ForumGarden

I'm noticing a couple of members here appear to be airing frustration with some of the threads I initiate, and I'm hoping we can figure out exactly how many of you are experiencing this and find a compromise to keep peace in the garden.

I can certainly relate to anyone who becomes frustrated by seeing any particular individual constantly filling the board with their threads. So I'm asking if that is the case regarding me, and if so, can we perhaps reach a consensus as to a number limit of new threads per day you'd like me to cap it at? I do a lot of reading on the internet and I know I can sometimes get carried away with wanting to share what I find.

I don't wish to stifle anyone else from starting conversations and I certainly do not intend to bury other's threads. As I said, I'm aware of just how annoying that can become.

Mind you, I'm not requesting criticism on how I post or any analysis of my personality. I have my own reasons for how I word my posts most of the time. But I'm always a work in progress, too. I'll figure out my shortcomings from constructive input I receive from a few trusted people I request it from.

I'm asking all this because I'd like to see FG succeed as a forum and I'd like to do whatever I can to help as I have admiration and respect for the two owners and I enjoy conversing with a few of the members.



i look forward to your responses - if any.

You might be surprised but I say go ahead on with whatever you want (minus the recent

personal attacks etc.) and then the onus is on the rest of us to mega thread start and blow

you out of the water.

My only small caveat is to consider the 'look' of the home page. And if there are potentially

more timid people who come by for a look, and are turned off. Which if enough of us do as

I suggested ^ will cease to be a concern. Maybe.

I think you're too concerned about the look of the home page. I'd rather have some crazy, eye catching stuff that would attract and interest fun people than keep it subdued so we don't scare away timid folks. Timid people don't post.

Ahso... I can understand you having a passion.... I also have a passion In the form of National Hunt Horse Racing which only takes place In winter months... I do post many threads on Horse Racing In the sports catagory but I am also very aware that It's not everyone's cup of tea and I try to limit myself to the big races that get a lot of British TV attention....

We had a member here once who enjoyed word games.... the ' Something beginning with Z' type kind of thing and I know some members would get quite Irate when they had posted a new thread only to find by the next morning that the entire front page was full of replies to the word games. and their new thread was overlooked in page two.

I think It's about finding the right balance. No-one Is objecting to you pushing the gun agenda per say, we are all entitled to opinions and the right to express ourselves for It's when others begin to dictate the format of a forum that things get nasty. However, since the school massacre, you have posted nothing but gun related threads. That's fine and that's your right as a member but some people just switch off when they just see another one followed by another one, especially when the same debate takes place yet again. In the end, people don't even bother opening the threads.

For any forum to grow, It does need to attract new members as any business needs new customers and I agree with Snooze that the home page should Ideally have a quirky mixture and the right balance to do that. If the entire home page Is taken up by guns guns guns, they may not see other threads.

Post away, everybody has their favourite hobby horses you can just not read threads that don't interest you. Oscar and I disagree a lot and have quite heated discussions bet most people just don't look at those threads because they are usually about British politics and dead boring.

I have never actually looked at any of the word game threads I find word games boring. It's easy enough for any semi-literate would be member to find their way to what does interest them it would be a shame to curtail someone who starts a lot of threads. You and accountable are entertaining because you disagree so passionately about things the whole raison d'etre for a discussion forum is to discuss. You can't do that if everybody agrees. I don't look at many other forums I suspect a lot fail because free flow disagreement gets curtailed in some way.

gmc;1415407 wrote: Post away, everybody has their favourite hobby horses you can just not read threads that don't interest you. Oscar and I disagree a lot and have quite heated discussions bet most people just don't look at those threads because they are usually about British politics and dead boring.

. No.... you're just a knob.

You are more than welcome to show restraint by limiting threads or combining similar themed ideas into a collective thread.

I don't think you are under any site restriction to do so, however.

I tend to wander off to other sites when I see one that starts looking like spam to me. If I want to see one focal topic on a board, I'll go to a topic specific board of my own choosing instead. There are plenty out there.

To be honest, I usually don't bother to read your posts. So the "look at me" approach you've adopted recently may have paid off, for the moment, at least. Makes it harder for you to complain about others doing the same next week,perhaps.

