Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 170

Thread: 50 posts...

  1. #31
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Adopted Bronco:
    Ray Finkel
    Posts
    86,694

    Default

    For me i rather him post in other threads than clutter up the board with 50 new and pointless ones like he is doing now again.

  2. The Following User High Fived Northman For This Post:


  3. #32
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Adopted Bronco:
    Josey Jewell
    Posts
    30,216

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Denver Native (Carol) View Post
    I was following the member last night - if the post count would have been in place, rather than creating new threads in Broncos Talk, he could have used existing thread(s) to post his crap in, as it was obvious that his ONLY reason for posting on BF was to post crap.

    Most of the time spammers do not create new threads, but dump their crap in an existing thread(s) also.

    To me, the best course is, when someone notices a post(s) like the ones created last night, whether a new thread is started, or whether a new member is posting crap in an existing thread, it needs to immediately be reported, and acted upon ASAP.
    I believe that's what they did, wasn't it? I watched to see who was online during
    the troll's time here, and no mod was on board. (Dread showed, but he
    obviously was not lurking at the time). Then JR came on, and a few minutes
    later the troll was banned.

    -----
    Though He slay me, I will trust in Him . . . (Job 13:15)


  4. #33
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    31,747

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by topscribe View Post
    I believe that's what they did, wasn't it? I watched to see who was online during
    the troll's time here, and no mod was on board. (Dread showed, but he
    obviously was not lurking at the time). Then JR came on, and a few minutes
    later the troll was banned.

    -----
    this clown has been banned 6 or 7 times now and frankly anyone that determined is almost impossible to stop..

    it is not like we like the extra work but putting on to many restrictions also diminish the forum.. sometime you have to take the good with the bad..

    If you think it is annoying to Y'all it is not just the editing and deleting these moron cause but also the 4-5 behind the scenes thing they cause us to do with each of these post or threads..

    we do not want to ban someone that is legit and being brand new sometimes it takes 5-6 posts for them to be seen.. one of them was visitors message that some third party reported.. or he would still be here..

    your reported posts are great folks as the mods can not see everything all the time.. but please one report per newbie per person is usually enough..

    please do not get crazy if we do not drop the hammer in a heart beat it sometimes takes awhile.. 6-7 reported posts by the same member in 6-7 threads will not make it happen faster.. often it just slows stuff down..

  5. The Following User High Fived Lonestar For This Post:


  6. #34
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    31,747

    Default

    I f I have a vote I have always been an advocate of not allowing newbies to start threads.. while it has not been a huge problem here the number of almost dupe threads in mania in the past drove me nuts..

    having the same conversation in 5-6 different threads is insane IMO..

    I would like to see a min number of post before they can start threads it would cut down on those that come here to spam their products or web sights..

  7. The Following 2 Users High Fived Lonestar For This Post:


  8. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jrwiz View Post
    I f I have a vote I have always been an advocate of not allowing newbies to start threads.. while it has not been a huge problem here the number of almost dupe threads in mania in the past drove me nuts..

    having the same conversation in 5-6 different threads is insane IMO..

    I would like to see a min number of post before they can start threads it would cut down on those that come here to spam their products or web sights..
    I agree.

  9. #36
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Westminster, CO
    Adopted Bronco:
    Phillip, Demaryius, Derek, Shane, Von,
    Posts
    47,825

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jrwiz View Post
    I f I have a vote I have always been an advocate of not allowing newbies to start threads.. while it has not been a huge problem here the number of almost dupe threads in mania in the past drove me nuts..

    having the same conversation in 5-6 different threads is insane IMO..

    I would like to see a min number of post before they can start threads it would cut down on those that come here to spam their products or web sights..
    The only thing I agree with here is that it would cut down on those that come here to spam their products or websites.

    As far as newbies starting dup threads, established members also start dup threads. Sometimes I have posted a new thread, because I use the exact title on the article that I am posting. Then later my thread is merged because someone already posted the article, but titled the thread different than what the article title was.

    Thanks to MasterShake for my great signature
    Rest in Peace - Demaryius (88) - Darrent (27) - Damien (29) - Kenny (11)
    #7 - JOHN - #44 - FLOYD - #80 - ROD
    THIS ONES FOR JOHN
    WOULD YOU RATHER WIN UGLY, OR LOSE PRETTY?

  10. #37
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Adopted Bronco:
    Pat Bowlen
    Posts
    97,306

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Denver Native (Carol) View Post
    The only thing I agree with here is that it would cut down on those that come here to spam their products or websites.

    As far as newbies starting dup threads, established members also start dup threads. Sometimes I have posted a new thread, because I use the exact title on the article that I am posting. Then later my thread is merged because someone already posted the article, but titled the thread different than what the article title was.
    That is a very different situation than the one that occurred last night and again today.
    *The statements above are my opinions, unless they are links, because then they are links, which wouldn't make them my opinions, and I suppose stats aren't necessarily opinion, but they are certainly presented to support an opinion. Proceed accordingly.

    Quote Originally Posted by Buff View Post
    What is this, amateur hour? It's TNF against the Jets and you didn't think you'd need extra booze?

