Metropol

In that instance you can speak for me.

Gavin Scott wrote:In that instance you can speak for me.

In which case I shall re-read it in the voice of Picard.

Well all I can say is that maybe you could put people when they first started on a mod queue until they come trusted members

Lightoftruth wrote:Well all I can say is that maybe you could put people when they first started on a mod queue until they come trusted members

Why are you winking? Is that a reference to our policy? That is purely to stop spambots and only affects the very first post.

Pete wrote:

Lightoftruth wrote:Well all I can say is that maybe you could put people when they first started on a mod queue until they come trusted members

Why are you winking? Is that a reference to our policy? That is purely to stop spambots and only affects the very first post.

I thought you have emotions for a reason. Anywhere I'm off to congrats this place for being here 7 years

I have to say (just to add my less than interesting thoughts on this, and generally reapet what everyone else has already said), I have also recently become increasingly frustrated (there's always usually some degree of it, but I can normally withstand it) with the way the form is at present, especially with the aforementioned Danslink and ginofish (no relation) et al. I'm not exactly a prolific poster myself, usally as by the time i get reound to posting, what I want to say has usually been said about 50 times already, but I am a big visitor and reader. And although there are irritations with some posters and threads, the occasional visit to Doigital Spy reminds me how bad it could be.

If anything though, all this shit that these types pump out often puts me off posting more, as it's more likely that my post will get lost in the shot they post (and to an extent the backlash once it starts tipping people over the edge). Unfotunately I can't offer any advice on how to sort it out.

The postings today of "why can you do <one thing> when I'm not allowed to do <other thing>" is really getting on my tits.

Lightoftruth wrote:

Pete wrote:

Lightoftruth wrote:Well all I can say is that maybe you could put people when they first started on a mod queue until they come trusted members

Why are you winking? Is that a reference to our policy? That is purely to stop spambots and only affects the very first post.

I thought you have emotions for a reason. Anywhere I'm off to congrats this place for being here 7 years

Like the "Add Reply" and "New Topic" buttons, they're available for when they're needed, and not there to use just because you've worked out how your mouse works.

Never had Charlie Wells down as a Wikipedia snob.

Of all the things to pull someone up on.

We've got a couple of the same threads on TVF at the moment. Someone, who was probably ginofish, but I can't be bothered to verify it, has made a thread on TV News in Australia, when I made one not long ago. I WANT MY CROWN BACK.

However, I am getting a knack for figuring what threads are worth reading. It all depends whether the title is in lower case, without apostrophe's and the like and also whether it contains disregard for bad grammar.

Leading on from the stickers mentioned above, I'm beginning to think we need a public information poster on what to do when someone like ginofish posts.

1) Load the shotgun...

Just RTP any and every post made by Lightoftruth or ginofish. Use the reason "Idiocy. Pure and simple."

By the fact there was no comment, I get the idea that my grammar, punctuation and the like passed your scrutiny?

I also note that one or two threads that should really be in Media Websites on TVF are here. Both are from TVIdents, who gave you a World Cup discussion chatroom, which had a clock as the most interesting feature.