Life is full of trade offs.

I think Flopstock needs to post more often.

I agree

flopstock;1415413 wrote: You are more than welcome to show restraint by limiting threads or combining similar themed ideas into a collective thread.

I don't think you are under any site restriction to do so, however.

I tend to wander off to other sites when I see one that starts looking like spam to me. If I want to see one focal topic on a board, I'll go to a topic specific board of my own choosing instead. There are plenty out there.

To be honest, I usually don't bother to read your posts. So the "look at me" approach you've adopted recently may have paid off, for the moment, at least. Makes it harder for you to complain about others doing the same next week,perhaps.

Life is full of trade offs.
Besides the fact that the highlighted sentence appears to be contradictory of itself, what I think I'm seeing you say is that it's mainly the number of posts I make within threads that are most bothersome to you. i oftentimes feel the same way. What I've found is that when posts within threads are not extensive (at least a little) in explaining one's overall view of a replied post and the thought process drips out slowly it's sometimes necessary to respond to each sentence (post) in an effort to help the person walk through the process of finishing their thought. OTOH, In instances where a poster deliberately walks themselves through the thought process in full first and then posts in that fashion it's easier to keep replies lower because there's more substance within each post. That's what you'll see in many of my posts - an attempt to understand what it is the other person is trying to convey. Posts often require more information for readers to get the full gist of the person's perspective.

The majority of posters on FG are short-post posters and it makes it difficult to appreciate the art of dialogue that way. While most of the more deliberate posters are no longer active members of this forum (many of which I believe left due to this), a couple are still here and it's them I try to engage.

I'd just assume post anonymously if I could, BTW! Though that does make it more difficult to find one's own older threads to update or revive. My threads are mostly about mature subjects with a serious side to them, but they are not about me at all.

All you have done Is rational your posting style and not addressed the Issue of which your OP stated, that some members are frustrated at the AMOUNT of gun threads.

oscar;1415423 wrote: All you have done Is rational your posting style and not addressed the Issue of which your OP stated, that some members are frustrated at the AMOUNT of gun threads.Take a look at all the threads I initiated yesterday. Only one mentions guns in the title but even that thread is about two homeless men helping out a guy being robbed. I did participate in other gun related thread that I and others had started before. I've not posted one new thread yet today

And I'm not rationalizing anything, I responding to a person's post as I interpreted it.

SnoozeAgain;1415396 wrote: I think you're too concerned about the look of the home page. I'd rather have some crazy, eye catching stuff that would attract and interest fun people than keep it subdued so we don't scare away timid folks. Timid people don't post.


Okay. Timid was a poor word choice. I'll re-state:

I doubt anyone would call me timid, but if

I wasn't already an FG member, and just came by this place, the large amount of gun

threads would be a turn-off. Whether or not I agreed with the position.

And for me, it invites a little boy cries wolf or a one trick pony feel.

Ahso!;1415425 wrote: [QUOTE=flopstock;1415413]You are more than welcome to show restraint by limiting threads or combining similar themed ideas into a collective thread.what I think I'm seeing you say is that it's mainly the number of posts I make within threads that are most bothersome to you.



Ahso!;1415425 wrote: Take a look at all the threads I initiated yesterday. Only one mentions guns in the title but even that thread is about two homeless men helping out a guy being robbed.
So problem solved.

Ahso!;1415421 wrote: My threads are mostly about mature subjects with a serious side to them, but they are not about me at all.


Then you can close this thread.

I started posting here a little more but in all honesty and in answer to your opening post, i gave up around Christmas. I read the first couple of gun related threads with interest and noted you made a good debate initially and i was tempted to add my tuppence worth given that i served in the armed forces. Then i noticed how you attempted to humiliate some members who didn't agree with you and i decided not to bother for it seemed you were more on a mission rather than engaging debate. Following the school shooting, every time i looked in there was just more of the same and i gave up even looking at your threads due to overkill. I'm certain that should i fill the home page with fishing related threads, others would feel the same as i do now but that's not to say that you should stop. I'm just curious now as to what this thread is intended for. A popularity vote?

