Bundling threads

[MaggieMae]

Sorry, guys, but I don't think it's fair to bundle all threads started regarding Osama bin Gotten into what's already 1300+ strong. I for one don't have time to plow through all of those, nor would I want to. For one thing, there are going to be many aspects to this operation that will unfold in the next few days, and they deserve SEPARATE threads. If some are obviously similar, that's a different story.

Same thing with bundling everything regarding Trump. I mean, seriously? What on earth is the point? I may want to post something about his stone face at the Correspondents' Dinner the other night, but for anyone to join in THAT discussion (just as an example), they'd never find it.

What you're doing lately is making it like a comment section for an online newspaper article, where people normally only weigh in once. This is supposed to be a FORUM.

I hope you keep this comment HERE, because it's my "feedback" and posted in the appropriate place.

Thank you.
Maggie

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Sorry, guys, but I don't think it's fair to bundle all threads started regarding Osama bin Gotten into what's already 1300+ strong. I for one don't have time to plow through all of those, nor would I want to. For one thing, there are going to be many aspects to this operation that will unfold in the next few days, and they deserve SEPARATE threads. If some are obviously similar, that's a different story.

Same thing with bundling everything regarding Trump. I mean, seriously? What on earth is the point? I may want to post something about his stone face at the Correspondents' Dinner the other night, but for anyone to join in THAT discussion (just as an example), they'd never find it.

What you're doing lately is making it like a comment section for an online newspaper article, where people normally only weigh in once. This is supposed to be a FORUM.

I hope you keep this comment HERE, because it's my "feedback" and posted in the appropriate place.

Thank you.
Maggie

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-trump-was-hysterical-and-well-delivered.html

Having 100 or more threads on the same essential topic is clutter. When such threads are merged, it's based on housekeeping only. Same thing would happen with other big events, such as if the shuttle crashed again, or whatever.

There might be alot of folks who want to talk about other topics, they would have to wade through the 100 or more clutter threads to see if their topic already has a thread on it.

 

[MaggieMae]

Sorry, guys, but I don't think it's fair to bundle all threads started regarding Osama bin Gotten into what's already 1300+ strong. I for one don't have time to plow through all of those, nor would I want to. For one thing, there are going to be many aspects to this operation that will unfold in the next few days, and they deserve SEPARATE threads. If some are obviously similar, that's a different story.

Same thing with bundling everything regarding Trump. I mean, seriously? What on earth is the point? I may want to post something about his stone face at the Correspondents' Dinner the other night, but for anyone to join in THAT discussion (just as an example), they'd never find it.

What you're doing lately is making it like a comment section for an online newspaper article, where people normally only weigh in once. This is supposed to be a FORUM.

I hope you keep this comment HERE, because it's my "feedback" and posted in the appropriate place.

Thank you.
Maggie

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-trump-was-hysterical-and-well-delivered.html

Having 100 or more threads on the same essential topic is clutter. When such threads are merged, it's based on housekeeping only. Same thing would happen with other big events, such as if the shuttle crashed again, or whatever.

There might be alot of folks who want to talk about other topics, they would have to wade through the 100 or more clutter threads to see if their topic already has a thread on it.

I found a place to make whatever comments I have today, but I won't go to a bundler thread. They're extremely difficult to follow, wind up being filled with tit-for-tats among two people for page after page, and the epitome of "clutter," in my opinion.

As for the Trump link you posted, I didn't even go looking for an existing thread. I just assumed any comments on the dinner Saturday night would have been merged. So see? That happens, too. But thanks for posting the link.

 

[Vast LWC]

Well, what has our panty-waist President done with Osama or Iran's nuclear ambitions..?.

I'm thinking ... Nothing..

LOL, you combine all the threads into one (which was well done), but then you put this as the opening post?

DOH.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Well, what has our panty-waist President done with Osama or Iran's nuclear ambitions..?.

I'm thinking ... Nothing..

LOL, you combine all the threads into one (which was well done), but then you put this as the opening post?

DOH.

We can't control the timestamps. When multiple threads are merged, the earliest ones go to the top.

 

[del]

MODERATOR: We have combined many "OBL is Dead" threads in the politics forum, creating this one large thread. Please restrict yourselves to this one and only thread on the topic.

Thx.

Well, what has our panty-waist President done with Osama or Iran's nuclear ambitions..?.

I'm thinking ... Nothing..

How does yesterday's mission belong on a thread that was started three weeks ago? This is the dumbest and most disrespectful of any important American victory "merge" that has ever happened on this MB. You should be proud. Support The Seals! Support the President. SHIT ON AMERICA's accomplishments!!!! Good work assholes!!!!

take a midol and confine your commentary on board management to PMs, or in your case, PMS.

it's a messageboard, not the tomb of the unknown soldier.- del

 

[Foxfyre]

Believe me its tough having to agree with Maggie who has over the months described me with a lot of choice ugly adjectives. But alas I do.

1. I can appreciate not wanting 100 different threads on the same topic.

2. I agree that it is extremely difficult to have any kind of coherent discussion when those threads are merged indiscriminately without consideration for the different emphasis re the topic. A discussion on how the mission affects national security is quite different from a discussion on whether Obama is a hero or arrogant credit taker.

3. And I would repectfully like to request that at least two merged threads be allowed: One headed by positive comments re the topic: i.e. Obama should be commended for mission accomplished. And one headed by negative comment.

Much appreciation and thanks for the time and effort our faithful mods bring to the process.

Just suggestions for one way to make the board a bit more useful and satisfying, I think.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Believe me its tough having to agree with Maggie who has over the months described me with a lot of choice ugly adjectives. But alas I do.

1. I can appreciate not wanting 100 different threads on the same topic.

2. I agree that it is extremely difficult to have any kind of coherent discussion when those threads are merged indiscriminately without consideration for the different emphasis re the topic. A discussion on how the mission affects national security is quite different from a discussion on whether Obama is a hero or arrogant credit taker.

3. And I would repectfully like to request that at least two merged threads be allowed: One headed by positive comments re the topic: i.e. Obama should be commended for mission accomplished. And one headed by negative comment.

Much appreciation and thanks for the time and effort our faithful mods bring to the process.

Just suggestions for one way to make the board a bit more useful and satisfying, I think.

The merged thread in Politics had about 1,100 replies when this thread was first posted. It has well over 1,400 now. It is humming along just fine.

It just is what it is, there are other threads on this topic exploring other avenues of the event, in other forums. The Politics forum will have only one.

 

[Foxfyre]

Believe me its tough having to agree with Maggie who has over the months described me with a lot of choice ugly adjectives. But alas I do.

1. I can appreciate not wanting 100 different threads on the same topic.

2. I agree that it is extremely difficult to have any kind of coherent discussion when those threads are merged indiscriminately without consideration for the different emphasis re the topic. A discussion on how the mission affects national security is quite different from a discussion on whether Obama is a hero or arrogant credit taker.

3. And I would repectfully like to request that at least two merged threads be allowed: One headed by positive comments re the topic: i.e. Obama should be commended for mission accomplished. And one headed by negative comment.

Much appreciation and thanks for the time and effort our faithful mods bring to the process.

Just suggestions for one way to make the board a bit more useful and satisfying, I think.

The merged thread in Politics had about 1,100 replies when this thread was first posted. It has well over 1,400 now. It is humming along just fine.

It just is what it is, there are other threads on this topic exploring other avenues of the event, in other forums. The Politics forum will have only one.

Okie dokie.

 

[Gunny]

Doesn't really matter. I'm about sick of having countless threads on one topic just because one dork thinks his/her idea of "political satire" is better than the rest.

Here's a quick rundown:

Osama is dead.

No, Obama didn't kill Osama.

Just because you can't touch the dead body does not mean he's not dead.

AND ... it really doesn't matter WHERE Obama was born since he hasn't had to provide a birth certificate and a court ruled in his favor.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Believe me its tough having to agree with Maggie who has over the months described me with a lot of choice ugly adjectives. But alas I do.

1. I can appreciate not wanting 100 different threads on the same topic.

2. I agree that it is extremely difficult to have any kind of coherent discussion when those threads are merged indiscriminately without consideration for the different emphasis re the topic. A discussion on how the mission affects national security is quite different from a discussion on whether Obama is a hero or arrogant credit taker.

3. And I would repectfully like to request that at least two merged threads be allowed: One headed by positive comments re the topic: i.e. Obama should be commended for mission accomplished. And one headed by negative comment.

Much appreciation and thanks for the time and effort our faithful mods bring to the process.

Just suggestions for one way to make the board a bit more useful and satisfying, I think.

The merged thread in Politics had about 1,100 replies when this thread was first posted. It has well over 1,400 now. It is humming along just fine.

It just is what it is, there are other threads on this topic exploring other avenues of the event, in other forums. The Politics forum will have only one.

Okie dokie.

I don't disagree with your ideas but you also have to understand, it's not a perfect world. Not many of the Mod staff was online when this story broke, and the result was chaos that we have done what we can, to bring some semblance of order to.

 

[Foxfyre]

The merged thread in Politics had about 1,100 replies when this thread was first posted. It has well over 1,400 now. It is humming along just fine.

It just is what it is, there are other threads on this topic exploring other avenues of the event, in other forums. The Politics forum will have only one.

Okie dokie.

I don't disagree with your ideas but you also have to understand, it's not a perfect world. Not many of the Mod staff was online when this story broke, and the result was chaos that we have done what we can, to bring some semblance of order to.

I appreciate that and I am just one customer without any responsibility for the final product. I always bow to authority in such matters.

The thread however has already adopted into a direction that disinterests me while the emphasis I was interested in has been buried and is unlikely to be seen by anybody who might comment. But c'est la vie. No big deal. There will be other subjects to explore.

 

[dilloduck]

poor Elvis--the guy really got the shaft on his shift.

 

[HUGGY]

Sorry, guys, but I don't think it's fair to bundle all threads started regarding Osama bin Gotten into what's already 1300+ strong. I for one don't have time to plow through all of those, nor would I want to. For one thing, there are going to be many aspects to this operation that will unfold in the next few days, and they deserve SEPARATE threads. If some are obviously similar, that's a different story.

Same thing with bundling everything regarding Trump. I mean, seriously? What on earth is the point? I may want to post something about his stone face at the Correspondents' Dinner the other night, but for anyone to join in THAT discussion (just as an example), they'd never find it.

What you're doing lately is making it like a comment section for an online newspaper article, where people normally only weigh in once. This is supposed to be a FORUM.

I hope you keep this comment HERE, because it's my "feedback" and posted in the appropriate place.

Thank you.
Maggie

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-trump-was-hysterical-and-well-delivered.html

Having 100 or more threads on the same essential topic is clutter. When such threads are merged, it's based on housekeeping only. Same thing would happen with other big events, such as if the shuttle crashed again, or whatever.

There might be alot of folks who want to talk about other topics, they would have to wade through the 100 or more clutter threads to see if their topic already has a thread on it.

There were not "a hundred threads" There were less than ten. Several including thanking the president should have been separate topics. I agree with MaggieMae 100% on this. This house keeping action was heavy handed and partisan in it's effect. I realize Gunny and some others want to down play the role the president played in this great victory. OK THAT should be a separate topic and thread. I just think this is a great victory and we should be able to enjoy it and explore something that has affected all of our lives in many ways since 9/11.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

There were not "a hundred threads" There were less than ten. Several including thanking the president should have been separate topics. I agree with MaggieMae 100% on this. This house keeping action was heavy handed and partisan in it's effect. I realize Gunny and some others want to down play the role the president played in this great victory. OK THAT should be a separate topic and thread. I just think this is a great victory and we should be able to enjoy it and explore something that has affected all of our lives in many ways since 9/11.

Del's reply.


Gunny's reply.

 

[Gunny]

Sorry, guys, but I don't think it's fair to bundle all threads started regarding Osama bin Gotten into what's already 1300+ strong. I for one don't have time to plow through all of those, nor would I want to. For one thing, there are going to be many aspects to this operation that will unfold in the next few days, and they deserve SEPARATE threads. If some are obviously similar, that's a different story.

Same thing with bundling everything regarding Trump. I mean, seriously? What on earth is the point? I may want to post something about his stone face at the Correspondents' Dinner the other night, but for anyone to join in THAT discussion (just as an example), they'd never find it.

What you're doing lately is making it like a comment section for an online newspaper article, where people normally only weigh in once. This is supposed to be a FORUM.

I hope you keep this comment HERE, because it's my "feedback" and posted in the appropriate place.

Thank you.
Maggie

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-trump-was-hysterical-and-well-delivered.html

Having 100 or more threads on the same essential topic is clutter. When such threads are merged, it's based on housekeeping only. Same thing would happen with other big events, such as if the shuttle crashed again, or whatever.

There might be alot of folks who want to talk about other topics, they would have to wade through the 100 or more clutter threads to see if their topic already has a thread on it.

There were not "a hundred threads" There were less than ten. Several including thanking the president should have been separate topics. I agree with MaggieMae 100% on this. This house keeping action was heavy handed and partisan in it's effect. I realize Gunny and some others want to down play the role the president played in this great victory. OK THAT should be a separate topic and thread. I just think this is a great victory and we should be able to enjoy it and explore something that has affected all of our lives in many ways since 9/11.

Dude, get a grip. I'm not downplaying shit. What was Obama's role? Continuing a policy Bush started? What does THAT tell you?

The "housekeeping" is real simple: You aren't fucking special. Your dumbass thread claiming Obama killed Osama is not better nor worse than the other hundred threads. You're wasting my bandwidth because you think you political partisanship is more "special-er" than any other partisan hacks'.

