Even though it didn't break any forum rules?

... it's not even a new thread and it's original post / starter post ...

Please read:

PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING In The Political Forum

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/religion-po...cal-forum.html

1. Again, it wasn't even first post in a thread....

2. "And here comes Part 3:" ... - to accompany the link .. - was my OWN words ... not sufficeint enough, however?

3. But in other threads ... people often simply throw few words as a comment, or simply agree with other comments ... and those are sufficent enough / acceptable comments?

If so, then where should the line be drawn?

4. but at the same time:
hmmm ....

THEN links ARE ok? ....

... so let me get it straight ... - if i post a link and throw few tacky or cheap words to accompany it, even though often (not in above post of mine (with link), but in other cases / links) the headline speaks for itself basically, and "I couldn't have said it better myself") ... -- FEW "cheap" words, just to make it a commentary to accompany the post ... the post becomes OK?

LOL .. Discussion forum = ya .. but just to post a link and a quote from the link, without not commenting on it (or doing so occasionally) = no?

I can show you MANY other discussion forums where doing the same would be totally acceptable and OK

So in that case "this is Discussion Forum" is kinda incorrect phrase ... better to say maybe "in THIS PARTICULAR Discussion Forum we do things like that"

even if we often say some BS ... It's OK .. as long as it's a comment?

-------

So then to keep few "harmless" link(s) that form post(s) (regardless of the way each one of us might think about it) is NOT ok ... BUT filling threads with some BS posts (and I am NOT saying all of them are BS, but some ARE) is OK?

It's one thing if you just post a link from time to time, but nearly every single post of yours is from an article with a link, and sometimes a video. Most of us aren't interested in just reading something from a blog because they're often heavily biased. It's annoying to see these threads bumped to find out that you just posted some guy ranting on youtube, it adds nothing to the discussion. I'm considering making you the first person on my ignore list. It's sad to see you fighting back about your posting habits because you are obviously opinionated and could have some substance to add to the dialogue if you weren't just regurgitating stuff you found elsewhere.

Your links aren't generating any discussion even from you so it might be time to just stop already.

Do they HAVE to generate a discussion ... ??

Is it written in stone somewhere that they DO?

LOL ....

-----

If a link / video or a quote wasn't mentioned here before, is a "new news" etc ... or simply an interesting fact - what's wrong to post it ??

and whoever wants (including me) can discuss it .. or if people don't want to discuss it - they simply don't.

I can't make anyone to dscuss my posts regardless if they are just a link ... or a short / long comment (with or without a link).

If you don't want to discuss it .. then don't .. no one is making you or should make you do so ... but if my link, headline or qoute represent a new news, fact etc ... - pretty sure there should be a place for it in a discussion thread, ESPECIALLY if it's not the 1st post of a thread...

----

But not to worry .. I think you are doing pretty good job for me to stop posting period... - and you might get your way pretty soon ...

Which should be "no sweat off your back" anyhow, cuz that's what you want, but the looks of it ... ("hmm .. some newbie comes to our forum here .. and dares to post in his / non-traditional way or a manner ... How dare he!!??")

Uh, yeah, it is.

I'm not a moderator, but I play one on TV.

Here's the thing. You're a new member who just signed up a month ago. Most of your posts seem to be links to editorial content, offered up to the forum with little to no commentary.

The name of this site is DVDTalk. It's primary focus is on DVDs, blu-rays, movies, and television. Yes, there is an "other" forum and a forum for the discussion of politics. But that's not the primary raison d'être for this site; it's isn't freerepublic or democraticunderground.

You come off like a troll or spammer who has wandered into an established community and is trying to provoke arguments among the members.

The rules say:

It's quite clear. The "particularly as the first post in a thread" means ALL posts, but especially at the start of a thread. And just sticking something like "read this" or "here's part two" onto the post isn't commentary.

I've probably broken this rule a few times. Most posters here have. But you've been doing it habitually since you signed up a month ago.

I will leave with a good bit of advice that pertains to all communities and not just this one. Spend some time lurking before you join in. Learn the rules and how they are applied. Don't jump headlong into a community and try to make it your own personal army.