So, so far in the way of constructive dialogue we've got "post away" (don't be concerned with burying other threads) and the bit about the front page.

The front page is something I never look at and so it wasn't a concern of mine. Anytime I've gone looking at forums I've jumped directly into the forum category pages and looked there. It would be nice to hear from the only two people here who are more important than me, unfortunately - Tyr and Bryn - on the front page effect. I'd like their attention too.

Ahso!;1415438 wrote: So, so far in the way of constructive dialogue we've got "post away" (don't be concerned with burying other threads) and the bit about the front page.

The front page is something I never look at and so it wasn't a concern of mine. Anytime I've gone looking at forums I've jumped directly into the forum category pages and look there. It would be nice to hear from Tyr and Bryn on the front page effect. I'd like their attention too.

I think I'll be a real attention whore and give it a few days though - just in case. Then surely what you're saying is, to heck with members opinions as you asked in your opening post but word from Bryn and Tyr that you are an asset to the forum, rather than consider the fact that some members are suffering overkill. This thread is not about what members think but an invitation to the administration to rebuff any complaints they may see about the endless gun control threads. Old east end adage son, " never blag a blagger".

Accountable;1415433 wrote:


So problem solved.



Then you can close this thread. You make me laugh. :wah:

Peter Lake;1415440 wrote: Then surely what you're saying is, to heck with members opinions as you asked in your opening post but word from Bryn and Tyr that you are an asset to the forum,[...]
That could've been done in a PM.

Accountable;1415449 wrote: That could've been done in a PM.They'll hopefully answer here so we can all read it for ourselves. Remember the front page wasn't any concern i had originally, it was a concern of Valerie and Snooze. I'd never considered it.

I don't care about the front page, I was merely addressing Valerie's concern about scaring away timid posters, etc.

I haven't bothered to comment on your OP because I usually don't read your posts anyway so it's a non-issue. However, I agree with the others... post as you like but have the courtesy not to spam the board with the same kind of threads all at once.

Accountable;1415449 wrote: That could've been done in a PM. A private message would render the intention of this thread useless, i.e, the hope and possibility of the middle finger to those who object to overkill on gun debate.

It would be rather surprising if the gun debate was not something that gripped American posters since they have to deal with the matter. for those who object to overkill on the issue stop reading those threads and maybe start one on something else. chocolate for instance --- drooling already aren't you:sneaky:

Ahso!;1415438 wrote: So, so far in the way of constructive dialogue we've got "post away" (don't be concerned with burying other threads) and the bit about the front page.

The front page is something I never look at and so it wasn't a concern of mine. Anytime I've gone looking at forums I've jumped directly into the forum category pages and looked there. It would be nice to hear from the only two people here who are more important than me, unfortunately - Tyr and Bryn - on the front page effect. I'd like their attention too.


From a personal point of view I'd say we only need one or two threads to discuss gun control, after all, how many different aspects are there to the subject.

From an official viewpoint I've yet to come to a conclusion - I'm too new to this to gauge the impact.

SnoozeAgain;1415452 wrote: I don't care about the front page, I was merely addressing Valerie's concern about scaring away timid posters, etc.

I haven't bothered to comment on your OP because I usually don't read your posts anyway so it's a non-issue. However, I agree with the others... post as you like but have the courtesy not to spam the board with the same kind of threads all at once.


I did SAY I used the wrong word.

FTR, I don't see the home page but very rarely, either. I just stay in new posts.

Looks like Ahso got his answer, even Bryn thinks he's a jerk. :sneaky:

SnoozeAgain;1415495 wrote: Looks like Ahso got his answer, even Bryn thinks he's a jerk. :sneaky:

Bryn Mawr;1415482 wrote: From a personal point of view I'd say we only need one or two threads to discuss gun control, after all, how many different aspects are there to the subject.



From an official viewpoint I've yet to come to a conclusion - I'm too new to this to gauge the impact.

I note that's a full stop there.

I am surprised. Surely you understand there are different aspects to any issue. Political; psychological; mathematical; general; and more - and then there are the sub-categorical aspects of each major one.

