Pointless posting

[Calum0812]

So they don't trust you enough...

btw not targeting u, i still like u lol

I guess some spoil it for others in the past (someone has abused permissions), but if me and Phil wanted to, we could really wreck the forum, so they must trust us. I could ban people if I wanted to screw them over so hmmm... Not sure. They take backups and mods can be trusted I guess.

It's alright I'm not taking too much of this personally, mods are the people everyone hates, who is gonna thank us for sending them a PM

Nowhere in the rules does it state that one or two word replies are pointless posting - so you cannot warn people for pointless posting in this case. So in the discussion I'm trying to have here, one/two word posts are irrelevant assuming they make sense with the context of the thread.

Yes, but the rules did say that the other day hence why people have been getting PMs. Since the rule was updated people shouldn't get a PM automatically for a one or two word reply but can still if it is, in the mods opinion, pointless.

[Kardan]

First example: What has 'whoosh' to do with anything?
Second example: Actually sorry you're right, that's more considered off topic rather than pointless.

Sorry for choose two of your own posts but as you asked the question I thought it might be the fairest thing to do just because I didn't want to pick anyone out

For the 3rd time this thread:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=whoosh
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=woosh

It essentially means that someone has totally missed a reference. In the thread Scottish says 'Dragga, you need to edit your sig. It says 'Stay away from the rude ones!' - That doesn't really work'

Scottish was referring to Dragga basically being rude to other people and kicking them off the server. Dragga however thinks Scottish is referring to the people he kicked off as being rude. So Dragga replies 'Cool, I'll get round to removing that part of my sig now', whereas Scottish meant that he should remove it because it's silly to hear that the rude person.

So Dragga misinterpreted what Scottish was saying, so I said 'whoosh' (imagine my hand flying straight over my head). It would be equivalent to me saying 'Wow, I don't think you understood what Scottish meant'.

- - - Updated - - -

Well I can see this has still gone nowhere. I can't change the rules if nobody is going to agree on anything.



Both are breaking rule A7 in some form.

Do you not understand the meaning of whoosh either?
And for the 2nd one, I understand it's breaking the rule - but I'm pretty sure that's what people want to change about the rules. They shouldn't be so strict. Essentially, for me to reply to Undertaker, I would need to keep saying (FAMILY GUY) in my post - even though I've already said it once in the thread already. It seems stupid that I have to repeat my answers to avoid a warning.

[Phil]

For the 3rd time this thread:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=whoosh
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=woosh

It essentially means that someone has totally missed a reference. In the thread Scottish says 'Dragga, you need to edit your sig. It says 'Stay away from the rude ones!' - That doesn't really work'

Scottish was referring to Dragga basically being rude to other people and kicking them off the server. Dragga however thinks Scottish is referring to the people he kicked off as being rude. So Dragga replies 'Cool, I'll get round to removing that part of my sig now', whereas Scottish meant that he should remove it because it's silly to hear that the rude person.

So Dragga misinterpreted what Scottish was saying, so I said 'whoosh' (imagine my hand flying straight over my head). It would be equivalent to me saying 'Wow, I don't think you understood what Scottish meant'.

- - - Updated - - -



Do you not understand the meaning of whoosh either?
And for the 2nd one, I understand it's breaking the rule - but I'm pretty sure that's what people want to change about the rules. They shouldn't be so strict. Essentially, for me to reply to Undertaker, I would need to keep saying (FAMILY GUY) in my post - even though I've already said it once in the thread already. It seems stupid that I have to repeat my answers to avoid a warning.

That's still unnecessary?

[Chris]

For the 3rd time this thread:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=whoosh
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=woosh

It essentially means that someone has totally missed a reference. In the thread Scottish says 'Dragga, you need to edit your sig. It says 'Stay away from the rude ones!' - That doesn't really work'

Scottish was referring to Dragga basically being rude to other people and kicking them off the server. Dragga however thinks Scottish is referring to the people he kicked off as being rude. So Dragga replies 'Cool, I'll get round to removing that part of my sig now', whereas Scottish meant that he should remove it because it's silly to hear that the rude person.

So Dragga misinterpreted what Scottish was saying, so I said 'whoosh' (imagine my hand flying straight over my head). It would be equivalent to me saying 'Wow, I don't think you understood what Scottish meant'.

- - - Updated - - -



Do you not understand the meaning of whoosh either?
And for the 2nd one, I understand it's breaking the rule - but I'm pretty sure that's what people want to change about the rules. They shouldn't be so strict. Essentially, for me to reply to Undertaker, I would need to keep saying (FAMILY GUY) in my post - even though I've already said it once in the thread already. It seems stupid that I have to repeat my answers to avoid a warning.

I have no idea what this whoosh thing is about but I'll let you debate that with Phil

As for the post about undertaker, I fail to see how that has anything to do with the threads discussion? It's completely irrelevant and off topic.

[Kardan]

That's still unnecessary?

So me telling someone they misinterpreted a post is unnecessary?

[Phil]

So me telling someone they misinterpreted a post is unnecessary?

No not at all but if you actually pointed it out to them and explained it it would have been fine. You posted a sound effect of your hand going over your head :S

[Kardan]

I have no idea what this whoosh thing is about but I'll let you debate that with Phil

As for the post about undertaker, I fail to see how that has anything to do with the threads discussion? It's completely irrelevant and off topic.

http://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop...s_whoosh_mean/

As for the Undertaker thing, I realiseI've just been commenting about the wrong pointless post The one linked can be pointless - I'm on about the one in the Family Guy/American Dad debate that I linked earlier. My bad.

- - - Updated - - -

No not at all but if you actually pointed it out to them and explained it it would have been fine. You posted a sound effect of your hand going over your head :S

So basically we can't use internet terms on an internet based forum because the MODs might not understand what it means?

[Phil]

http://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop...s_whoosh_mean/

As for the Undertaker thing, I realiseI've just been commenting about the wrong pointless post The one linked can be pointless - I'm on about the one in the Family Guy/American Dad debate that I linked earlier. My bad.

- - - Updated - - -



So basically we can't use internet terms on an internet based forum because the MODs might not understand what it means?

Okay let me ask you this, when you received the PM, I assume you didn't agree with it? What did you do?

[Kardan]

Okay let me ask you this, when you received the PM, I assume you didn't agree with it? What did you do?

I quoted my post with a reference to the word.

Why didn't I reply to the PM? Because

1) I don't get a caution/infraction.
2) Whenever I do decide to reply, the mod will refer me to a super mod, who refers me to Chris, who refers me to general management. It's just not worth it.

[e5]

Yeah that would be more off-topic than pointless i guess. I consider posts carefully, always, before editing

If it hasn't got anything to do with the thread or as in the rules it is something like 'roflcopter' 'ierutjikfd' i'd class it as a pointless post. Also if you are answering/replying to another persons question I don't think it should be pointless if you don't exactly answer to what the thread starter is talking about. I think before any of us try to edit it as a pointless post, I think we really need to think and look at it thoroughly before we actually do anything.