http://forum.dvdtalk.com/movie-talk/...ns-remake.html

Why?

I checked the log to see who closed the thread, and...um, apparently it was me on Dec. 18th. If I had a reason why, I guess I've forgotten. (Maybe I did it by accident? Is that even possible? I don't fiddle with threads in forums I don't moderate.) It's been reopened. Sorry about that. I'm pretty mystified.

you're fired.
turn in your name badge and report to security immediately.

How about the target gun thread I posted in Vegas Forum? It was deleted, yet the gory deer thread stays open...

Agreed. Whether you hunt or not, the gore is disgustingly displayed. It's in such poor taste that I can't imagine why it's allowed to remain open. I eat meat, though I don't hunt, and I have no pity for the animals I eat. And I know where/how my food arrives at my table. But that thread is disgusting, and those who are contributing pics are just....disturbed.

I also wonder why the deer thread has not been closed.

Has anyone actually hit the "report" icon on any of the offending posts?

Consider it done.

I know this thread (http://forum.dvdtalk.com/store-forum...hese-days.html ) was closed because the OP requested it after insulting other members, but I think that is a stupid rule. I don't think that just because other members have a different opinion than him, the OP should take the ball and go home.

I was wondering about that one too. I figured it was the usual anti-Kraken bias by "the man" that keeps creeping in.

i mean, seriously, the guy can't add!

Yeah, what the heck is up with that?

The OP should not 'own' a thread or have any more rights in it than any other DVDTalker.

I did on several occasions. I thought it was to make the forum load faster.

My apologies to those who got banned.

Why this was closed? It was becoming the thread of the year.

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/other-talk/...-please-4.html

I suspect it was at the request of the OP.

While we're on the subject of closing threads, I recently bumped a nearly three year old thread of Target sale prices in the Hot Deals forum. I did so because I recently bought the Target exclusive Casino Royale that went on sale that week and thought it the most appropriate place to ask a question about the ISBN for the product, as I did not get the packaging with my book. I made sure to post, in bold font, that this was not a current thread thinking that would dispel the inevitable, "Dammit! I thought Speedy was back!" remarks that accompany every such bump. I was chastised anyway. One poster even remarked something to the effect of how, for every two failures to use the search feature there's an instance of someone using it when they shouldn't have.

I suppose I should have instead found a thread about the title in the DVD section, but my reasoning for the hot deals was simply that I sought ISBN information, and I know that the regular readers of that section are generally more conscious of such information. (I mean, hell, we've even had side conversations emerge over what the SKU number was for a specific store exclusive on occasion.)

In any event, that thread is now closed...in large part due to a spattering of entirely unnecessary remarks such as the ones espousing confusion and anger at my bump. I'm fine with the closure, actually, and it got me to thinking. I move that every Hot Deals thread started by Speedy be closed. Let it be a monument to his retirement, ending these unpopular bumps (though I still believe I had a legitimate, if dubious, reason).

What you're talking about, MinLShaw, is a real issue on this board when it comes to the search feature. It's either, "Why didn't you use the search function?!" or it's "Why did you bump this thread?!" It's frustrating.

I never understand why that matters. In my opinion, the OP of a thread is no more important than anyone else who participates in it. Closing threads is stupid. Punish the one or two people who break the rules.
I think most of the people questioning the thread bump were just joking, and if they weren't, they need to get over it. I thought it was a fine bump.

I doubt it. It will be a sad, sad day when The Infidel can't take a joke.

Really? I thought it was pretty mean-spirited and unnecessary.

Mean spirited? Towards the guy who did Drink Man Comics? I doubt he took much offense.

He seemed pretty annoyed in that thread, and didn't seem like someone who was joking. I suspected that he requested the thread closed as well, based on how he was responding to people in the thread.

But I think dogmatica was responding to something else (the search vs why did you bump this comments).

I'd say that it's okay to start a new thread as long as there isn't an active discussion currently going on.

Personally, I find it a little irritating when someone bumps a thread over a year or so old to ask something only tangentially related to the discussion at hand.

Every message board has its own temperament, some boards will expect all "Star Wars" discussion to go into a "one and only Star Wars" thread that might stretch over hundreds pages. Which, in my mind, makes it next to impossible to get anything out of it.

I much prefer bumps of old threads than starting new ones. A bump of an old thread will often inspire new discussion and interest in the subject, and having all the old conversation right there is only a benefit.

Starting a new thread will just lead to people asking the same old questions that were answered in the old threads.

Ideally, when an ongoing thread here exceeds a certain number of posts, currently around 600 (I think - but it may be 800, I forget what was agreed), the idea is to start a new part two/three/whatever and ask a mod to close the older one.