Author Topic: [RESOLVED] An explanation  (Read 1592 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jayman77

  • Posts: 243
[RESOLVED] An explanation
« Topic Start: May 01, 2008, 09:55:51 AM »
Chief, I noticed your response to me in the game thread from last night followed by you locking the thread.  I never knew there was a board rule not allowing sarcastic posts, which, as I'm sure you know, are pretty plentiful on the boards.  As a member of the Washington Capitals message boards for several years, I've posted the same thing about Caps game threads a number of times, and have rarely received any feedback about "not contributing anything else" or "that's all you say on these boards."  For one thing, it's TRUE that these boards become highly emotional one way or another whether the Nats win or lose, and I happen to think it's amusing.  Second, if there is another board rule saying you have to contribute a certain amount of posts here, I'm not aware of it.  One main reason that I don't have a huge post count on here is because I'm at work and only post on or read these boards during a break, or when I'm at home, I'm doing other things like putting my twins to bed during the game or watching the game itself while my wife uses the laptop for work.  If you don't happen to like what I do say about game threads from time to time, you can ban me or just put me on ignore.  Thanks.

Offline The Chief

  • Posts: 29998
    • http://www.wnff.net
Re: An explanation
« Reply #1: May 01, 2008, 10:13:56 AM »
Chief, I noticed your response to me in the game thread from last night followed by you locking the thread.  I never knew there was a board rule not allowing sarcastic posts, which, as I'm sure you know, are pretty plentiful on the boards.  As a member of the Washington Capitals message boards for several years, I've posted the same thing about Caps game threads a number of times, and have rarely received any feedback about "not contributing anything else" or "that's all you say on these boards."  For one thing, it's TRUE that these boards become highly emotional one way or another whether the Nats win or lose, and I happen to think it's amusing.  Second, if there is another board rule saying you have to contribute a certain amount of posts here, I'm not aware of it.  One main reason that I don't have a huge post count on here is because I'm at work and only post on or read these boards during a break, or when I'm at home, I'm doing other things like putting my twins to bed during the game or watching the game itself while my wife uses the laptop for work.  If you don't happen to like what I do say about game threads from time to time, you can ban me or just put me on ignore.  Thanks.

I actually didn't lock the thread, 2k6 must have done it, and if so, it was a coincidence that it was after my posting.

I'd like to apologize for any perceived insult, but in my own defense, it did seem like dropping in at the end of game threads to heckle everyone about their "bipolarity" has constituted the bulk of your posts *lately*  You're generally pretty good-natured about it though, so it was probably wrong of me to call you out like that.  Again, I apologize.

Also (and this is more for the general benefit of anyone who reads it, not directed specifically at you)  - people shouldn't interpret my personal opinions as "board rules."  I think there has been a rash of that due to a disturbance we had recently, which is understandable, but no one here should think that way.  I'm a BENEVOLENT dictator, really ;)  I much prefer the hands off approach, and I enjoy seeing all the lively discussion that goes on here.  And honestly, I couldn't care less about anyone's post count, everyone participates as much and as often as they like, and I wouldn't have it any other way.  I have no intention of banning or ignoring anyone for make negative remarks, smart-ass jokes, or anything of the like...  if I did that, I'd be sitting around here talking to myself by now :lol:

So in short - sorry for calling you out, I didn't lock the thread, and I hope we are cool again 8)

Offline Jayman77

  • Posts: 243
Re: An explanation
« Reply #2: May 01, 2008, 10:39:39 AM »
It's all good.  And I shouldn't have concluded that you locked the thread, although that was my hunch since you are a mod and were the last one to post :) 

And I know that my jab was definitely heckling, but it was all in good fun.  It's great that we're all passionate about the Nats, and I just get a little amused when it's taken to extremes on a message board.  No harm, no foul. 

No apologies necessary!

Offline The Chief

  • Posts: 29998
    • http://www.wnff.net
Re: An explanation
« Reply #3: May 01, 2008, 12:21:42 PM »
Good deal.  I'm going to go ahead and lock this one up then.  Thanks for understanding my momentary snarkiness.

Offline 2k6nats

  • Posts: 9238
  • Are we having fun yet?
Re: An explanation
« Reply #4: May 01, 2008, 05:38:45 PM »
Just have to say that I was the one to lock the thread.  I wouldn't have if Jayman was online, as I thought he should have the chance to respond.  However, I concluded that keeping the thread unlocked until the next day would be unnecessary when Jayman could just PM the Chief his response (or make a thread).