Posting Problems
 

I'm sorry to bring this to the public light since it is not my style, but it is the only way I thought of resolving an problem I have with some mod/administrator who seems to have issues with me posting new threads in the DVD Talk section. My intention here is not to get banned or supended, just to settle some difference of opinion.

I'm a frequent contributor to the DVD Bargains and DVD Talk areas of the forum and have been a member since 2003 . On the DVD Talk section in particular, I post news from the different dvd sites such as dvdactive, dvdtimes, davisdvd, thedigitalbits and so on. My purpose of doing that is to inform fellow DVD Talk members about upcoming dvds and to hear their opinions about the releases and the films itself. I really don't care about post counts, titles, padding the account, etc., I just want to see and propel a civil discussion about the topics I post.

Everything was fine until I recieved an email last Thursday from an administrator saying:

I replied:

Then yesterday, I recieved this:


This doesn't make sense. I can't post new threads because there are old threads that I started are having active discussionss on the first page of the DVD Talk forum? So my old threads are good enough that they produce active discussions but then I'm not able to post new more threads because they clog the forum?

I do not post spam or list threads or wish threads or anything related to that; I just post news on the DVD Talk section of the forum. Only one member was critical of my posting and he was banned for being obnoxious several months ago. And the funny thing is that in the rules and guidelines of the forum there is no info on how many threads started by a member can be on the first page or how many threads a member can start per day.

As I said before, I don't want to get banned or suspended, but I don't feel right about being discouraged to post new threads. The last sentence of the email I recieved yesterday felt like a threat instead of a warning.

I'm bringing this situation to the feedback forum for 2 reasons:
1. See what other mods and administrators think about this.
2. See if other members are annoyed, angry, or mad at me for posting new threads. I want to see if any members have issues with me posting "too many" threads.

Let me get this right. You were to not to post threads, because the infomation you provided in other threads were still active? Even though these threads were on new topics and provided new information?

I thought that rule was only for the political forum

It's generally the rule for all forums and other members seem to have little trouble complying with it. Whether the threads are new are old doesn't change the fact that they begin to dominate the first page of the forum they're in and drive other people's equally interesting threads into oblivion.

This particular situation was overlooked for a while as it usually is when someone occasionally exceeds it but when it became evident that dx23's saturation of the DVD Talk Forum started getting out of control with 13 threads on the front page of a forum he was emailed about it. At first it seemed he understood but I guess not.

There is currently a single thread called "DVD Talk New-To-DVD Theatrical Release Calendar" and another single thread called "UPCOMING RE-RELEASES LIST (rumored and confirmed)" in that forum. If it is important to announce all these new releases there's no reason why a single thread can't be created for them too.

That seems a little too micromanaging to me, but if that's really the rule for the whole forum, there really should be something about it in the posting guidelines (which I'm assuming the original poster is correct in saying there isn't anything there about this).

UPCOMING RE-RELEASES LIST (rumored and confirmed) and
DVD Talk New-To-DVD Theatrical Release Calendar are lists of DVD and I can find that on Amazon.com or any other online retailer list. Those threds don't have any discussion and doesn't give any other type of info except for the release date. My threads carry information about the release date, specs, cover art and helps create a good discusion about the film and DVD. It helps other members decide whether to purchase the DVD or not like the recent Wicker Man re-release thread. It also helps in the integration of new DVD Talk members who are shy to start a thread but feel confident enough to reply to an already existing one. And it doesn't make any sense that if there are 10 threads that I created weeks or months ago and they are having active discussions, then I can't create any others because it "overshadows" other threads.

You can certainly list the DVDs to be released and where you saw it in one thread and let other people start threads discussing them if the feel it is necessary. You are also monopolizing any discussion about all those DVDs in your threads because you happened to mention them first. The effect of this will be that after a while half the threads in that forum will be ones you started because you got the name of the DVD in your title first.

You're pretty much only listing a DVD's release date and sending people to other sites to get their info on a DVD in your threads anyway.
You're not providing any discussion so nobody's missing anything if you put all your announcements in one thread.

You used the single thread concept in your Janurary 2007 Criterions thread and it received the appropriate attention.

If you don't find the single thread acceptable you merely need to start fewer threads when existing ones of yours are already on the first page.

You keep mentioning "first page", but keep in mind that not everyone has their settings to show the default number of posts per page. I have mine set to 40. So my first page looks different than everyone else's. What's the default, 20 per page? It's not clear where that 20th post is if you have 40 on a page, since the thread's aren't numbered. And then, do the stickies count as the first 20, or not?