  11. #38
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Adopted Bronco:
    Josey Jewell
    Posts
    30,216

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jrwiz View Post
    this clown has been banned 6 or 7 times now and frankly anyone that determined is almost impossible to stop..

    it is not like we like the extra work but putting on to many restrictions also diminish the forum.. sometime you have to take the good with the bad..

    If you think it is annoying to Y'all it is not just the editing and deleting these moron cause but also the 4-5 behind the scenes thing they cause us to do with each of these post or threads..

    we do not want to ban someone that is legit and being brand new sometimes it takes 5-6 posts for them to be seen.. one of them was visitors message that some third party reported.. or he would still be here..

    your reported posts are great folks as the mods can not see everything all the time.. but please one report per newbie per person is usually enough..

    please do not get crazy if we do not drop the hammer in a heart beat it sometimes takes awhile.. 6-7 reported posts by the same member in 6-7 threads will not make it happen faster.. often it just slows stuff down..
    I know, JR.

    I was a mod once . . .

    -----
    Though He slay me, I will trust in Him . . . (Job 13:15)


  12. The Following User High Fived topscribe For This Post:


  13. #39
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Westminster, CO
    Adopted Bronco:
    Phillip, Demaryius, Derek, Shane, Von,
    Posts
    47,825

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MissouriBronc View Post
    That is a very different situation than the one that occurred last night and again today.
    I realize that because I was also on when it happened. I was responding to Jr in regards to his statement about newbies starting dup threads.

    Thanks to MasterShake for my great signature
    Rest in Peace - Demaryius (88) - Darrent (27) - Damien (29) - Kenny (11)
    #7 - JOHN - #44 - FLOYD - #80 - ROD
    THIS ONES FOR JOHN
    WOULD YOU RATHER WIN UGLY, OR LOSE PRETTY?

  14. The Following User High Fived Denver Native (Carol) For This Post:


  15. #40
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Adopted Bronco:
    Doom!
    Posts
    3,759

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Northman View Post
    For me i rather him post in other threads than clutter up the board with 50 new and pointless ones like he is doing now again.
    Fair enough...

    But it would make idiots like him harder to track, in a manner of speaking.

    Fewer people would realize what he's doing or report it... it'd be easier to overlook a few posts...


    Then on top of that, you have the guys they mentioned that would also start spamming just so that you could start a thread.
    To all the armed forces... present, past, and future.
    Thanks, Reid!

    Click the sig to read JetRazor's and my story! PM me with any questions!
    I love my wife!

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Adopted Bronco:
    Ron Dayne
    Posts
    20,574

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hardwired View Post
    I belong to other boards where the 50-post rule is in effect and most people do just what Carol suggests to get their 50 posts. The people you least want to post are the ones that can type up 50 inane responses in 30 minutes and the problem still remains.

    Is there a way to set a max number of posts per day until you reach 50, say, 10 posts in 24 hours? Not many trolls would have the patience for that. Once you reach 50 (or 100 or whatever limit is set) the daily limit would come off.
    Like this

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Adopted Bronco:
    PTBNL
    Posts
    22,698

    Default

    Instead of a post limit, how about a 72 hour waiting period before new threads can be started?
    I got mind control while I'm here
    You goin' hate me when I'm gone
    Ain't no blood clot and no fear
    I got hope inside of my bones

  18. The Following 4 Users High Fived Thnikkaman For This Post:


  19. #43
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Adopted Bronco:
    Mike Leach
    Posts
    20,546

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thnikkaman View Post
    Instead of a post limit, how about a 72 hour waiting period before new threads can be started?
    I like this idea.
    Quote Originally Posted by Benetto View Post
    Orton can't single left handedly ruin everything on O.
    We didn't lose the game; we just ran out of time. - Vince Lombardi

    *****************
    "I make mistakes, I am out of control and at times hard to handle. But if you can't handle me at my worst, then you sure as hell don't deserve me at my best."
    — Marilyn Monroe

    Quote Originally Posted by pnbronco View Post
    dang it go drink some Fireball and find your own dang chicken....

  20. #44
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Albany, New York
    Adopted Bronco:
    Charley Johnson
    Posts
    27,236

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thnikkaman View Post
    Instead of a post limit, how about a 72 hour waiting period before new threads can be started?
    Serves much the same funcrion in keeping most Spammers out. This could work, perhaps better than a post count minimum
    “What fresh hell is this?”

    "A man who picks a cat up by the tail learns something which he can learn in no other way." - Mark Twain

  21. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Adopted Bronco:
    PTBNL
    Posts
    22,698

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnought View Post
    Serves much the same funcrion in keeping most Spammers out. This could work, perhaps better than a post count minimum
    If you think about it. If someone comes in and starts jacking up threads, we get an idea if someone needs to be banned before they are given the ability to start a thread. Its not going to take care of every troll, but it kills spammers abilities (a captcha script when signing up for the site would help this too) to do their damage,
    I got mind control while I'm here
    You goin' hate me when I'm gone
    Ain't no blood clot and no fear
    I got hope inside of my bones

  22. The Following 2 Users High Fived Thnikkaman For This Post:


Go
Shop AFC Champions and Super Bowl gear at the official online Pro Shop of the Denver Broncos!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
status.broncosforums.com - BroncosForums status updates
Partner with the USA Today Sports Media Group