Canceling my site supporter status

[Ziggidy]

Why are INGO mods slapping peepees so much?

That is a MAJOR reason I am following all rules......nothing worse.....a peepee slap!

 

[churchmouse]

I think it’s unfair to other advertisers that don’t have conversations going on. Their ads don’t stay at the top. So I think the rule makes sense to me on that basis. Would be ideal if the software could enforce it rather than leaving it open to people accidentally breaking the rules.

The software is only so good. More band width more server space blah blah blah.
So we put a rule in place to expedite our own shortcomings. It’s just a forum (Stupid as some feel it is yet they use it regularly) after all.

I think after the abuses in the last few days and others you know nothing about I am pretty much over being Mr nice guy and am falling back to the mouse of old.
Call me stupid but hey.

Thanks for putting some clarification on this Jamil.

I will just kick back on the recliner now.
BT Kelly db and mom have a good handle on this.

 

[churchmouse]

I understand the no chatting in a sales ad rule. But I have seen people post a question, and assume they got infracted for it, that everyone that would go into that ad would have the same question. Something like what choke on a hunting shotgun, length of barrel, etc. I usually am just curious when I am looking and not that motivated, so no, I am not going to PM them with the question.

In truth if it’s the 1st time the member does that and there is not a history of infractions I hand a Mulligan and a pm explanation of the issue. That’s very fair.
If said member continues to do this as some have then I take that as being flipped off and a hardy **** you.
I don’t like being flipped off.

 

[jamil]

The software is only so good. More band width more server space blah blah blah.
So we put a rule in place to expedite our own shortcomings. It’s just a forum (Stupid as some feel it is yet they use it regularly) after all.

I think after the abuses in the last few days and others you know nothing about I am pretty much over being Mr nice guy and am falling back to the mouse of old.
Call me stupid but hey.

Thanks for putting some clarification on this Jamil.

I will just kick back on the recliner now.
BT Kelly db and mom have a good handle on this.

People are what they are. They think when things don’t go their way, they’re getting screwed. And they go off in self-protection mode. Say some ****. And when they’re convinced they’re not getting screwed and their blood pressure drops, they likely regret saying some of the things they said. I know its hard to convince people they’re not being screwed. They go down still believing it.

 

[churchmouse]

People are what they are. They think when things don’t go their way, they’re getting screwed. And they go off in self-protection mode. Say some ****. And when they’re convinced they’re not getting screwed and their blood pressure drops, they likely regret saying some of the things they said. I know its hard to convince people they’re not being screwed. They go down still believing it.

What usually the outcome as in this instance is the membership steps up and puts the childish behavior in its place. That’s always a positive but call me a Chicken or any other member and that’s 2 lines crossed.
Then a member who got the same pass on his mistakes calls the rule stupid. That’s not cool. We strive to be fair. We (staff) have lengthy discussions about the existing rules and any new ones we put in place. All because we really do care about this site. And the membership.
It’s tough to never make a mistake. We all do it. Yeah I make a couple every day. But I stand with the mistake. That’s what’s lacking.

 

[jamil]

What usually the outcome as in this instance is the membership steps up and puts the childish behavior in its place. That’s always a positive but call me a Chicken or any other member and that’s 2 lines crossed.
Then a member who got the same pass on his mistakes calls the rule stupid. That’s not cool. We strive to be fair. We (staff) have lengthy discussions about the existing rules and any new ones we put in place. All because we really do care about this site. And the membership.
It’s tough to never make a mistake. We all do it. Yeah I make a couple every day. But I stand with the mistake. That’s what’s lacking.

No doubt, I think after his blood pressure went down he may have regretted characterizing you as chicken ****. I kinda assume he certainly does now.

When people call something stupid, I think that's generally just a euphemism to say it doesn't make sense to them. Maybe they're angry about it. It would be way better just to say it doesn't make sense to them, rather than calling it stupid. Obviously that would be a lot less inflammatory.

Like I said, maybe on the surface the comment rule for ads doesn't make sense to a lot of people. It certainly has gotten a lot of comments to that effect. People have a problem with it. But the rule got put in place to solve a problem, and people just need to understand the problem it was meant to solve. Until there's a better way to solve it, it is what it is.

 

[xwing]

I got an infraction a while back (for the exact same thing as the OP). Although it was clearly stated in the rules, it is very different from any other forum I've been on; so I forgot.

Given the common concerns and issues caused by this specific rule ("No posting in a for sale thread, even if the posting is relevant to the thread"); is there a polite way to request reconsidering that rule? The classified section would be much more robust and easy to follow if simple, relevant questions were allowed to be asked within the thread. I certainly understand the goal to prohibit all off-content or irrelevant comments.

If the above question is disallowed, please delete it. I in no way want to complain or disrespect INGO, but it seems that many people would benefit from a potential change in that particular rule. If allowable, it would be a useful discussion to consider the pros & cons of a change.

