Hey, you:) (I wonder how many other threads are gonna be hijacked like this. I don’t mind it, but I can’t imagine everyone is in love with the influx of old n00bs and how we’re interrupting threads to say hello to people we haven’t seen in two years:))
The Fellowship of the Right Way.
Ha! I should say I was rather pissed off at the locking of your Barn Kampf thread, and Scrivener’s Barnfire of the Vanities. So much potential, cut down in their infancy! I mean, move them to MPSIMS, sure, but lock them down? That’s just shitty.
They are barning your dog.
Barnstards.
It tells me some things about the forum and some things about the posters who are upset. Neither one proves the forum itself is a bad idea, and even if it is, this level of outrage is just absurd. Honestly, I find it embarrassing.
It has nothing to do with the fact that it’s the forum based around Ed’s book. (I can hear you snickering but it’s true regardless.) It’s because that’s just dickish behavior. If people had gone into The Game Room when it was new and started a series of “this forum sucks” threads, that would have drawn warnings too.
Surely you must be joking. It’s named “The Barn House Forum,” fer crissakes.
Let’s imagine an equivalent “barnhousing” of the rest of the SD, shall we? –
General Questions put to Ed or relating to Ed
Great Debates: Ed or Cecil, and a few other issues
Cafe Society – the music, films, etc. that Ed might like or comment on; also, Ed Z. as a fixture of our pop culture firmament
…Etc., ad nauseum…
And re. “barn” sequel thread titles:
Barn Yesterday
Barn on the 4th of July
An Alan Smithee Barn: Barn, Hollywood, Barn!
Gebarnem In Absurdistan – okay, that’s a German pun on this title, but it seems apropos, no?
Barn Stormers
Ah my fellow ignorant dumbasses. Your lack of reading comprehension (or even reading ability at all) belies your wrath over the new forum.
(that means you are dumb, either can’t or won’t read and this is why you are pissed off)
Allow me to repost Ed’s views on the forum:
If you pull your collective heads out of your asses long enough to check out the website:
http://edzotti.blogspot.com/
you will clearly see that the forum is not an ad for the book, the book is an ad for the forum and for the message board itself.
Readers of this book will come to the “Vanity” forum to comment on the book and get shown the ads - boom, profit.
If they find us entertaining they may stick around, post a little, lurk a little, be shown more ads - boom, more profit.
It is ok children, I for one forgive your ignorance. After all, that is the mission of this board anyway, but let us not forget the purpose of this or any business venture - to make the PTB enough cash to cover costs and turn a dime or two to make it worth their time.
Pay to post did not do that.
Random strangers posting on an ad sponsored message board will.
Hell, it’s possible that if a doper wrote a book and wanted the SDMB to host a discussion forum it could turn into a mutually beneficial relationship. Or not, what the hell do I know.
But I know this, no matter how much belly aching we do TPTB will do whatever justifies their budget. And if we belly ache enough to piss His Most Perfect Baldness off then, one flip of a switch and the SDMB is history no matter what the income projection is.
So suck it up buttercup, the new forum probably won’t be around forever (mentioned in Ed’s quote) but for now burning up bandwidth bitching about it is going to get you jack squat, especially when the bitching is coupled with ignorance.
And judging from this thread you started in the new, yet strongly controversial, BH Forum, you must have a high threshold for embarrassment, as you chummily addressed your query directly to Ed Zotti, correspondence style – “Hi Ed,…” – just as everyone else on the SD board habitually begins their threads and queries, right?
Perhaps. But your argument would be more… grounded in reality?.. if there were in fact any dickish “this forum sucks” threads in the new, yet uncontroversial, Game Room forum. Which there aren’t. Not one, closed down or otherwise.
Marley23, the fact remains that several threads grousing about the stupid Barn House forum that were initiated in the Pit were also summarily shut down by moderators. It doesn’t really matter if we SD dissidents (with respect to the Barn House forum only) respectfully confine our doubts, carpings, satires and curses to the Pit ghetto or not, does it, since the same degree of activist mod censureship applies regardless.