That said, i do appreciate the reply, and since this is your forum I'm happy to conform as best I can to suit your wishes.

And I had found what I thought was a good one to chew on. Oh well!

Ahso!;1415383 wrote: I'm noticing a couple of members here appear to be airing frustration with some of the threads I initiate, and I'm hoping we can figure out exactly how many of you are experiencing this and find a compromise to keep peace in the garden.

I can certainly relate to anyone who becomes frustrated by seeing any particular individual constantly filling the board with their threads. So I'm asking if that is the case regarding me, and if so, can we perhaps reach a consensus as to a number limit of new threads per day you'd like me to cap it at? I do a lot of reading on the internet and I know I can sometimes get carried away with wanting to share what I find.

I don't wish to stifle anyone else from starting conversations and I certainly do not intend to bury other's threads. As I said, I'm aware of just how annoying that can become.

Mind you, I'm not requesting criticism on how I post or any analysis of my personality. I have my own reasons for how I word my posts most of the time. But I'm always a work in progress, too. I'll figure out my shortcomings from constructive input I receive from a few trusted people I request it from.

I'm asking all this because I'd like to see FG succeed as a forum and I'd like to do whatever I can to help as I have admiration and respect for the two owners and I enjoy conversing with a few of the members.



i look forward to your responses - if any.


It appears that the entire premise of this thread was a lie, from the gitgo.

You weren't looking for honest feedback from your fellow posters, were you? You say yourself that it is only the opinion of two that matter to you.

The question to ask yourself now is "what was I really going for here?".

I'm betting it didn't play out like you had hoped it would.

Ah well, better luck next time.:-6

Later......

flopstock;1415533 wrote: It appears that the entire premise of this thread was a lie, from the gitgo.

You weren't looking for honest feedback from your fellow posters, were you? You say yourself that it is only the opinion of two that matter to you.

The question to ask yourself now is "what was I really going for here?".

I'm betting it didn't play out like you had hoped it would.

Ah well, better luck next time.:-6

Later......TV time?

Actually, no, I thought much of your post was good and brought up an important issue. I'm sorry I forgot to mention you though, it wasn't intentional.

This thread has developed just fine since I didn't have any designs on it from the, how'd you put it? "gitgo"?

What I was hoping for, and I received some though not as much as I wanted, was honest feedback from honest posters.

Later on...

Very often on forums, posts get misinterpreted Ahso but this Is not just Flopstock misinterpreting you. She's right... I wrote a post early on offering you the advice of finding a balance which you completely Ignored and failed to address. You can not say In one post that you address every post In your gun threads but then choose to Ignore others when It suits. You're contradicting yourself.

You asked for feedback yet have dismissed or Ignored feedback only waiting until the site owner or admin come In to tell you that as Peter said, you can stick a middle finger up to those who are sick of the amount of threads on the same subject. Ironically, Bryn should be a politician because that was the most brilliant way of swerving a question In the utmost polite manner that I've seen for many a month. Then unbelievably, your arrogance see's you continue to question him because you didn't get the admiration It's so blatantly obvious that you were looking for.!!!

I don't know If there are forum rules that mean you can't write endless threads on the same subject but It's not about rules, It's about curtesy for other members and the possibility that you could be deterring new members If they mistake this forum as a gun debate forum. I myself don't care. I don't read your threads and other members like Peter switched off very quickly when It appeared you had an agenda.

why don't you post an anon poll so that more members who don't want to engage here get to vote about your threads/?

No man Is an Island Ahso.. what has historically made this forum so successful is the varied topics and varied people those varied topics attract. If It were me, I'd take notice of the members telling you that they don't read your threads and switching off your readership and address that first. Posting more of the same and striving to convince members Including the site owner that your threads are an asset to the forum Is not going to change anything.

Ahso!;1415528 wrote:


I remember slow dancing to that... god, I'm old!

Perhaps if you put your myriad gun control threads in the gun control forum, instead of the general chit chat area, you might actually attract new people who might be looking for such a conversation. I (and many members) don't pay attention to the different areas when reading posts, but we're already here. A visitor looking for debate on gun control might look in our gun control forum, see how rarely it's used (and NOTHING on Sandy Hook), and move on.

