TexasCHLforum.com

In the same way that a new member cannot spam up a bunch of for sale threads without reaching a minimum post count..

I feel like there should be a minimum post count for recounting some outlandish extreme CHL scenario that solicits advise, or generally complains. This would be especially true for those that claim first person incidents...


Thoughts?

Who sets the standard for "extreme"?

I think there should be a minimum amount of posts before someone can post.

Grog wrote:I think there should be a minimum amount of posts before someone can post.

Catch 22

what fun would this forum be without the occassional newbie crackpot?

we need a "bunk" button .... quick, fast, safe for 9-year-old ears etc.

How about a five day waiting period after registering before you can post. Call it the Brady Outlandish Scenario Prevention Act.

gigag04 wrote:In the same way that a new member cannot spam up a bunch of for sale threads without reaching a minimum post count..

I feel like there should be a minimum post count for recounting some outlandish extreme CHL scenario that solicits advise, or generally complains. This would be especially true for those that claim first person incidents...


Thoughts?

I don't think a new rule is necessary or advisable. If forum members refrain from reponding to what they consider "outlandish extreme posts", then there is no payoff for the poster and they will disappear on their own.

WildBill wrote:I don't think a new rule is necessary or advisable. If forum members refrain from reponding to what they consider "outlandish extreme posts", then there is no payoff for the poster and they will disappear on their own.

I agree with WildBill. Just as the best way to deal with a bully is to ignore him, the best treatment for goofy trolls is to leave the bait lie.

And... if someone posts an outlandish or extreme scenario, at least the Forum membership gets to read some amusing fiction and decide whether or not to spend/waste time responding.

I do not see the upside of prior restraint.

Regards,
Andrew

OK, so here is how it went down. I was walking to my car at 2:30am, as I usually do, to get the smartphone that I left in there so that I could post of the forum. As I was walking down my driveway, out of the corner of my eye I saw a guy with a black hoodie pulled waaaaay down and he was clearly also posting to this forum on his smartphone. The whole time I was wondering if he was within the 21 foot zone and if I had a reasonable way to remove myself from this "situation". Luckily I was able to get to my car and remove my phone long enough to get a post started. The perp saw my face in the light of my phone and bugged out right away. Here is the really scary part, after I called the police and they promptly showed up 45 minutes later the first thing they did was take away my phone, remove the SIM card and the battery and then the officer locked my phone, the SIM card and the battery in the trunk of my car. I'm like "whoa, dude, are you leaving me out here without the protection of my phone?" Well he didn't like that and proceeded to chew me out for, like, and hour or so.


So my question is, if I was unable to post on this forum due to someone's arbitrary rule, would I even be here to tell you this true story? Huh?

It's stuff like that that gives smartphone users a bad name.

USA1 wrote:Proper spelling and grammar wouldn't hurt either.

Hear, hear. I to would like too see people use there proper gramer and sin-taxes when thay post. What would this whirrled come too if wasn't know rulz?

austinrealtor wrote:what fun would this forum be without the occassional newbie crackpot?

we need a "bunk" button .... quick, fast, safe for 9-year-old ears etc.

Your wish is my command:

SlickTX wrote:

USA1 wrote:Proper spelling and grammar wouldn't hurt either.

Hear, hear. I to would like too see people use there proper gramer and sin-taxes when thay post. What would this whirrled come too if wasn't know rulz?

I rest my case. .............

The sad part is I didn't have any trouble reading that.