I'm curious if there's a way to get rid of the Read and review topic by sorrowdays127? I'm tired of looking at it. I was tired of it the first time I saw it. Now, it's an eyesore. Just my opinion, but I wanted to ask.
I'm curious if there's a way to get rid of the Read and review topic by sorrowdays127? I'm tired of looking at it. I was tired of it the first time I saw it. Now, it's an eyesore. Just my opinion, but I wanted to ask.
if there's a way to get rid of the Read and review topic by sorrowdays127?
Just click on the green dot. You don't have to read it. That's what I've been doing.
Lazeez can lock the thread. He may even be willing to delete the thread. I'm guessing he would want to see a consensuses of opinion before he takes any action.
He has in the past banned a person from the forums and then some time later rescinded the ban.
ETA add/change words
I'm guessing he would want to see a consensuses of opinion before he takes any action.
He has in the past banned a person from the forums and then some time later rescinded the ban.
From the instances I am aware of, Lazeez doesn't ask for a consensuses of opinion regarding locking or removing a thread.
I think he blocks people from the site for a specified period, not the forum. If he felt the situation warranted banning a person from the site, I doubt he would rescind a ban.
Lazeez can lock the thread. He may even be willing to delete the thread. I'm guessing he would want to see a consensuses of opinion before he takes any action.
I haven't read that guy's threads in a while so I don't know what people are saying there (I simply click on the green circle). But, evidently, people on this forum have something to say in it.
Well, his initial actions did raise some valid concerns, and that one thread ended up being the one everyone stayed with to discuss those concerns.
I do think it's going to wind down now. They do seem to have been addressed as much as they can, and unfortunately a test we just ran proved that one of those concerns is valid.
It may not even require puns and jokes.
I'll go make a post suggesting that if we continue the discussion, that we start a thread with a new relevant title, so that others aren't inflicted with the title of the existing thread any longer. It's a legit complaint.
Lazeez can lock the thread. He may even be willing to delete the thread.
Given my druthers, I'd rather SOL doesn't turn into another Facebook or Twitter type website.
Given my druthers, I'd rather SOL doesn't turn into another Facebook or Twitter type website.
I'll 'Like' that suggestion, as soon as the functionality is added!
@Capt.Zapp
As someone pointed out, if you don't want to read the thread, just click the green dot. That marks the tread as 'all posts have been read'.
Or, more accurately, all the posts that you care to read!
I'd be happy if I could just kill it off of my screen. clicking the green button works just fine until I go back to the forum. Then I have to click it again. Plus, I still have to see it after I click it.
clicking the green button works just fine until I go back to the forum. Then I have to click it again.
You should only need to re-click on the green button after someone posts something new on the thread, but your browser needs to stay logged into SOL to remember which threads you've already read.
Do you remain continually logged into SOL at all times, and sleep rather than shut down your computer when you're not using it?
Hi Ross,
I stay logged in pretty much 24/7 unless I reboot or some such. I guess I set it off this time, lol. I wasn't even trying.
I stay logged in pretty much 24/7 unless I reboot or some such. I guess I set it off this time, lol. I wasn't even trying.
I hope it helped.
The site relies on users' browsers remembering their past actions, but only when the user is logged in.
I have had times when my browser gets my login status wrong. The first thing I try when the site is "behaving strangely" is to logout and log back in.
I'll 'Like' that suggestion, as soon as the functionality is added!
What I was getting at, or trying to, is the penchant of FB and TW to censor. Sometimes I'm too subtle for my own good.
What I was getting at, or trying to, is the penchant of FB and TW to censor. Sometimes I'm too subtle for my own good.
we do not want the style of mind control censoring used on those anti-social media sites here.
Lazeez can lock the thread.
I have no problems with threads being locked as he's done in the past. I can see no reason for a thread to be deleted, no matter how much someone thinks it is an 'eyesore'. As someone pointed out, if you don't want to read the thread, just click the green dot. That marks the tread as 'all posts have been read'.
I can think of only one thread being deleted and I don't recall what it was about.
I do recall that the post were offensive. Far more than just an 'eyesore'
OP stated
So what. I consider a number of threads to be "eyesores" for lack of a better name. I doesn't mean others agree or that the thread should be deleted.
If Darian doesn't want to have anything to do with the thread, then he doesn't have to click on it. That's what I do.
OP stated
So what. I consider a number of threads to be "eyesores" for lack of a better name. I doesn't mean others agree or that the thread should be deleted.
If Darian doesn't want to have anything to do with the thread, then he doesn't have to click on it. That's what I do.
Why are you giving me a hard time about the thread? Go back and read what I replied to instead of just reading what you think it says.
YOU said Far more than just an 'eyesore, I was just clarifying that it was the OP that claimed 'eyesore' in the first place.
Capt. Zapp 5/2/2018, 12:12:15 PM
@paliden
Lazeez can lock the thread.
I have no problems with threads being locked as he's done in the past. I can see no reason for a thread to be deleted, no matter how much someone thinks it is an 'eyesore'.As someone pointed out, if you don't want to read the thread, just click the green dot. That marks the tread as 'all posts have been read'.
Replies: REP
REP 5/2/2018, 2:03:21 PM
@Capt. Zapp
I can think of only one thread being deleted and I don't recall what it was about.
I do recall that the post were offensive. Far more than just an 'eyesore'
Capt. Zapp 5/2/2018, 2:44:56 PM
@REP
Far more than just an 'eyesore
OP stated the thread he wanted deleted was an eyesore.
Replies: REP
I can see no reason for a thread to be deleted, no matter how much someone thinks it is an 'eyesore'.
I was responding to "I can see no reason for a thread to be deleted".
I believe there are reasons that warrant the deletion of a thread. I was saying that a thread being an "eyesore" was not adequate reason for deleting a thread.
I believe there are reasons that warrant the deletion of a thread. I was saying that a thread being an "eyesore" was not adequate reason for deleting a thread.
The only time I would consider it an option is if the posters in the thread get abusive to the point where 'viable threats' are being made. At the same time, instead of deleting the entire thread, only the offensive posts could be deleted. Generally, there is almost always some good information in a thread.
I don't recall seeing any threads on here that I would consider candidates for deletion, although the one that just turned into a flame war with childish name-calling (I don't recall who it was between) came very close.
I agree that being 'an eyesore' is not even close to being enough. Just like the stories posted here, if they don't like them, they don't have to read them.
the one that just turned into a flame war
I read the threads that interest me and ignore the rest, so I think the flame war was in a thread I didn't read. Lazeez seems to shutdown threads that turn into flame wars.
It is also interesting when the participants of a flame war switch to another thread and seem to treat each other politely. (as I shrug my shoulders)
It is also interesting when the participants of a flame war switch to another thread and seem to treat each other politely. (as I shrug my shoulders)
I think there is a difference between attacking a statement and attacking a person who made a statement. So for me it's normal to treat people politely even if I previously heatedly argued with them.
the one that just turned into a flame war with childish name-calling
True, but Capt. Zapp said the above which is different from a heated argument about a statement.
Only in regards to acronyms. Who or what are FT and TW?
Most likely
FB (not FT) = Facebook
TW = Twitter*
*Twitter is the most aptly named social media service. The vast majority of it's users are twits.
Twitter is the most aptly named social media service. The vast majority of it's users are twits.
#MeToo ;)
On a serious note, if you want to make money out of writing stories it's virtually obligatory for you to use FB and TW accounts for self-promotion.
AJ