The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / Feedback  % width posts: 210

Updated rules


OP Harry
15 Apr 2017 #61
What is the rationale behind this?

It's very simple: content on a page which is repeated is bad for Google rankings.

Seems fair.

It is fair. But it's also hilarious, given that people are given a warning for having too many quotes but aren't for posting racist abuse.
delphiandomine 88 | 18,454
15 Apr 2017 #62
Well, as you say, racist abuse doesn't harm the visibility of the site.

Quite who wants to read a certain poster's fantasies is another question, though.
Atch 17 | 4,005
15 Apr 2017 #63
Paulina is incredibly long winded. She's worse than I am and that's saying something. As Billy Bunter would say, she's like a sheep's head, all jaw. So it's a relief to think that the three quotes rule will help to curb her longest monologues.

First prize for being succint and to the point goes to Rozalinda. I bow before thee Queen of the Forum :))

The three quotes thing though is a bit too controlling. However Minnie has spoken, he needs to get his power needs met somehow God love him, so that's that. Happy Easter to all! Yes, even to Minnie and the Mods. May they live long and prosper :)
johnny reb 32 | 6,835
15 Apr 2017 #64
She's worse than I am

At least she stays on Polish topics, doesn't reprimand us boys every day like she is our school mum, and some of your posts have been just as much of a sheep's head as hers.

Love ya dearly Ms. Atch but you of all people shouldn't be judging others for windy posts.
Especially after you have had a breakfast of prunes and oatmeal.
Rozalinda is my favorite too.
Both intelligent and humorous.
rozumiemnic 8 | 3,846
15 Apr 2017 #65
why thank you both!
<twirls> <bows>
Admin 32 | 1,530 Administrator
15 Apr 2017 #67
What is the rationale behind this?

My response1.

Are you saying that long posts, which by their very nature will probably contain more than your allowed number of quotes, are to be discouraged?

My response2.

Would Paulina's post have been acceptable if she had divided it into 4 separate posts instead?

My response3.

Seems to me as if you are trying to limit discussion.

My response4.

are you saying that warnings will be given or the post removed to the bin for posts containing 4 quotes and above?

My response5.

Please clarify.

My response6.

Much quoting / much ado about nothing. The majority of people DO NOT NEED to have each and every sentence or question quoted- they can relate to the questions in a single thought. Just like in a conversation - when you make your point, you don't quote the other person's exact sentence to make your own point. Besides, PF is not a courtroom.

---

A better version:

@Chemikiem - The rationale is that most readers are discouraged by excessive quotes (they skip/don't read them). Second, it's a waste to duplicate the EXACT message (ie. a quote) that was posted right above because it forces mobile users to scroll to read a NEW message. Finally, now you can scroll with the POST FORM and you can see the exact post when you reply to it (and don't have to remind yourself what you're trying to refer too).
OP Harry
16 Apr 2017 #68
The rationale is that most readers are discouraged by excessive quotes

Far more readers are discouraged by the vile racism that has unfortunately become the main thing that PF is known for. Why do you warn people have more than four quotes in their posts but not for posting racist abuse?
Bieganski 17 | 896
16 Apr 2017 #69
racist abuse

To comment myself as a user of PF I would say that over quoting is something measurable while defining a "racist" is highly subjective particularly since the likes of you routinely abuse the term itself by applying it to everyone that you personally disagree with regardless of the topic at hand.

No one needs you to be bullying others into silence with false charges of racism simply because they don't conform to your highly distorted leftist view of the world.
delphiandomine 88 | 18,454
16 Apr 2017 #70
Far more readers are discouraged by the vile racism that has unfortunately become the main thing that PF is known for.

Yes, I suspect that a ban on racism here would improve things considerably and encourage more Polish posters as well.
jon357 70 | 19,567
16 Apr 2017 #71
the vile racism that has unfortunately become the main thing that PF is known fo

I know a few people who have interesting things to say about Poland, however don't post here for that reason.
johnny reb 32 | 6,835
16 Apr 2017 #72
they don't conform to your highly distorted leftist view of the world.

Exactly and then they start stalking with posts expecting us to defend ourselves against their provoking lies.
Minnie stated that this is not a courtroom but you would never know it when members don't conform to the Bullies.
That is what needs to be addressed first.
Screw racism as racism is just another convenient word like homophobe that the Left uses as a crutch to brow beat the Right with.
delphiandomine 88 | 18,454
16 Apr 2017 #73
I know a few people who have interesting things to say about Poland, however don't post here for that reason.

More than just a few. If you look at how Facebook groups are moderated in Poland, most of them ban racism. They have much more traffic than here as a result - I suspect putting a stop to racist nonsense here would also yield considerable increases in visitors. I understand the Admin's point of view though, so it might be better to simply put all racist stuff into off-topic.
johnny reb 32 | 6,835
16 Apr 2017 #74
"racist" is highly subjective particularly since the likes of you routinely abuse the term itself by applying it to everyone that you personally disagree with

Typical Left attack words to abuse with like, "racist", homophobe", "bigot", etc.
Have heard then so much being used out of context here that they have become meaningless.
I have a couple of buddies that refuse to post here (Adrian being one of them) because of the gays posting about their sex lives.

