against "double posting"


[Edited on 01.23.2008 8:29 AM PST]

  • 01.23.2008 8:28 AM PDT

etc etc/glaringly obvious/and so on, and such <=Not redundant!
Posted by: Cr4ne Style
Taxes do nothing to affect the share of wealth, since taxes are only applied to income.

So that's not even a part of the conversation at all, so it's pointless talking about it....

"for a "best" moral to exist, there must exist the "best" moral base. If the base of morality varies from location to location, culture to culture...then there can't be an absolute moral..

great! thanks for helping me out. you did not really answer my question about a possible distinction between two kinds of posts, but that is no problem. i would see double posting as posting the same thing twice, and i see that as being different than posting two distinct posts about two distnct posters very quickly in a row. regardless of the difference between the two kinds of posts, can you tell me where you found this as a violation of the rules? and, if a topic is already at the top of the front page, how can making a second post a form of bumping? if it is not moving at all, then how is it bumped? also, how on earth is making two posts in a row about different issues a bad thing for the forums that should be against the rules?

as for the situation that you are talking about, can you tell us about it? i have one in mind, and i do not see it as bumping (i see it as making distinct posts very quickly responding to distinct posters, who have since had their posts hidden since they were banned). i do not know which posts you have in mind, so could you tell us where to find it?

sometimes i feel glad that styles p has such a habit of posting in threads right after i have joined the discussion. thanks for helping us here.
Posted by: Styles P
Umm, it's pretty self explanatory. Making 2+ posts in a row is against the rules. It's sometimes a form of bumping but even if they are done quickly it's still a violation of the rules. There's an edit button for a reason.

I think I know what situation you are referring to and I can tell you right now, that was indeed a double post/bump.

  • 01.23.2008 8:54 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Talk to the Soul | ~B.B. | Know Your Duardo |  | Hero | ISFJ | 77135 | 94371

"It's not who I am underneath, but what I do that defines me."

Posted by: sesquipadelian
great! maybe you can help me out on this. could you please explain the distinction between a double post and making two posts quickly in a row? after seeing the quote from shishka that was just posted above, can you tell me why you think that what i was talking about counts as being against the rules?
Posted by: Styles P
Posted by: sesquipadelian
if it is against the rules to make consecutive posts very quickly, and if mods are going to mete out punishment for this infraction, then i think that everyone would benefit if they added this to the forum rules that appear in each forum. as of now, people are being punished for unwittingly breaking a rule.
I'm pretty damn sure there is a rule against "double posting"
I'll give this a shot.

A double post is when a member posts two replies in a row just for the hell of it. Usually this happens when someone wants the thread stickied or wants to "Bump" it to the top. This would be against the rules, as it has no impact on the discussion.

Posting two replies quickly is different. This should only be done when the member literally has no more space to type. That member, if still contributing to the topic, may then create another reply with added material. This is not against the rules.

Now, there is a difference between double posting just to bump up a topic, and double posting to contribute to the thread. Double posting just to "bump" up (usually by saying "BUMP!" "stick this!" etc.) a thread is against the rules. Double posting while adding to the conversation is also against the rules (if you still have plenty of room to edit your post). (Example: ses, you double posted in this thread but added to the conversation; you still had plenty of room in the post before to edit it and add whatever you needed to say in that post, but you didn't.)

Basically, this is how it should be done if no one posted after you:
*post a reply*
*edit your reply and add to it*


This is the wrong way:
*post a reply*
*post another reply but addressing something else*



That's how I look at the rule. Cheers! ;)

  • 01.23.2008 9:20 AM PDT

etc etc/glaringly obvious/and so on, and such <=Not redundant!
Posted by: Cr4ne Style
Taxes do nothing to affect the share of wealth, since taxes are only applied to income.

So that's not even a part of the conversation at all, so it's pointless talking about it....