In other words, Marley23, don’t be such a fucking barnhouse.
I’m sorry, my reading comprehension is inadequate to elucidate this point, but are you confessing to ignorance or to being a dumbass, or both?
Hoisted on your own petard, indeed.
Well to be fair, that was just because they were superfluous. Cisco’s was already up (fixed the title yet Marley?)
ETA: :smack: oh wait, of course you haven’t, and I can see that straight away, cos it’s, like, THIS ONE? Look, it’s 4am here, and I’m a tired insomniac, the worst kind.
Yeah, it’s a forum for Ed’s book and I hear from Ed slightly more often than other posters do. He picked me to be a mod, the mods hear from him sometimes. Ta da.
Ah, here we go with the hairsplitting. Three threads got locked in there today, deservedly so. Did they say “this forum sucks?” No. They were mocking the purpose of the forum, which I expressed in shorthand as “this forum sucks.” I don’t know if anybody here has ever used the term forum-shitting, but that’s what was going on there. If you have a philosophical disagreement with the forum, as everybody said repeatedly, you can talk about it here or in ATMB.
They were duplicates, dude. Nobody’s stifling discussion, it’s just not necessary to have four Pittings of the BH forum going at once. This one was started first, a few others got started because people didn’t realize what the title of this one meant, and those others got locked. I’d fix the title of this thread, but I can’t edit thread titles in the Pit at the moment. This is not censorship; locking duplicate topics is standard everywhere. There is not a sinister motive here.
Go fuck yourself.
Why yes, yes I am.
“The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing.” - Socrates
:dubious:
I can’t plead ignorance of Cisco’s thread 'cause I’ve been lighting it up, and your argument is, narrowly, a valid one. But if I were a mod with any interest in maintaining a neutral tone WRT the mushrooming threads critical of the new [yet strongly controversial] Barn House forum, I’d err on the side of caution and magnanimously let a few of the fledgling dissident threads survive, at least to the digital equivalent of toddlerhood.
Besides, if mere repetition or redundancy were uniformly enforced as a thread-locking rationale, we’d have, like, one thousand-page-long thread for oohing over kittens (with pics!); one infinitely revived thread announcing the Steelers’ March to the Super Bowl; one thread denouncing Microsoft products; etc.
And could you imagine the thread about that treadmill business?
We do, believe it or not, exercise common sense when possible. There’s no rule about allowing only one thread per topic ever. Allowing four Pit threads on the same exact subject on the same day would be a little ridiculous.
But a whole BarnParty forum full of threads about Ed’s book passes the sniff test? Mmmmmmkay.
I have no idea what you’re talking about. I checked the Game Room forum – all four pages, even though pages 2 through 4 were identically null – prior to posting, just to be sure, and there weren’t any locked thread-shitters. There were two locked threads but they were both related to the numeric game – which many participated in and which wasn’t critical of the forum at all, anyway.
A reasonable sounding argument, but the devil’s in the details, or in this case, in the selective enforcement of the rules. That, and the mods’ collectively deaf ear towards how all this hair-trigger moderating, and reflexive defending of Ed & his new toy, sounds to most of us Dopers.
[No retort necessary.]
Dude, Marley doesn’t make the rules, he just enforces them.
Then he’s a barnship trooper?
You’re complaining about threads about the book in a forum about the book?
Treating this question seriously, which it doesn’t really deserve, there are topics about salvaging wood, useless contractors, green building ideas, rehabbing urban houses, and rural living. Related stuff but not four instances of the same thread over and over.
I can see. Here’s what I’m saying: threads about the merits or demerits of a forum belong in here or ATMB. Not in the forum in question. And the threads that got locked weren’t actually debating the issues of having a Barn House forum, they were more like threadshitting.
What was selectively enforced? Two threads in ATMB about the Barn House stayed open, this thread stayed open, although the redundant pittings didn’t. The joke type threads in the Barn House forum got locked.
As for my correspondence, by the way, it’s the same style as plenty of letters to Cecil. Cecil writes, Ed edits, made sense to me.