Accountable;1415552 wrote: Perhaps if you put your myriad gun control threads in the gun control forum, instead of the general chit chat area, you might actually attract new people who might be looking for such a conversation. I (and many members) don't pay attention to the different areas when reading posts, but we're already here. A visitor looking for debate on gun control might look in our gun control forum, see how rarely it's used (and NOTHING on Sandy Hook), and move on.This is actually a fair response. Not one that addresses the OP really, but fair just the same. Though I must ask: "myriad"? Really?

I don't often pay that much attention to scouring through the what can seems like a "myriad" of forums on FG to properly categorize threads. As you said, its doubtful many do. As for attracting more gun enthusiasts? I shudder to think of the consequences. Though Tyr might then revive Spot and have a field day. Come to that, it's worth considering.

ETA: One-dimensional thinkers are boring and boorish.

Ahso!;1415565 wrote: This is actually a fair response. Not one that addresses the OP really, but fair just the same. Though I must ask: "myriad"? Really?

I don't often pay that much attention to scouring through the what can seems like a "myriad" of forums on FG to properly categorize threads. As you said, its doubtful many do. As for attracting more gun enthusiasts? I shutter to think of the consequences. Though Tyr might revive Spot and have a field day. Come to that, it's worth considering.


I like National Hunt horse racing Ahso... I live and breathe NH HR every day of my life... some races such as the King George, The Grand National and The Gold Cup are big Television ratings here and of Interest to those who only have a bet once a year...and why I post on the big races.... Some people have absolutely no Interest In horse racing at all so It would be a complete waste of time for all concerned If I posted on every days racing. What I'd be doing Is not giving a little Info here and there on the contenders of the big races, but trying to convince an entire forum and those with no Interest at all, to share my passion. It's a bit like my husband showing me pics of fish every day for decades... It's never going to make me want to go Fishing and the more he shows me, the more my eyes glaze over. If he wants to discuss In depth the ongoing Issue of diminishing fish stock In the River Wandle on a daily basis, then he can do so on his angling forum where like minded people are Interested... Like wise, I can go to my racing forum with like minded people but what you're trying to do Is preach to a general purpose forum and bamboozle those who come here for a variety of reasons to think the same as you.

What you're trying to do Is change the demographics of a forum and It's members and evolve It Into a gun forum... That will never happen simply because you don't have enough like minded members wanting to debate gun control.

Shudder.

SnoozeAgain;1415576 wrote: Shudder.
Shutter

SnoozeAgain;1415576 wrote: Shudder.Oops. Nazi

Fixed! Thanks

oscar;1415575 wrote: I like National Hunt horse racing Ahso... I live and breathe NH HR every day of my life... some races such as the King George, The Grand National and The Gold Cup are big Television ratings here and of Interest to those who only have a bet once a year...and why I post on the big races.... Some people have absolutely no Interest In horse racing at all so It would be a complete waste of time for all concerned If I posted on every days racing. What I'd be doing Is not giving a little Info here and there on the contenders of the big races, but trying to convince an entire forum and those with no Interest at all, to share my passion. It's a bit like my husband showing me pics of fish every day for decades... It's never going to make me want to go Fishing and the more he shows me, the more my eyes glaze over. If he wants to discuss In depth the ongoing Issue of diminishing fish stock In the River Wandle on a daily basis, then he can do so on his angling forum where like minded people are Interested... Like wise, I can go to my racing forum with like minded people but what you're trying to do Is preach to a general purpose forum and bamboozle those who come here for a variety of reasons to think the same as you.

What you're trying to do Is change the demographics of a forum and It's members and evolve It Into a gun forum... That will never happen simply because you don't have enough like minded members wanting to debate gun control.Oscar, it's pretty obvious you're feeling slighted. I've read your posts thoroughly more than once and I do appreciate any constructive input you've offered.

