I have a thread I had started for Prisoner of Azkaban HERE. It is similar to my example above and is not locked...but that might be because it is located about 8 pages away from the first page, so it might have just been ignored by itchy trigger fingers. Regardless, I think the mods are (hopefully) putting their heads together to work this out. I think everyone (including mods) needs to be on the same page as to what is allowed and what is not allowed. I'll continue to be patient as 'Pilot' requested.

It will be resolved soon, I promise. Your thread (8 pages away) xpfshost wasn't closed because it wasn't needed to go back 8 pages to close old threads. New ones were being closed though.

I briefly looked at the first four pages of the Bargains forum. Maybe I missed something, but all the locked threads I saw were either reposts or threads asking for information.

Again, from what I understand, the threads that Geoff is trying to do away with are best price request threads that lack information, not threads in which people post the best prices they find for things. The example thread above is one in which someone posted the best price they found, not one that was asking for a best price without providing information.

So....would you have closed my thread if it was on Page 1, even though I started the thread with the cheapest price I could find for the title? Just curious.

when the "new" rule went into effect..no older threads were going to be closed, but someone started to bump up old threads with messages saying "this should be closed" so all of them on the first page (and a half?) were closed ..anything not on the first page or so was just left open..

OK. I understand that. But my question still stands...would my thread have been closed if it was on the first page??

Here is the link to the thread again:

http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...hreadid=391773

Based on what Static Cling has said, it should be 'legal' because I started the thread with the best price I could find. Please let me know. Thanks.

I would have probably closed it.

Thanks for the reply, pilot. This is why I had mentioned the need for the mods to be on the same page. My Harry Potter thread DID contain relevant information in the initial post. Instead of just begging for prices without doing any legwork, I did some research ahead of time and posted the best deal I could find...which would've made it an acceptable post based on Static Cling's interpretation of Geoff's new ban on Best Price threads. I'm sure this will be worked out soon as you had mentioned in a previous post. I'm still patient ;)

I've not been patient, and oddly enough that hasn't changed much.

=)

See. This is the thing. I don't really care if the 'Best Price' thread starts with info, as it will end up containing info on the 'Best Price'.

The proposal that one should only post if one has done the research is invalid, as there is always more research and newer information. Just let the threads exist. If you post a 'Best Price' thread the 'Best Price' will come.

If one is only allowed to post a 'specific deal' that will only lead to the issue of clutter. If the issue is clutter, then if a forum member sees a 'Best Price' thread that doesn't contain the 'Best Price' generally it has been proven over time that they will post the info to that thread.

I don't care if the original poster is 'lazy', 'begging' or 'uninformed'. The 'Best Price' threads have value in that they are a lightningrod for members to post their research and experience. History has proven this and history will repeat itself (if it is given a chance by the owner and moderators of this forum).

I see your point and absolutely agree with you. However, it appears that the owner of the boards doesn't like people who 'mooch' deals. As you said, the Best Price threads are like 'deal magnets' since people will keep posting better deals in that one thread. Even if the original post doesn't contain any useful info, the subsequent threads/pages typically contain a WEALTH of info. It doesn't matter who started the thread or how...it ends up a good thing in the end. I can certainly see closing multiple threads devoted to the same title. THAT would be clutter. Of course, one man's clutter is another man's treasure..... :brickwl:

so how does one decide what a page is?

i see people say something like "wow this is up to 3 pages already."
but for me it's still the first page.
i'm set at 40 posts per page.

anyway i would be for the best price threads for specific titles returning.
i stopped by today hoping to find something showing the best price anyone foound for seinfeld box set.

i saw one thread but it was bestbuy specific.

I think most people go with the forum default for 'number of threads per page'. Once that page fills up with threads, another page is created (page 2). And so on.

Well, having just found out about this little policy - this is a dumb f'ing idea. The usefulness of the bargain forum has now dropped through the floor. Oh, yeah - such a huge flood of threads - horrible. Oh no - I'd much rather read about people reporting in about how their Kraft 3 dollar Hulk DVD didn’t show up yet, MONTHS after the deal was dead. *That's* the type of bargain we need to be supporting!

My "Buck Rogers at Costco" thread that was locked was NOT a 'hey - who's got the best price', it was a request from ONE store (with the "can anyone beat them" tacked on at the end as an afterthought. I'm pretty sure that Costco will be the cheapest, so that's all I was really concerned with). And the "oh, why don't you just call them" isnt an option either - you ever try and call them on the phone? I'd have better luck getting through to the president of the UN on the phone than I would getting a live person at Costco.

Oh - and I love how we can't mine for prices about a disc from other stores, but the post outlining the banning just happens to 'suggest' other affiliates. Nice to see the promotion synergy with price grabber and/or Deep Discount in full swing here.

Methinks theres something not right in denmark. . . .

Yet another example of a seasoned DVDTalker/Bargain Hunter who's in disagreement with the 'new rule' and fears the worst.

When this policy hit that was my first thought as well, and with further reflection and some time to think about it I find that the thought remains.

I know that this forum is not a democracy, but it is successful based on the policies and the traffic (and resultant ad revenue) those policies generate. I do strongly believe that this change will negatively effect not only my enjoyment of, and visits to this site, but the site will suffer as the many who think similarly about this issue are resultantly negatively effected.

But that's just me.

...oh, and El-Kabong, whotony, xpfshost, zak52, The Cow, CRM114, fumanstan, chemosh6969, Rogue588 (I could go on...)

With hindsight I'm sorry I didn't put a poll in this thread, so I created a new thread with a poll.

It's closed.

due to popular demand. this rule has been retracted..let the best price threads continue..