And, frankly, posting other people's tirades is kind of annoying. Nobody wants to read some dipshit's blog or listen to some asshole ranting on youtube for thirty minutes. Our time is too valuable to waste on shit like that.

Same here...I learned to just scroll past every one of his posts without reading anyways, but I never put anyone on ignore before. If I do, I think I will PM Spottedfeather and ask him how to do it.

"Our time is too valuable to wast on chit like that"

but not small discussion and often cheap comments in other threads?

I DO know this forum is DVD Talk ... - but as you said, this, here, is "other" talk / politics etc .. NOT related to DVDs ...

... either this section exists or it doesn't ...

OK .. I am done bickering .. I know what you guys want, or how you prefer it ... Now I simply have to figure out if I am willing or capable of giving it to you .....

LOL .... Re: "putting someone on IGNORE"

Never in my life have I done such a thing to my forum-mate ... - if I don't like his posts ... I simply don't read them / scroll past them etc ....

The obvious question--if you send that PM--will it ever be seen?

Never have to words "LURK MOAR" been more appropriate.

Darkman, no offense, but that's a lot more scrolling than I (and I think most of us) care to do. I've been biting my tongue, since I didn't want to offend nor antagonize you, but I have to agree with the majority of the posters regarding your contributions. To me, they are fairly worthless.

If you decide that you're willing and capable, I hope its not one of those things where you're going to do it on your own terms and find every loophole, every opportunity to bend and stress the forum guidelines. You see what the Other forum is like, if you don't like what it is, then why waste time with something that will most likely end badly? But if you decide to stay and participate, I look forward to sharing some thoughts with you.

I was dinged (correctly) for a forum violation recently. I acknowledged it, apologized, and moved on, no biggie. When I see a post like yours, where you are picking apart the rules, word by word, trying to find the delicate balance where you can continue with the kind of posts you want but that, as far as I can tell judging from the responses, no one else appreciates, then I would suggest that you might be better off devoting that energy to finding a forum that will appreciate your style of contributing.

What a beautiful morning!

Conform or die, it's the only way to be otter.

Is there a difference between news and editorial?

I can understand why just throwing up a link to some biased opinion piece is frowned upon, but if there is breaking news on an older topic and I want to bring that up, what additional discussion is needed?

Sounds like if there's and old story and something new happens and I say "update: {{summary}} LINK" that's not good enough.

I think there's room for interpretation, but in general a little commentary on why you think the breaking news is of interest is always appreciated. Sometimes it's obvious (in the Zimmerman thread when the verdict came out, for example), other times less so (when Zimmerman subsequently got pulled over for speeding). Since the line on what's "obvious" differs from person to person, a little context on why you think it's worth adding to the discussion is a nice thing to do when posting any link.

I think the whole thing about posting commentary is so it fosters discussion. We could wind up with threads that are just posts with a bunch of links to stories, or blogs and that can be pretty boring.

Even a comment to say an Onion article that says something like: "As usual, the Onion nails it." would be ok in my opinion. I don't know if the other mods want more than that, but even that nugget is better than just posting links, or story quotes.

What about when a new topic is made, and no time is given for it to generate a discussion? I posted a video not long ago, with a detailed list of topics it covered, as required by the mods. One person responded without constructive commentary in the first few minutes, and the topic was locked. How is this fair or reasonable? Here's the link.

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/religion-po...questions.html

That thread seemed more like proselytizing, not discussing. A "detailed list of topics it covered" isn't providing any additional commentary, it's the equivalent of just dropping in an article.

I wanted honest discussion, but the thread was never given a chance. Dinesh D'Souza went into much more detail in that hour alone, than I could type in a few. Some folks keep saying that "Christians don't want to learn", but when an educated believer speaks, their attempts are crushed on principle.

In truth, I like most of what he says, because it makes sense.

This is a discussion forum, not a link farm or video sharing site. Videos and links should be a supplement to that discussion.

Meaning what, exactly? Are you saying I can only post something in a pre-existing thread, instead of starting my own? Wouldn't my threads qualify as being attempts to keep other topics from being derailed? If not, why?