"for a "best" moral to exist, there must exist the "best" moral base. If the base of morality varies from location to location, culture to culture...then there can't be an absolute moral..

this post is in the format that duardo has in mind. even though i will respond to two distinct posters about two distinct matters and two distinct posters, i am making but one post.

here are my thoughts about styles p's last post: i hoped that he would address this matter further but he chose not to. and, instead of making a post that has anything to do with the discussion about rules, he made a post that i consider spam. i hoped that he would share his thoughts about the topic and i mentioned that in this case it is fortunate that he has jumped into a discussion shortly after i have. rather than addressing the topic as i did, he called my post a batch of "silliness," he told us that my post made him mad, and he claims "know what [I'm] trying to do." i am trying to better understand the forum rules and to have a discussion about them that everyone can see, but, for some unknown reason, styles p seems to think that i am up to something else.

i consider his post spam since it fails to address the discussion at all. all that styles has done here is explain his feelings about me. oh yeah, he has also made personal attacks by stating that another poster is arrogant.
Posted by: Styles P
You've been in this discussion since yesterday, I just commented on your post today. Whatever, I already see where this is going so I'm going to end this here. I refuse to respond to your silliness.
Many of you may not understand why I'm angry over his post but I get this sarcasm and arrogance from him almost everyday and I know what he's trying to do.
Bye. ;-*


luckily, duardo did address the topic. thank you for so clearly mapping out the distinction between the two kinds of posts, and for sharing your thoughts about how they break the rules.

duardo, i will ask you the same questions that i hoped styles would answer:
can you tell us where you have found information stating that double posts or making consecutive posts quickly is against the rules?
can you explain why you believe that making consecutive posts quickly responding to distinct posters should be against the rules?

regarding the second question, i cannot understand why it would be against the rules to make two posts quickly in a row if they are about distinct matters. i cannot see how this practice is bad for the forums. so, for example, instead of me opening styles p's post, copying it, going back to the forum, opening your post, pasting it, and then responding to you, how would the forums be worse off by me making two posts, one responding to him and one responding to you?

responding to two distinct posters quickly has no negative consequences on the forums as far as i can see. combining responses to different posters involves jumping through hoops, and i do not see how it is beneficial, so i would love to hear your thoughts (and the thoughts of others) on the matter.
Posted by: Duardo
I'll give this a shot.

A double post is when a member posts two replies in a row just for the hell of it. Usually this happens when someone wants the thread stickied or wants to "Bump" it to the top. This would be against the rules, as it has no impact on the discussion.

Posting two replies quickly is different. This should only be done when the member literally has no more space to type. That member, if still contributing to the topic, may then create another reply with added material. This is not against the rules.

Now, there is a difference between double posting just to bump up a topic, and double posting to contribute to the thread. Double posting just to "bump" up (usually by saying "BUMP!" "stick this!" etc.) a thread is against the rules. Double posting while adding to the conversation is also against the rules (if you still have plenty of room to edit your post). (Example: ses, you double posted in this thread but added to the conversation; you still had plenty of room in the post before to edit it and add whatever you needed to say in that post, but you didn't.)
That's how I look at the rule. Cheers! ;)

  • 01.23.2008 10:04 AM PDT

Old school Bungie, born and raised,
In the Septagon is where I spend most of my days.
Relaxin', maxin', posting all cool,
Talking about Halo, life and some school.
Got in one little argument, and the mods got scared,
they said "You're gonna get banned and your member title'll be bare!"

We have the edit option so we can add to our own posts. There's no reason to continually compound your posts, when you can easily enough edit a post and retitle a section to a new individual.

  • 01.23.2008 10:12 AM PDT

#2 Supporter Halocharts, #11 other account.
"Ordinary love is selfish, deeply rooted in desires and satisfactions. Divine love is without condition, without boundary, without change."
You are all loved beyond measure.
I, like you, am a light-sound-vibration complex that resonates with others. I have hopes and dreams and ambitions, just like you! I AM, and so are you! Yes, we are one and the same, you and I.

I suspect this is one of those cases were people get mixed up in terminology -- double posting, bumping, spamming, and their real and putative definitions.

I'm looking over similar threads and it has never been authoritatively stated, to my understanding, that responding to unique individuals in succession is against the rules. In fact, it has been pointed out numerous times, either humorously by fawning admirers who orgasm at seeing the number 7, or as a point of fact by more level-headed observers, that Achronos and other reputable, rule-abiding members follow this practice. There is no need to go back and edit; that just invites turgid and rambling tomes. And it's silly. Especially in an active thread, where your edits may not be noticed though you have something to say.

The only situation I can see where this would be unacceptable is when it's used as a cover tactic for reviving dead threads. But that doesn't really make it an offense.


[Edited on 01.23.2008 10:22 AM PST]

  • 01.23.2008 10:20 AM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2