I send them to the other sites, so they take credit for news that I'm posting from their sites. As for the Criterions, they are usually bundled together, since they are few releases from the same company each month and the discussion most of the times doesn't get tangled up. Imagine if I put a single thread of all the Warner titles to be released in January? People will get lost in the discussion and the thread would be at least 10 pages long. That is the reason why I post individual threads for new releases of the big companies (Warner, Universal, Buena Vista/Disney, Lionsgate, etc.). Explain to me how am I monopolizing a discussion by posting the news first? I just post the news and then the members discuss. How is that monopolizing?

The only thing I can think of is that you got annoyed with me posting frequently and decided to use your power as administrator in a negative way towards me. As i mentioned before, no other member has complained about my posting and the rules and guidelines of the forum do not say anything about the frequent posting. As i said before, i don't care about titles under the username, post counts, etc. I just care about having a discussion on the DVDs I'm interested. I thought that was the purpose of the forum.

Why does it matter who made the thread? If dx23 was to send me the information I started a thread about it instead of him, would that change things?

I think this rule makes a lot more sense with discussion-driven subforums. Does it really matter who posts a DVD release date or if the same person starts 10 weekly TV shows threads?

Well, you're thinking wrong. I don't know you from Adam and your proliferation of threads just became evident as it kept growing. I asked other mods if there was anything different about the DVD Talk Forum that would allow that and the response was that we should maintain consistency between the forums.

If you read the threads, you would have noticed that the coupons posted on the DVD Bargains forum are only for DVDs and the ones posted in the hot deal forum are for books, CDs, refreshments and general coupons. They are not duplicated. You can see with the Borders Coupon threads that I put my posts in their respective places.

To make sure I was correct about them I did just after posting that and that's why I removed my comment about those threads while you were writing your response. But the idea is the same. While they appeard to be the same threads I didn't even bother looking into them for merging because I didn't want you to think I was picking on you. But you evidently do anyway.

This rule as existed for a long time as far as I recall. The idea behind was to spur contributions from many posters, not just one or two.

If one thread starter as X-amount (no pun intended, X) of posts on the front page, then it has a tendency to look like one or two posters are driving the discussion.

The problem comes from when one or two posters just start regurgitating info from other sites and it appears that you're posting just to start a thread. Similar first-to-start-a-thread duels occur every so often in the TV sub-forum.

In the OP’s case here, I don't see any discussion you're contributing on these threads, just a dumping of information. Don't take that personally, but give other folks a chance to start discussions on titles, or as X suggested, ask the DVD Talk sub-forum mods to add a new to DVD thread that you could maintain if you're really that interested in each and every title that gets listed at DVDActive, Davis DVD, TV Shows on DVD, etc..

As i said before, I don't care at all for first to start thread duels, post count, titles, etc. I just care about seeing opinions, responses and discussions on the DVDs I and other members post threads about. I love films, and DVDs have become a great tool to watch them. I thought that DVD Talk and its forum was the place to join and talk about all the new releases and announcements about upcoming DVDs. Those announcements are usually made in other sites, and the give us the specs, cover art and release date. I always thought that those were the most useful items to start a discussion. I have seen so many times how many interesting DVD releases fall under the radar here at DVDTalk because nobody post about them. I don't think that any of my threads have overshadowed any other members threads. In fact, i have seen more order and more facts and more organized participation from other members in the forum. I have seen less duplicate threads, less speculations and less threadcaps in the DVD Talk and Bargains section of the forum. I'm all for other members participation, since that is what make a forum a succesful, interesting and diversifying. But the unofficial, unspoken rule is completely discouraging. When I had 8 threads in the first page, only 3 of them were posted on Oct 30th, the rest were older threads that have active discussion and participation. And like i said before, nobody had complained.

If I may hop into this and offer a possible alternative:

The thread I began years ago, "The DVDTalk New-To-DVD Theatrical Release Calendar", was always meant to be a discussion thread. Those members who know me and who follow the thread closely have known that my resources include a number of sites, but most of the date information comes directly from studio and industry insiders. Most sites must wait until an official announcement is made. This thread has never been bound by this rule.

I would like to suggest that dx23 use this thread to post whatever links he chooses to the specific information regarding the titles contained within. This would save lots of space and could serve as a central location for discussion.

While I do not include information about catalog or TV releases, perhaps a single sticky monthly thread to hold this information could be established (similar to the wonderful threads Cameron maintained).

That is a good idea and it can be done. Still, I have percieved by looking at the tendencies of the threads in the DVD Talk forum that members still like to discuss DVD releases separately.

I suggest that big releases and known films get their individual threads. Smaller indie films, foreign, Criterions, Art house collections (Kino, the upcoming Eclipse label, Brentwood, even Anchor Bay) and TV Shows can get bundled. For example, instead of having 8-9 threads of the Simpsons seasons, we can have only one thread were we announce and discuss all of the seasons releases.

