Satty... the new Cliffy?

Home  \  Off Topic  \  Satty... the new Cliffy?

Locking this (http://www.car-forums.com/talk/showthread.php?t=1379) thread is absolutely f*cking bullsh*t. There is no good reason to lock it except... Except nothing. That is a pure abuse of power.

posted by  vwhobo

It was pretty funny I dont understand whats the problem with bringing back an old thread. I suppose that maybe making a new one with the same content would make it all the better. Makes no sense.

posted by  newyorker

Easy answer Hobo...THAT THREAD IS ALMOST TWO ****ING YEARS OLD!!!!! Almost eveyone and their mom have seen that vid. I'm sorry to those who haven't seen it, but you know what? You can still search for it. I locked it, I didn't delete it.

posted by  Satty101

Well let's see Mr High and Mighty. If somebody doesn't know it exists, how are they supposed to search for it? Using that theory, we don't even need these forums, people can just go online and search for everything. The whole reason that thread was there to begin with was for people's enjoyment and now you come along and play thought police. That's like saying that if your parents have a video that's over two years old you're going to throw it in the trash because it's too old. I bet that would go over like a turd in a punch bowl. You need to lose the power trip little man.

posted by  vwhobo

You know what Hobo, if you have a problem with me, or how I do my "job" discuss it with me through PM, AIM, or e-mail. Seeing as how you would always tell other people to take a 2-way convo to private messaging or the like, why don't you go ahead and take your own advice.

posted by  Satty101

this is from the rules and regulations, what if hobo just wanted to show the forum again because it just now got brought up again on other sites. Another thing, I do believe it was an abuse of power because its not like it was just sitting there, people were making comments on it, which shows you even though its old you can still find away to talk about it. thats just my :2cents:

posted by  salimander13

Isn't it in the rules that old threads can be revived?...More specifically



I guess nobody wanted to make another thread, but it basically says old threads can be revived...and it serves a purpose, not like there was any post-whoring, people were watching it, and giving their opinions, as the thread was intended to do...

Everybody just needs to lighten up a little bit though :doh:

BTW How is Satty turning into Cliffy? I've never seen Cliffy lock/delete threads without a good reason behind it :ohcrap:

posted by  chris_knows

I challenge you to show me one instance where I said that. It's not my fault you're abusing your power, or maybe more correctly misusing it.

posted by  vwhobo

Oh please Hobo. You know you've said it. I don't have the time or the patience to go look up ****ing ancient history like you apperently do. I have a life. I work at a shop, have a girlfriend that I go on dates with quite often, hang out with friends, Go to school, and sit down and talk with my familly. And what the hell made you search for that vid anyways? That's not even that funny anymore. If everyone is going to complain when I do something why am I still a supermod? Why doesn't somebody just start a "Flame on Satty" thread if what I do is so unjustified and if I'm "abusing my powers". It's not even an important thread. You people take shit way too seriously. You guys get 10 people to say that I was wrong in this, and I'll unlock it. Till then...I will stand by my decision.

posted by  Satty101

does someone need to call the waaambulance?

posted by  jedimario

so you sound like a very happy person, then why are you so uptight about such a little incident, and i dont see in the rules where it says you cant revive threads...

posted by  Stem

It's not the point itself that you locked it Dumb@$$, it's the reason WHY you did it. Hopefully your access to the internet will be cut short, and you will disappear again as before because none missed your sorry ass.

posted by  Pythias

i suggested in the feedback suggestions about locking out alot of the old threads so they werent resurrected and everybody said no, blah blah blah mods are to lazy blah blah blah to much work blah blah blah...so im going to say your WRONG, no old threads should be locked out unless they are turning into advertising or flame wars........

posted by  adamc44

Where is doesn't actually state anything of the kind in the rules....I for one can see how annoying it can get to keep on seeing a revived thread! :thumbs:

BTW, hobo...because you used my name in another thread title (I'm sure there's been a few!)....I'll assume it's because you secretly want to be like me :thumbs:

posted by  Cliffy

I just wanted to say I have never seen that video and I found it absolutely hilarious. In fact I watched it over and over just for giggles. No harm, no foul? It was a funny video.

posted by  97Talonchik

(from the looks of it)
1)hobo
2)me
3)chris knows
4)talonchik
5)adam
6)pythias
7)stem
8)maybe newyorker
9)maybe jedimario

so 1-3 more?

posted by  salimander13

It's pretty much lost its point by now...I'd like to see it opened again, but not many people left to comment on it...