Maybe we should hide all the gay stuff on the back page too.
delphiandomine 88 | 18,454
16 Apr 2017 #75
I have a couple of buddies that refuse to post here (Adrian being one of them) because of the gays posting about their sex lives.

Adrian is banned, he doesn't "refuse to post here".
johnny reb 32 | 6,835
16 Apr 2017 #76
He is not here by choice is what he told me.
That's my source.
Who is your source that told you different ?
jon357 70 | 19,567
16 Apr 2017 #77
Adrian

Adrian the Holocaust denier? I wonder how he's bearing up after his recent arrest?
delphiandomine 88 | 18,454
16 Apr 2017 #78
I dare say PF is the last thing on his mind after the last incident he was involved in, to be honest.

He already made it clear that he has no intention of ever posting here again, and he's still banned anyway.
johnny reb 32 | 6,835
16 Apr 2017 #79
He never denied the Holocaust you liar.
He just said no way were there 6 million of them killed.
See, that is half the problem here......'half lies' and we all know a little lie goes a long ways.

the last incident he was involved in

Another half lie, it was nothing serious at all.
You two have just proved my point.
And Adrain is not here by his choice as you have no source to prove otherwise.
delphiandomine 88 | 18,454
16 Apr 2017 #80
He never denied the Holocaust you liar.

Doesn't really matter what he did and didn't do, he's still banned for his threats towards the Admin.

Not sure why you're claiming that he isn't posting here through choice - it seems to me that he has no choice in the matter.
johnny reb 32 | 6,835
16 Apr 2017 #81
it seems to me

Hint: Nobody really cares 'what seems to you' as it is JUST your opinion.
delphiandomine 88 | 18,454
16 Apr 2017 #82
as it is JUST your opinion.

Hint: Adrian is banned, therefore he can't come back even if he wanted to. No opinion there, just plain old facts.
johnny reb 32 | 6,835
16 Apr 2017 #83
he can't come back

Why, you did after you posted his personal identification which is a much much worse rule violation then what Adrian did.
Wasn't that your third violation for doing that.
Casting the first stone are we.
delphiandomine 88 | 18,454
16 Apr 2017 #84
Why, you did after you posted his personal identification which is a much much worse rule violation then what Adrian did.

Don't ask me, ask the Admin why he's banned. Perhaps he didn't take too kindly to being threatened by Adrian, perhaps he didn't want holocaust denial crap on here, or perhaps he simply thinks that Adrian isn't worth having on here.
johnny reb 32 | 6,835
16 Apr 2017 #85
Don't ask me

Well you seemed to be the authority on why until I held your lying feet to the fire to back up your opinion with a source.

Now let's talk about how many times you have been banned and what they were for.
Separate posts for each one so we don't get confused with your half lies and pointless merry go rounds.
Bieganski 17 | 896
16 Apr 2017 #86
Now let's talk about how many times you have been banned and what they were for.

He'll never take responsibility for his conduct. After one very long long suspension he came back pleading ignorance as to why he was even suspended to begin with.
johnny reb 32 | 6,835
16 Apr 2017 #87
Consider the source Bieganski, he is mentally ill.
He always doubles down when he is desperate.
He gets banned over and over and over and it still doesn't sink in.
If nothing changes, nothing changes.
Bieganski 17 | 896
16 Apr 2017 #88
Consider the source Bieganski, he is mentally ill.

Yes, there was a time people like him were put away in institutions for their own good and the good of wider society. They are so lost in their own world they don't care how badly they affect others. Some like the member in question though do know and take a perverse delight in the toll they take on others.

People like him need boundaries and structure for everyone's benefit.

Since this thread is about updating rules then perhaps apart from deletion of inflammatory posts or long suspensions user privileges for those who only come to troll and incite can also be restricted to say 3 or 5 posts within a 24 hour period and even limited to so many characters for each of these posts.

That way they can still participate in the forum but hopefully become more judicious about what they say and keep it strictly relevant to the topic at hand.
delphiandomine 88 | 18,454
17 Apr 2017 #89
how badly they affect others.

Interesting admission there. What's it like being "badly affected" by a forum? Have you considered a hobby, such as a job?
Chemikiem
17 Apr 2017 #90
Just like in a conversation - when you make your point, you don't quote the other person's exact sentence to make your own point.

Of course not, but you tried this once before, to have posts flow as if in a conversation, and it didn't work because the 'conversation' as such requires all participants in it to be online at the same time which is not possible. Conversation will be disrupted when posters reply the following day or many posts later.

I agree that there is no need to over quote but restricting to 3 quotes per post or said posts will be binned and warnings given seems ridiculous. So this means that I can write a couple of well thought out on topic posts containing 4 quotes, get a warning and have them binned, but I can talk to my hearts content about w.hores, faggots, s1uts, n1ggers, **** etc and if having a bad day, tell a couple of people in random to STFU, and not incur a warning. I would like to know why you are not addressing the problems here that many posters are complaining about. I don't post here as often as I used to for this very reason, PF has become more like The Jeremy Kyle Show, but with no sign of Jeremy to address the problems.

Personally, I would also be far less inclined to read lengthy posts with just a single quote at the start, but that's just me.

still banned

Yep:- ?action=userinfo&user=54242

Home / Feedback / Updated rules
Discussion is closed.

Please login or sign-up on the main page to post in this category!