Still, i think the forum was running without any problems before all of this happened. There were ongoing discussions, everybody was participating, and they knew when these DVDs were coming and what edition was the best. The only 2 criticism I saw was that the search engine wasn't working that great and that the forum was a little slow and that was it.

I believe that we should go with the saying " If it ain't broken, don't try to fix it". I believe X was overeacting a little because he just happened to see many threads started by the same poster (me) and didn't looked at the dates of when they were posted. I even think that when he gave me the first warning, there was even a Monty Python thread that I started almost 2 years ago.

Dissapearing Threads
 

Are threads being deleted in the DVD Talk area? I ask this because I can think of 2 threads up the top of my mind that dissapeared/were deleted this past week; one was about the upcoming Jaime Fox Collection and the other one about the upcoming Batman: Gotham Knight.

Edit: The thread about the Great Debaters was also deleted.

You mean threads that disappeared when you had at least 8 on the first page of the main forum? Haven't we been through this before?

Edit: Yes, we have. http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=482386

Oh, I see that you are micro-managing again. You only see how many threads are instead of seeing when they were started. And to you, it doesn't matter that the threads have a discussion or not, just that "I have too many".

Right now there are 4 threads that were started by me:

Official Wrestling DVD Discussion Thread - Volume 4

Started on 1/2/08 and it has 770 posts and 44,415 views

Indiana Jones Trilogy Special Edition ----> 5/13/08

Started on 2/18/08 and it has 119 posts and 10,074 views

Criterion Newsletter - February 2008 Edition

Started on 2/29/08 and it has 13 posts and 781 views

Xanadu (Re-release with CD Soundtrack)---> 6/24/08

Started 3/1/08 and it has 35 posts and 767 views




Really, it is completely stupid what you are doing. It isn't like I'm spamming the forum or creating idiotic threads. I'm posting DVD release information and/or discussion on the DVD TALK area of the forum and other members in fact are discussing and adding to the topic.

Edit: I suggest that you re-read the thread you posted above to see how other members view you unnecesary micro-managing technique. Nobody cared about who posted or started the threads except you. I suggest that you do something better with you time than count the threads I start.

That's really stupid. If people are contributing to the threads and posting, who cares?

I was wondering what happened with that Gotham Knights thread.

:thumbsup:

:up:

It's not like he's starting eight threads about "What's your favorite boxing movie?" and "What's your favorite baseball movie?" and "What's your favorite racing movie?" etc.

I agree. Not for nothing, but I very rarely notice who the OP is in the thread before I click it, so it wouldn't matter to me if he'd started all the threads on the front page. His threads are informative and sparking conversation. Where's the problem?

Why delete the Jamie Foxx Collection though? Is it cause he's black? Same for Batman: Gotham Knight(well he dresses in black anyway...) and the Great Debaters?
http://img128.imageshack.us/img128/7...sracistvl2.gif

I'm kidding here (well mostly at least) but I do find it interesting these threads are deleted simply because the OP has already started other informative threads.
Oh well...

:up:

I feel I have to expound on my earlier post that read:

As The Bus wrote, it's not like these threads are vague or 3,295 threads about the same subject matter. Besides, Mao does a great job on that stickied thread, but we've had some interesting (at least I think so) conversation in the Xanadu thread that would clutter and be out of place in his thread.

As Ed and abrg923 said...it really shouldn't matter as long as there's a discussion going on.

So what is it going to be? Are those missing threads going to be reposted by the mods or do I have to start them again? Or are we going to be having these discussions every now and then?

You give X a hard time, but he's made it clear it's not a solo decision he's making. Simply because he's the one carrying the axe doesn't make him the one ordering the executions.

The mods have made it clear that they don't want you or anyone else controlling the front page of the forums. And they've also made it clear where new release information should go.

So yes, if you continue to ignore that, your threads will get nuked and if you keep arguing with them about it, I would expect that there will be other repercussions as well.

We're all guests here. You can either choose to follow the rules or choose to leave.

The problem is that the rule doesn't make any sense. I have started numerous threads for the past 4 years. So if anyone decided to bump 3 old threads I started making the total to 7 or 8 in the first page, will they be deleted or would I be suspended?

Like I said before, I'm not a rebel or want to cause any problem. I love DVDTalk and like the discussions in the forum and I know that I'm a guest in here. This is the feedback forum, where there is supposed to be a civil discussion about the ways of the forum and serves as a place to amend rules and see that there are situations that are not black and white. My situation is not black and white.

And I'm giving X a hard time because his tone was unnecesarily harsh towards me without any reason and he was the one that decided to make the cut. No other moderator or administrator has made any criticism or called my attention about this situation.

And by the way, the limit on threads posted in the first page still is an unwritten rule, since as of today, is not posted in the Forum Rules and Guidelines.