BTW Why is everyone being so hard on Satty? Big deal, he locked a thread...Jeez, acting like he bombed China :laughing:

posted by  chris_knows

Yes someone does.

posted by  jedimario

It's just hobo getting on his high horse again because CF isn't run the way he wants it run....if ya ask me, he needs to grow up....or get out more....or both. Lets face it, if he had his way, CF would be full of old, revived threads and flaming.... :2cents:

posted by  Cliffy

Thank god he is the admin..none of us (well, I should say "you" seeing as how I haven't been here for a while) "regular" members wouldn't be here. And if we were, we'd be flamed for farting 200 miles away from them.... :screwy:

posted by  Satty101

Seems like we have ourselves a problem. Rules say not to revive old threads, but also say to search for old threads before making new threads about something. Therefore you could never post.

posted by  PontiacFan27

Ding!!!!

And in this case, Hobo's right, thogh he WAS going around reviving old threads on purpose...

But still, the sentiment is right.

posted by  ChrisV

Is there a way to revive old threads by accident? And I still don't understand what's wrong with reviving old threads if they still have useful information or have some entertainment value.

That's okay, we can fix that.

posted by  vwhobo

I think what he meant was you did it on the purposeful intent on it getting "noticed" as you did it repeatedly. And actually some people do revive old threads accidentally, mostly noobs who dont pay attention to the dates.

posted by  thunderbird1100

Well technically, not all the threads you revived had useful content nor were they all entertaining. There was one or more in the R&M section that had no use, you just said like one word.

I don't really see why it's a bad thing this thread is closed because you can still watch the video, you just can't post so why complain. I'm not gonna choose sides (Hobo vs. The Mods) cause that would just be pointless, if people don't like how it's done then try to communicate and express yourself in a proper way and maybe work something out rationally.

Like c'mon guys (and girls), it's not a big deal, it's just a video (which can also be found on ebaums).

posted by  car_crazy89

That's very astute of you. Of course you revive a thread to get it noticed. It's the same reason somebody bumps a help or classified thread or even starts a thread to begin with. If people didn't want SOMETHING to get noticed, they wouldn't post it so there would be no need for forums in the first place. After all, you posted this response and quoted my last post for the purpose of... wait for it... to get it noticed, at least by me. It worked, the system isn't broken.

Should we lock every thread as soon as it's started because somebody wants it noticed? Doesn't make sense to me either.

posted by  vwhobo

Two words for you. Thought police. Just because you don't find something useful or entertaining, does that mean that nobody might? Just because you don't see the value in something, does that mean somebody else can't. The Off Topic part of this forum is filled with threads pertaining to video games and right now one about football. Those threads have zero interest to me and are complete waste of space in my opinion. BUT, and this is a crucial but. You and others find them enjoyable, interesting and maybe even useful. Because they're of no value to me, should I call to have them locked or deleted. Absolutely not.

How can you have a free exchange of thoughts, ideas, knowledge just plain fun when censorship of the kind you find acceptable is in place. The answer is you can't

posted by  vwhobo

So althought this post http://www.car-forums.com/talk/showthread.php?t=1185 has no point to me, it valueable to other long term members? The only thing you said was "okay". Hobo, I'm not against you or against having fun as I am a fan of both and I respect you, but I also respect most of the Mods decisions (as you were still gone when this place almost went to hell... again, until 'Super Mods' were created). They have done more then you probably think they have lately.

posted by  car_crazy89

Did your read my entire post before you responded? Did you notice the word entertaining? Another word I forgot but was working towards is participation. Notice you also participated in that thread after the revival, and based on the smiley it looked like you were enjoying yourself.

