If that's really Borgs . . .

Yes. Seems some people can't help but to try and stir shit.

Maybe they think the shit will shine if they stir long enough

Done.

Didn't the Borgs-Elwood transfer happen around 2005-2006? Borgs set me up an unrelated-to-him subforum on his board for a short period of time in summer 2006.

\o

\p

Yup, and this was the primary reason I lost all respect for him because at the time they were actively prosecuting and jailing torrent users to which he scoffed at. All of the backstage drama was secondary to this, he intentionally put me as a member at risk of legal complications as some kind of pawn in some fucked up game he was playing and refused to see the reason to cease and desist with doing this and the cockiness of telling us to go fuck ourselves if we didn't like it.
Some things are unforgivable especially from a stranger.
That said, time has passed and all that rot but don't expect me to roll out the welcome mat especially given his penchant for stealing data and admitted piracy.

Would you invite him to Thanksgiving?

Then again, why should I care. Ya'll have at it.

It was a mistake to not delete Liet again when he came back from his first deletion.

Banning is an art. It requires patience, style, cooperation, and an absence of that certain chez-naissance-quoi, i.e. the quality of having been on WF since its birth.

Je ne sais quoi?

Me neither.

Just a reminder folks, but the idea of opening these threads is that users might have pertinent comments to make that add to the discussion. Spammish comments don't really make the grade, and I would consider them warnable.

Right now, this is trial and error, and how we treat these threads might change if a completely open approach is abused.

You're going to warn people for bumping?

I actually thought my comment was pertinent, since none of you old folks could even put together a timeline of events. Which is really funny when it pertains to discussion of a medium that, by design, retains records of written communication.

EDIT: Although I see that none of the threads go back past 2007? I imagine I used to know why that was, but I suppose I've forgotten.

Not warning anything right now, and your comment in particular, @mburtonk was not something I'd describe as spam anyway. They've all just been opened, so some bumping would be expected, that's not an issue or concern. But would you agree some of what followed yours wasn't particularly meaningful? At any rate, most discussion going forward should likely be in fresh threads, as they are released.

There are only about five threads in the shelter, the rest are all here, although I can't say I know what happened to pre-2007 threads.

IIRC, the old board software pruned threads that were past a certain age.

If you like your spam you can keep your spam.

Looks like Gul is this board's Obama. Does that make Anc as Valerie Jarrett? The real power behind POTUS?

Since it's all trial and error now, I'd like to suggest something. Many of the threads that come from the shelter will be dealing with controversial stuff -- most of them deal with possible administrative action, after all. Defusing them with some general silliness might be considered quite healthy and productive. That's not the same as obnoxious trolling, and I'm glad to say I haven't seen any of that in the released threads so far. But silliness is a manner of normalization, and can help build or maintain communities. Savez-vous?