 

[KellyinAvon]

I see this thread has devolved into a... well hell a **** ****** fest.

Here's how it is, period, dot, end of statement: the "no post in classies except for the OP unless the OP's inbox is full" is so we can ******* manage the ****.

With that said, you can just imagine what I just deleted.

 

[KellyinAvon]

I got an infraction a while back (for the exact same thing as the OP). Although it was clearly stated in the rules, it is very different from any other forum I've been on; so I forgot.

Given the common concerns and issues caused by this specific rule ("No posting in a for sale thread, even if the posting is relevant to the thread"); is there a polite way to request reconsidering that rule? The classified section would be much more robust and easy to follow if simple, relevant questions were allowed to be asked within the thread. I certainly understand the goal to prohibit all off-content or irrelevant comments.

If the above question is disallowed, please delete it. I in no way want to complain or disrespect INGO, but it seems that many people would benefit from a potential change in that particular rule. If allowable, it would be a useful discussion to consider the pros & cons of a change.

You can ask anything you want. There's a reason the rule is in place. Trust me, that rule keeps the staff from losing their ****.

 

[jamil]

I got an infraction a while back (for the exact same thing as the OP). Although it was clearly stated in the rules, it is very different from any other forum I've been on; so I forgot.

Given the common concerns and issues caused by this specific rule ("No posting in a for sale thread, even if the posting is relevant to the thread"); is there a polite way to request reconsidering that rule? The classified section would be much more robust and easy to follow if simple, relevant questions were allowed to be asked within the thread. I certainly understand the goal to prohibit all off-content or irrelevant comments.

If the above question is disallowed, please delete it. I in no way want to complain or disrespect INGO, but it seems that many people would benefit from a potential change in that particular rule. If allowable, it would be a useful discussion to consider the pros & cons of a change.

The problem I see with it is that it bumps the thread when you comment on it. I think that makes it unfair to the people who's ads aren't getting questions. So if you post a really great add that leaves no question unanswered, your ad thread is going to get pushed down by people asking questions on ads that weren't as good at explaining the important details.

Plus, how much harder is it to moderate what comments belong in a thread and what comments don't? It would be great if the forum software had a Classifieds module that solved those problems. But it is what it is. Do you think it's fair that your comments push that ad to the top while pushing others down? I don't know how you solve that problem without a software change.

 

[d.kaufman]

The classified section would be much more robust and easy to follow if simple, relevant questions were allowed to be asked within the thread. I certainly understand the goal to prohibit all off-content or irrelevant comments.

What's so hard about clicking the start conversation feature to ask the op a relevant question v/s doing it in thread

If op gets enough pms with same question maybe he or she will add the pertinent info to the ad.

 

[jamil]

What's so hard about clicking the start conversation feature to ask the op a relevant question v/s doing it in thread

If op gets enough pms with same question maybe he or she will add the pertinent info to the ad.

It would be better if questions could be asked and answered in-thread because others benefit from the same answer, and the OP doesn't have to explain the same thing multiple times. Would be better to write an add that anticipates important questions, but no one can think of everything.

But, there are tradeoffs. The rule creates some problems but it also solves some problems. The net, I think, is that the rule makes sense. Not for the mods of course, I mean **** the mods.

 

[nonobaddog]

It would be better if questions could be asked and answered in-thread because others benefit from the same answer, and the OP doesn't have to explain the same thing multiple times. Would be better to write an add that anticipates important questions, but no one can think of everything.

But, there are tradeoffs. The rule creates some problems but it also solves some problems. The net, I think, is that the rule makes sense. Not for the mods of course, I mean **** the mods.

If the OP has to explain things multiple times that is completely the OP's fault... Bailiff!

 

[d.kaufman]

I mean **** the mods.

 

[churchmouse]

I got an infraction a while back (for the exact same thing as the OP). Although it was clearly stated in the rules, it is very different from any other forum I've been on; so I forgot.

Given the common concerns and issues caused by this specific rule ("No posting in a for sale thread, even if the posting is relevant to the thread"); is there a polite way to request reconsidering that rule? The classified section would be much more robust and easy to follow if simple, relevant questions were allowed to be asked within the thread. I certainly understand the goal to prohibit all off-content or irrelevant comments.

If the above question is disallowed, please delete it. I in no way want to complain or disrespect INGO, but it seems that many people would benefit from a potential change in that particular rule. If allowable, it would be a useful discussion to consider the pros & cons of a change.

Have you not read my and the other staff members responses. If not please go back and re-read them as it is fuully explained. Fully explained and no it is not any other forum. It is Ingo. It runs under this set of rules and this set will stand.
I see you are being polite but seriously peoples. Give it a rest OK.

This thread is done so I dont pop a vein.