Here's what you should understand about why I hesitate responding to you:

You go which ever way the wind is blowing. One post appears thoughtful and a post or two later you're throwing cheap shots. I value consistency in people, whether or not there's agreement. I also value flexibility in people but not the kind I've mentioned in this post.

That's the best I've got for you.

Ahso!;1415592 wrote: Oscar, it's pretty obvious you're feeling slighted. I've read your posts thoroughly more than once and I do appreciate any constructive input you've offered.

Here's what you should understand about why I hesitate responding to you:

You go which ever way the wind is blowing. One post appears thoughtful and a post or two later you're throwing cheap shots. I value consistency in people, whether or not there's agreement. I also value flexibility in people but not the kind I've mentioned in this post.

That's the best I've got for you. On the contrary. I respond as and when further posts are posted.

SnoozeAgain;1415495 wrote: Looks like Ahso got his answer, even Bryn thinks he's a jerk. :sneaky:


And where, pray, did I say that?

Accountable;1415552 wrote: Perhaps if you put your myriad gun control threads in the gun control forum, instead of the general chit chat area, you might actually attract new people who might be looking for such a conversation. I (and many members) don't pay attention to the different areas when reading posts, but we're already here. A visitor looking for debate on gun control might look in our gun control forum, see how rarely it's used (and NOTHING on Sandy Hook), and move on.


A very good point.

As I never access threads via the forum they're in (apart from the reported posts) I hadn't noticed but I will move the gun control discussions to the gun control area for pedantries sake if nothing else.

Bryn Mawr;1415604 wrote: And where, pray, did I say that?


You didn't, hence the sneaky smiley at the end of the sentence.

Good day old chap. (Said in a high falutten (is that a word?) British accent with a slight Welsh twinge, to hopefully get noticed).

I actually didn't mind all the gun threads. Being a gun owner I was interested in all the different opinions each was getting in the different scenarios you were putting forward. I was trying to gauge just how much anti gun sentiment (and what type of guns) that people were feeling.

I reckon I was in the minority pilgrim. (Done with the accent.)

YZGI;1415696 wrote: Good day old chap. (Said in a high falutten (is that a word?) British accent with a slight Welsh twinge, to hopefully get noticed).

I actually didn't mind all the gun threads. Being a gun owner I was interested in all the different opinions each was getting in the different scenarios you were putting forward. I was trying to gauge just how much anti gun sentiment (and what type of guns) that people were feeling.

I reckon I was in the minority pilgrim. (Done with the accent.)


Brirish accent? Do you mean received pronunciation, home counties, London, Birmingham, Liverpool, Geordie, Yorkshire, Lancashire, black country, welsh, scots, irish, soujthern irish, northern irish, scottisg, Aberdonian, Glasgow Edinburgh. You need to be a bit more specific.

A well armed citizenry is feared by tyrants and the UN. All tyrants use "safety" as a justification to their expansion of control. History. We have much to learn from...if we weren't so blind.

halfway;1415841 wrote: A well armed citizenry is feared by tyrants and the UN. All tyrants use "safety" as a justification to their expansion of control. History. We have much to learn from...if we weren't so blind.WTF is this? Go troll somewhere else.

halfway;1415841 wrote: A well armed citizenry is feared by tyrants and the UN. All tyrants use "safety" as a justification to their expansion of control. History. We have much to learn from...if we weren't so blind.


This is a profound message and true in every regard.

Is the motive and methods of tyrants to be disputed? Is the motive of the UN on this subject up for debate?

Posting a solid opinion of truth is trolling? You are the fool that your previous posts eluded to, yet you have somehow pulled me into your less than intellectual conversations.

You do feel you are "unbiased", "open-minded", and "fair" in your treatment of others don't you? Of course you do.

Ignore my posts please....I will not stoop to your level of argumentative trolling.

gmc;1415836 wrote: Brirish accent? Do you mean received pronunciation, home counties, London, Birmingham, Liverpool, Geordie, Yorkshire, Lancashire, black country, welsh, scots, irish, soujthern irish, northern irish, scottisg, Aberdonian, Glasgow Edinburgh. You need to be a bit more specific.


Okay, I'll go with Australian then. We all over here think they're British anyways.:wah: