Originally Posted by penchief:
4th, I'm not upset. I just find it amazing that there isn't one person who understands whe principle that I'm trying to defend.
I realize that the intitial act was not intended to be harmful, but to listen to everyone beligerently defend the act as opposed to defending the principle is confounding to me.
I feel compelled to convince, but by no means, don't take that to mean that I am still pissed.
Because there is NO principle here, Don Quixote. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
The title's were ABSOLUTELY related. All of it was unnecessary spam.
Then why condense the content of my thread with shitsmacks thread title and leave all of the other "ABSOLUTELY" related threads alone?
And don't give me that first page bullshit, as shitsmack did. As all of us know, any one of those threads will reappear on the first page the instance someone posts on those threads. [Reply]
Originally Posted by penchief:
I'm over it. The point now is to debate the intent of the person who changed the wording of a thread title that he didn't start. If it were an innocent merging of threads, not only would ALL of the parody threads (instead of just the two) been merged but whoever did it would not have applied a thread title to a thread that was incongruent with that title.
Who started the thread titled, "TY LAW HATES PARODY THREADS?"
I'd be interested to know. Since it looks like I did, I guess we'll never know unless that person admits it or someone else remembers.
Listen closely.
NOBODY STARTED A THREAD TITLED "TY LAW HATES PARODY THREADS!"
I merged 6 threads together and RENAMED ALL OF THEM.
Originally Posted by penchief:
Then why condense the content of my thread with shitsmacks thread title and leave all of the other "ABSOLUTELY" related threads alone?
And don't give me that first page bullshit, as shitsmack did. As all of us know, any one of those threads will reappear on the first page the instance someone posts on those threads.
First of all, "shitsmack" and myself are the SAME PERSON. Are you really that dense?
Second, the second those threads hit the front page, they will be merged. [Reply]
NOBODY STARTED A THREAD TITLED "TY LAW HATES PARODY THREADS!"
I merged 6 threads together and RENAMED ALL OF THEM.
Is it that hard to understand?
Bullshit! I saw the thread before I went back to work. My thread, and everybody else's parody thread, was still existent. And yes, you are correct, there were five or six of them. But don't try to tell me that nobody started a "TY LAW HATES PARODY THREADS" thread because I saw it. And I'm quite certain others did, too.
And don't try to explain that you or anyone else combined all of the parody threads because the other parody threads are still out there while the threads you claim to combine has only 16 posts, 10 of which occurred on my thread before I went back to work.
This is no longer about my being a prick. This is about the integrity of this forum, IMO. Don't get me wrong. I have always liked you but I think you are being stubborn, unfair, and dishonest in this instance. [Reply]
Originally Posted by penchief:
Bullshit! I saw the thread before I went back to work. My thread, and everybody else's parody thread, was still existent. And yes, you are correct, there were five or six of them. But don't try to tell me that nobody started a "TY LAW HATES PARODY THREADS" thread because I saw it. And I'm quite certain others did, too.
And don't try to explain that you or anyone else combined all of the parody threads because the other parody threads are still out there while the threads you claim to combine has only 16 posts, 10 of which occurred on my thread before I went back to work.
This is no longer about my being a prick. This is about the integrity of this forum, IMO. Don't get me wrong. I have always liked you but I think you are being stubborn, unfair, and dishonest in this instance.
Look, I'm done trying to explain this to you. I KNOW what I did, and it's in the logs for the other mods to see.
The "TY LAW HATES PARODY THREADS" thread you saw was in the process of being merged. The first thread I merged was not yours, which is why both existed simultaneously.
Of course, you don't know this, because you're not a mod and you DON'T HAVE A ****ING CLUE how this software works. Because if you did, you'd know that you can only merge TWO THREADS AT A TIME. That means to merge 6 threads, I had to go through the process 5 separate times, resulting in the parody threads AS WELL AS the merged thread existing simultaneously.
4 of the 6 threads I merged had only 1 post - the starter - including yours. The other two had only a handful of posts. As for the other posts being out there, I'm going to merge them right now since you're such a ****ing pussy about it.
This isn't about the integrity of the forum, this is about you being righteously indignant for no ****ing reason at all. [Reply]
Originally Posted by penchief:
Okay then. Ban all stupid threads. If that happened I'd have to say that you, along with me, would find themselves banned.
The bottom line is that this particular mod made a mistake. Nobody's words should be altered. A thread should be deleted before it should be changed to reflect something different than the thread starter intended.
Again, again, again, and again......this particular instance is of minimal signifigance, but it is the principle that is VERY important, IMO.
I don't think anybody else on this board would want the wording of their ideas changed for any reason, regardless of the topic.
I don't believe mods would alter the words of a thread with substance. There hasn't been a lot of substance on the planet lately. We really need the season to start before the Planet completely implodes. Although it is very entertaining. [Reply]
