Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cruzbay who wrote (213217)	10/10/2006 10:22:04 PM
From: DRBES	Respond to of 275872

you realize, of course, that your post violates the criteria of that board...im agin it

To: cruzbay who wrote (213217)	10/11/2006 2:08:17 AM
From: Petz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Try this thread, AMD, News, Press Releases and Information Only Subject 16438 Petz

To: cruzbay who wrote (213217)	10/11/2006 6:22:29 AM
From: Rink	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Cruzbay + thread. IMPORTANT. Re: Strictly on topic board. It'll require a different set of posters, plus MOST OF THE CURRENT NOISE IS AROUND INTEL BEING GUILTY OR NOT which you'd find on a strictly on topic board as well once that board would become mainstream. Think about it. It's what happened to this board in the beginning. In this current voluminous example it is knowledgeable posters that determine volume, not exclusively but to a large extent. Hooked on the bait. Another example: From what I recall Mani never banished for using the word 'AMDroid' in general sense in a question either. So I don't think this aspect changed. I understand you want to have 'unwanted elements' eliminated asap but that has never happened before either. Remember how much posts were wasted on Paul before the ban became permanent? He did get a fair chance though which I think is essential as well. The board Petz proposed is not moderated, but can of course be again if you'd want that. To avoid the process of changing moderators that haven't posted for over a year, it's btw easier to start a new board. Still it's my understanding that once it would become a mainstream board that it won't escape the law of unnecessary volume caused by 'unwanted elements' even if they largely abide by all OT rules. I believe in this set of rules. For a variety of reasons I think the rules are in balance, and have been since some time after the beginning of the thread. This plus the quality of posters is why I joined and stayed. I'm quite open to interpret the rules more strictly though. I can e.g. stop voluminous discussions after repetition of arguments. At this point I think this is a good idea without any significant drawbacks. One warning, then follow current rules for suspension. So if there are no significant objections to this I'll add this to the rules this Saturday. We went over the advantages of some OT and no OT before. I'm only going to have a discussion about this ONCE more. For OT there's only one workable solution that is more strict than the current rules and that doesn't require extravagant amount of work: Suspend everyone for a single OT post, even if only for a week. It'll help focus but there are disadvantages too particularly for OT that is fun, like Petz post that showed that scientist found a way predict stock prices. I think some fun is essential on a day that the stock goes down like it did. No OT is basically saying no to some of that and other fun. My personal opinion, others have different opinions I know. This is the last time I'm going to discuss it in a long while. If you have an opinion about some or OT or no OT now is the time to determine what we'll be doing regarding this subject the coming years. So what do you think? In order to be courteous to the thread please post your reactions on the OT thread: Subject 53036 Regards, Rink PS, Related but still important: Non paying members started to participate a year or so ago.