I'm not taking sides DX23, I've never had any issue with you personally, I'm just telling you my impressions of this situation, as I've seen it play out over the past few years with you. My personal belief on thread starters is that you should have something to contribute other than facts. Just posting a release date and features doesn't warrant a NEW thread. It should go into the main release thread.

However, if you wanted to post NCFOM's release info and post about how much you liked the movie, or talk about a special feature, or expand a little bit, then by all means. But just by posting release info, it does seem like you are trying to control the board discussion of those titles, which is what the mods are getting at.

The feedback forum is not a way to groundswell rule changes. It's a place to voice problems with the forum. I can't recall once in my 9 years here a single rule being changed due to the feedback forum (well, maybe the profanity one), but new features have been added from it.

Like I said, X has posted that he's not on some personal vendetta against you. He's said that the admins and mods have discussed the issue and decided to take certain action. Just because he's the face of the action doesn't mean that he's not supported.

It's important to realize that we are all here at the pleasure of the forum admins and mods. This place is more liberal than most. If the worst rule you've encountered is that you can't post 10 different release threads, then consider yourself lucky. Whether the rule is written or not, it's been communicated to you repeatedly. You can't say you aren't aware of it.

I disagree with you in the topic about what warrants a new thread or not. Even Mao, who is very respected in this forum, now post individual threads of the DVD releases, many times with little information about the specs, just a release date. To me, a release date, specs and any other information about a film that is being released on DVD and has some type of fanbase in the forum is reason enough to start a thread. That sparks a discussion about the release and helps us DVD fans to make a the best personal decision of whether to purchase the release or not.

As for the rule, my problem with it the way the don't see the gray area that exist in this. Two days ago there were 4 threads I started in the first page. Today one of the threads ran down its course but another one I created in October 2007 was bumped to the first page. So what then? The next one that is bumped is deleted? Am I suspended? banned?

That is the problem with the rule. And if other members don't see a problem with my threads and if they are sparking civil discussions, then, where is the problem?

I think it's stupid to dump any new release info into one big thread too. It's pretty much felt like there's an open thread for any big new or interesting release to discuss the release date, the features, quality, etc etc. It's been like that for years. And i know i've seen posts on new releases with nothing but "______ coming April 06, more details to follow."

This isn't like the issue where someone was posting a half dozen polls in the span of a couple hours. No one can help if their older threads get bumped. If I went and made a post in all the "What are you buying this week" threads to say "oh, that week I bought ______" would it get Rogue's thread's removed just because they're all on the front page? That's nonsensical.

I don't recall ever once reading the new release thread. I get all my info on upcoming releases from the individual threads which are usually made by Mao or dx#'s.

Your situation is quite black and white. You have no right to dominate a forum any more than any other person does.

I looked at the date/times of the new threads before I removed them to make sure that you posted those new threads after the ongoing ones were already on the first page of the forum. You obviously just didn't care about the rule that had been pointed out to you previously.

This is the same rule that applies to every other person in the forum. Since you posted your last thread in this forum complaining about why you should get an exemption to this long-existing rule I've pointed it out to perhaps two other people who got overly enthusiastic with their new threads. Those people, and every other person on this forum, has had no problem complying with it once it was brought to their attention. You seemed to understand as well since our last discussion of this matter.

Comments by current and former moderators and alternative means of making sure your important information got out there has been discussed previously as well. I am merging this thread with your previous one to make them easier for you to understand.

No is not. I'm not trying to dominate the forum or anything like it. Am I supposed to apologize for creating thread in which people actually discuss the topic? Am I supposed to control that other members don't bump old threads that I created so I don't get newer ones deleted?

You looked at the dates of the new ones, not the old ones. When I posted those 3 threads, only other 2 were active in the first page of the forum: The Xanadu thread and the Official Wrestling one, which it is almost a sticky since it never leaves the first page


The last thread was to created discuss the unwritten rule that you continously allude to. I created the second one to ask what happened to threads, unaware that I was violating the unwritten rule.

At least in this thread, the other moderator to have commented has been Mao, who I told him politely that although his idea was good, cramming all new releases and discussing it in one thread will be a complete clutter. Every other member who has posted in this thread has agreed with my point of view except you. And my other problem is that your snarky remark and attitude in your posts says a lot about you dictatorship problem.

QFT.

Funny, I've read all the posts that he's posted on this subject, and I thought he was extremely calm, friendly, and he definitely wasn't "complaining".

When I asked for my name change a while back, you said I was "bitching" about it. I was in no way bitching; we had fun in the name change thread in the "Other" forum and I don't know what all the threats of admin action was all about.

I don't understand that either. I don't think people start threads just so they can see their user name on the screen. They're posting because they want to get the word out about things or have a debate.

So should I take this as a reversal of the PM you sent me saying what a good job I've been doing under difficult circumstances and apologizing for your obsessive behavior in that matter?