Give it a rest. bin Laden is dead. Cool. It took 10 years and 2 Presidents. Obama being the lucky one in office carrying out military policies created by his predecessor doesn't make him jack shit but the same, Marxist asshole that couldn't even win the primary of his own party without a "superdelegate" (whatever the fuck that is) voting aginst of the will of his constituency. Two did. Otherwise, Hillary wins.

So no, I'm NOT going to give credit to a lying "rockstar" the delusional left put into office because he sounds like "the Rock" when he gives speeches.

How shallow can you people get?

 

[Ravi]

Huggy didn't say Obama killed bin laden.

Poor Gunny, it really kills you that this happened under Obama. Boo fucking hoo.

 

[HUGGY]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-trump-was-hysterical-and-well-delivered.html

Having 100 or more threads on the same essential topic is clutter. When such threads are merged, it's based on housekeeping only. Same thing would happen with other big events, such as if the shuttle crashed again, or whatever.

There might be alot of folks who want to talk about other topics, they would have to wade through the 100 or more clutter threads to see if their topic already has a thread on it.

There were not "a hundred threads" There were less than ten. Several including thanking the president should have been separate topics. I agree with MaggieMae 100% on this. This house keeping action was heavy handed and partisan in it's effect. I realize Gunny and some others want to down play the role the president played in this great victory. OK THAT should be a separate topic and thread. I just think this is a great victory and we should be able to enjoy it and explore something that has affected all of our lives in many ways since 9/11.

Dude, get a grip. I'm not downplaying shit. What was Obama's role? Continuing a policy Bush started? What does THAT tell you?

The "housekeeping" is real simple: You aren't fucking special. Your dumbass thread claiming Obama killed Osama is not better nor worse than the other hundred threads. You're wasting my bandwidth because you think you political partisanship is more "special-er" than any other partisan hacks'.

Give it a rest. bin Laden is dead. Cool. It took 10 years and 2 Presidents. Obama being the lucky one in office carrying out military policies created by his predecessor doesn't make him jack shit but the same, Marxist asshole that couldn't even win the primary of his own party without a "superdelegate" (whatever the fuck that is) voting aginst of the will of his constituency. Two did. Otherwise, Hillary wins.

So no, I'm NOT going to give credit to a lying "rockstar" the delusional left put into office because he sounds like "the Rock" when he gives speeches.

How shallow can you people get?

Sorry Gunny. You are not going to be able to harsh my victory buzz!

I'm not particularly tickled about Obama in many respects either. Dragging all that crappola into this topic is lame.

That is all.

 

[Gunny]

Huggy didn't say Obama killed bin laden.

Poor Gunny, it really kills you that this happened under Obama. Boo fucking hoo.

Got news for you, dumb twat. I could care less who was in office when he got killed so long as he got killed.

I just get disgusted with losers like you that try to claim something the military did as some political victory.

It would kill YOU that you're so fucking dumb except you're just SO fucking dumb, you don't even get how dumb you are.

 

[Gunny]

There were not "a hundred threads" There were less than ten. Several including thanking the president should have been separate topics. I agree with MaggieMae 100% on this. This house keeping action was heavy handed and partisan in it's effect. I realize Gunny and some others want to down play the role the president played in this great victory. OK THAT should be a separate topic and thread. I just think this is a great victory and we should be able to enjoy it and explore something that has affected all of our lives in many ways since 9/11.

Dude, get a grip. I'm not downplaying shit. What was Obama's role? Continuing a policy Bush started? What does THAT tell you?

The "housekeeping" is real simple: You aren't fucking special. Your dumbass thread claiming Obama killed Osama is not better nor worse than the other hundred threads. You're wasting my bandwidth because you think you political partisanship is more "special-er" than any other partisan hacks'.

Give it a rest. bin Laden is dead. Cool. It took 10 years and 2 Presidents. Obama being the lucky one in office carrying out military policies created by his predecessor doesn't make him jack shit but the same, Marxist asshole that couldn't even win the primary of his own party without a "superdelegate" (whatever the fuck that is) voting aginst of the will of his constituency. Two did. Otherwise, Hillary wins.

So no, I'm NOT going to give credit to a lying "rockstar" the delusional left put into office because he sounds like "the Rock" when he gives speeches.

How shallow can you people get?

Sorry Gunny. You are not going to be able to harsh my victory buzz!

I'm not particularly tickled about Obama in many respects either. Dragging all that crappola into this topic is lame.

That is all.

What victory? That the military continued a program Bush started that eventually led to Obama getting killed?

Try again. This time, use your brain.