Chad & gunwank box thread.

Understood.

Sorry, I must have missed it.

Thank you!

Lesson: a nanny state is a bad thing unless it protects fragile psyches from things they don't like.

Will this new gun spam policy also apply to gun wank threads?

It applies with any topic that gets out of hand to the point of annoying a large amount of people, interfering with board use and making people walk away out of frustration.

Will this new gun spam policy also apply to gun wank threads?

What part of any topic is confusing?

We generally don't have that issue since most gun threads are posted in Camp Wordforge....because anti-gun folks complained about seeing them.

Usually, it's a small amount of news stories and so far completely reasonable amounts.

No, the original intention for Camp Wordforge was to lure everyone inside to have them in one place, to blow it up.

But, the fuckin' detonator didn't work, and Elwood got sniffing around, and tried to trace it back to me, and...oh, shit.

Seems pretty clear that anytime there are more than a critical number of gun wank threads on Page 1, we'll just have to as loud as the wankers did about Chad's threads.

What that critical number is should be at the poster's discretion.

Of course then the wankers will start about our , and things will get interesting.

Yes, they call it "Camp Wordforge".

Maybe Chad should have his own forum? Hmmm....

Because I'm laughing at the mishegos over words on a screen?

As good a characterization of Camp Wordforge as any. The problem is, the gun wank threads keep oozing out of CW into the Red Room.

You"re confusing gun wanking to actual news concerning firearms.

"Ooo! Look at my 1911!"



Joe Blow used his firearm to defend himself/Joe Blow shot his old lady down....

:yesno:

Bit of a difference.

Considerable difference, which is why the current flap is so entertaining.

Perfectly all right to post a bunch of threads about Joe Blow defending himself, but "too many" threads about Joe Blow leaving his guns lying around for the kids to get at, and suddenly there's

Is it just that it was one poster posting "too much" of the latter? Maybe if more of us spread those kinds of threads out among us -? Hmmm...

(Yeah, I know that's not the real reason for the flap, which is why I find the whole thing amusing.)

Funny how those threads aren't limited to Camp Wordforge.

Plus, they're not posted to the point where they flood the main page. You might see one every couple of days or so, and it's usually by different posters.

You are trolling. Post 18, 45 and especially post 55.

You have not recommended anything in this thread until this very post. You've been trolling and it's a damn shame TPTB (that's all you mods, admins and the owner) don't have the balls to put a stop to your passive aggressive trolling crap outside of the Red Room.

When Wordforge becomes a country then you can cry about nanny state nonsense.

And here is where we see the move for censorship. Garamet (and apparently Gul from his refusing to understand the concept of "any topic") defines any thread that has a subject of guns in it to be a gun wank thread that oozed out of Camp Wordforge.

Except not all gun threads belong in Camp Wordforge.

Discussing a gun that someone bought? Yeah, Camp Wordforge.

Discussing the shooting of Trayvon Martin? Red Room.

Discussing a gun show deal? Camp Wordforge.

Discussing a home invasion where the home owner used her weapon to put five rounds into the perp? Red Room.

On top of that the so called Red Room "gun wank" threads in no way ever have come close to the amount of threads at one time like the threads Chad posted. Nor ever has one single poster posted so many "gun wank" threads at the same time like Chad posted his threads.

The "gun wank" issue is just cover for an attempt to force any topic concerning guns into Camp Wordforge even if some of those topics are Red Room material.

No. Only some. Kindly reread the post you're misinterpreting.

True.

Correct.

Correct. Which Demiurge clearly understood, which is why he started it there.

Correct.

Correct. Which is why all those posters whining every time it happens, and then starting Help Desk threads demanding that it stop are clearly out of li -

Oh, wait.

If this were a competition, you'd have a lot of catching up to do.

"Force"? How? At gunpoint?

Hyperbolic, and missing the target. If you think that's what Chad was doing, why are you vituperating at me?

And not only then, either.

Again, absolutely correct, as the use of the present participle ("What I am doing"...right there, in Post #58) clearly indicates.

There is no misinterpretation.

No threads have "oozed" out of Camp Wordforge. It's a lie to say it happens on a regular basis. It is even a lie to say it happens on an occasional basis. It doesn't happen.

All the gun threads that you consider "gun wank" (which includes Chad's threads as well) are Red Room style threads. They do not belong in Camp Wordforge.

Which is precisely why Chad shouldn't have been told to stop. His threads were proper RR threads, as were the other examples you've listed. The Red Room isn't a place meant for dainty sensibilities, and Chad's threads should be allowed to continue. I asked the question about other gun threads to illustrate that Chad has been punished not for placing them in the wrong room but for the content.

And you are wrong. He was not told to stop because of the content, but because of the number. And I think you know that, too.

Come now, do you think the rest of this board is filled with idiots?

If Chad had posted multiples of threads on the other side of the gun debate the result would still have been the same. He would have been told to stop.

As I said in an earlier post it is one thing to make it "rain" to make a point but another to flood the place.

And again the other gun threads do not even come close in number to what Chad posted so that argument is just pointless and wrong.

See, there's the fundamental difference. Rather than being told to stop, he'd have been managed:

• Those opposed could have ignored his threads until they slid off the page.
  Those opposed could have countered his threads with threads of their own.

Instead, those opposed went running to the authorities.

"Mommmmm! Make him stop!" is only one solution.

What's the appropriate number, then? Is there a maximum number of threads per day a poster should be limited to?

I don't know if it still does, but TNZ used to have a limit of three threads per day.

I mean, yeah, let's emulate TBBS, why don't we?

Let's say no more than three per day on the same subject.

And, no, variations of place and persons do not a new topic make.

People would be just as annoyed with you for flooding the front page with 25 separate threads per day about music concerts you really enjoyed. It's dickery regardless of the topic. You can start a million threads in a single hour if you want to, but if they're all on one topic, you're gonna catch shit for it.

You're a grown-ass man and you're not retarded, so quit playing surprised and butt-hurt about it. You knew good and well what you were doing, and you saw the backlash coming before you started.

^So, one vote for "let's follow the TNZ model."

Garamet, Chad, gul, etc... would you please just understand that we all see right through your holier-than-thou routine, that we KNOW you know Chad was spamming up the Red Room, and that all your protestations to the contrary are falling on deaf ears. It wasn't about the content of the posts. And had the shoe been on the other foot, the outrage would've been the same. So please just do us all a favor and STFU!

Can you link to where I said he wasn't spamming, or at least to what you consider a "protestation"? Or just call me a humorless harpy again (lower case, "y" rather than "ie" in the singular) because you're the one who can't see the humor in the situation.

Then surely you can provide evidence of where something similar has happened in the past. No?

Because if you can't shoot it, silence it.