It's a real simple process and it doesn't require anybody to do your thinking for you. If you don't want to be part of a thread, new or old, do just like I do with the aforementioned video game threads... Don't join in. It's as easy as doing nothing.

posted by  vwhobo

sure there is... like when newbs answer a 2-year-old question from someone because they didn't read the post date...

posted by  dodger65

Right you are. Should those be locked by a half witted moderator too? I mean is it okay to revive one by accident and not on purpose?

posted by  vwhobo

nope, only full-witted mods should lock 'em :laughing: :laughing: j/k

i really don't see the point of any of them being locked, really... maybe some of the ones that have just completely devolved into a flame fest and serve no purpose should be locked (at least temporarily) but as must as i hate seeing the miata, big ULGY post (i hate that it's misspelled, too) pop up, at least someones not starting a new, useless thread :2cents:

posted by  dodger65

So it sounds to me like there's 10 who don't think it should be locked. Time for the moderator integrity test.

posted by  vwhobo

damn, i just walked right into that one...

posted by  dodger65

so after reading this thread for however long its been debated over, I'm siding with Hobo on this one. the thread didn't break any rules...would you much rather have a new thread made in regards to it, only to clutter up bandwidth? I'm not sure why this issue blew up like it did...looks like Satty's one of those who doesn't like to second guess themselves, which I respect and do, as well. but come on, this is ridiculous. :banghead:

posted by  SuperJew

Here's 12.

posted by  67Coronet383

holy shit! you and hobo agree on something!?!?!?! :clap: :clap: :clap:

posted by  dodger65

That's not what I was getting at, but sure. :thumbs:

posted by  thunderbird1100

Actually, contrary to popular belief, we agree on more than we disagree on.

posted by  vwhobo

hmmm, maybe i'm not paying close enough attention, b/c it seems that you guys disagree a lot.... oh, well...

posted by  dodger65

BTW, the thread in question is a STICKY, which means it didn't just "pop up, " It's been at the top of that forum pretty much since it was first posted. Hobo didn't drag that one back to the top...

posted by  ChrisV

Yes, as you've noted when responding to people, "did you even see the date on the post you're responding to? He hasn't been here in two years. I don't think he's going to reply, twinkie."

Responding to a two or three year old post that you didn't see the date on is different than responding to one that you DID see the date on, and are trying to prove a point by doing so. ;)

posted by  ChrisV

I don't know, but there is a point as I see it and the point is there is nothing wrong with "reviving" threads, accident or otherwise.

posted by  67Coronet383

Geez, I can't believe that this whole thing would've been taken so seriously. It's just a damn thread...nearly 2 years old at that...But since I'm a man of my word, and you did manage to get more than 10 people to side with Hobo, it's unlocked. Quick, lets watch nobody post in it except those people who just like to be smartasses and prove me wrong.

posted by  Satty101

Intentionally doing it to continue a conversation on purpose, or add content instead of starting a new thread seemes pretty much on the up and up. Responsing to a 3 year old question as if the original poster is here to get the answer can be construed an accident. Running around and deliberately bumping 2-3 year old threads just to prove a point or get back at someone seems childish at best.

Regardless, I was agreeing with VWhobo on this one.

posted by  ChrisV

There we go, that's exactly it. Responding to a 2-3 year old thread for the hell of it can be called post-whoring at best, which is wrong in itself, so we don't even have to talk about is it wrong or not to revive a thread. But, I agree.

Sometimes proving points have to be done though.

posted by  67Coronet383

no, i meant pop up as far as in my email notifications... i'm generally not interested in what's said in that thread.... so i suppose i could unsubscribe to it (man, am i ever a f*cking genius :banghead: ) but i'll still see "ULGY" up at the top there, where it is a sticky... supermods--i beseech you to fix the ugly "ulgy" :ticking:

posted by  dodger65

Ya know...I've never noticed that untill you mentioned it lol.....oh well nevremnind tehn....siht hppaens :ohcrap:

Oh...it's fixeed now btw :thumbs:

posted by  Cliffy

That's better...I only noticed it yesterday, but it was quite annoying, thanks :thumbs:

posted by  chris_knows

yay! thanks, cliffy! you're my hero... :clap: :clap: :laughing:

posted by  dodger65

Your Message