RE: linking to topics in past forums...

RE: linking to topics in past forums... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

marieToo -> RE: linking to topics in past forums... (6/6/2006 9:10:03 PM)
aw gees...so you get the links and fresh input. In the short time that I have been posting, I have gotten plenty of responses. Some good some bad some indifferent. But if you ask a question and someone gives you the links. Check them out. you may find something valuable there. Take what you need and leave the rest....That doesnt mean you cant keep the topic going or ask a question pertaining to it. Believe me...no matter what you say around here someone will soon be responding. Edited to add that this was supposed to be in response to the OP, (not to lordandmaster).

Vancouver_cinful -> RE: linking to topics in past forums... (6/6/2006 9:24:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tade And just so this will be linked to in the years that follow... Fisting, music, crop, flogger, singletail, needle, water, switch, top, bottom, bear, worship, scold, punish and Fred... Crap!! Here I was doing an innocent search for Fred, and landed up in this thread. ::wanders off grumbling::

timeoutgurlie -> RE: linking to topics in past forums... (6/6/2006 9:32:38 PM)
Personally, as a "newbie", I love the links. I don't think they're condescending, and I have a hair trigger for that sort of tone, so if I didn't pick up on it, I'm relatively sure it just doesn't happen that way very often. Then again, I just posted in a topic about enjoying humiliation, so maby it's that part of that ignores the condescending overtones and just relishes in the humiliation of being told to go away and shut up [:-] lol Some people are a tad oversensitive [&:]

lisa1978 -> RE: linking to topics in past forums... (6/6/2006 10:06:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: darkinshadows quote: I will not take back my point... People who feel the need to voice their opinion on every thread that is a frequent subject on this site, THIS DOES NOT MEAN POSTING LINKS FOR HELPFUL PURPOSES, and feel obligated or frustrated because they write something over and over and/or want to refer people back because of something they wrote is arrogant. It becomes about them and not the subject. Well, I have to say, that is wrong(IMO). Because there are usually but a couple of people who do the regular reference back to older posts. And they often contribute to the thread or are known as that is what they do on this site(and you are being specific about this site, which means you are singling out certain individuals, no matter how much you deny that). And you are calling them arrogant? I don't apologise for thinking you need to go back and have a look at those 'link posts' and justify where your name calling is in anyway correct. Darkinshadows we are going to have to settle for being mutually offended at each other. I clearly when complaining and using the word arrogant offended you and I certainly will apoligize for my strong and negative language. I am also very offended at you for grossly misscharacterizing my statements. If you would have taken the time to actually read my three previous posts, I clearly do not rip or call arrogant anybody who lists posts in other threads. In fact, I clearly state that for the most part I think that people who do take offense they have a miss conception of the purpose people do it for the most part. I really do not appreciate you taking my statements in that area and saying I ripped people like LA or Proudsub or called them arrogant when I did no such thing. I do want to apologize to mistoferin. While I never mentioned your name in my intial arrogant comments and my comment was not directly a response to you, I am not a fan of anybody ripping people for thier opinions that do not rip other people in them. For that I am sorry and pissed off at myself. I though do stand by my point although it was quite clouded. I do find comments of things like "not this topic again" or "this has been done to death" and things similar as not positive and come off as a little clickish. Sorry but I just do. People newer to the boards should have the right to have a fresh thread if they want, and people who are tired of the same old topic have the right not to post to that topic. I just wish they that some (I actually have no one in mind!) would not be so negative when making comments inside the threads about topics being done to death.

BitaTruble -> RE: linking to topics in past forums... (6/7/2006 12:50:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bearlee Fast Reply: I have had three people…different times, different occasions, different circumstances… but THREE different people come up to me and say “You’re nice!” …as if I’m not. By now I’m used to their somewhat quizzical look and the fact that they always repeat it: “No really, you’re NICE!” I’m to the place now where I just sigh…and they go on. “When I first met you, I thought you were a bitch…but you’re not! You’re nice!” I dunno…I think I’m nice…but apparently there’s something about me. Perhaps it’s that I’m confident? Perhaps it’s that I’m fairly no-nonsense? Or that I’m not all that shy? Perhaps it’s these thin lips? Anyway, I wonder if it’s because I come from a boisterous family and have three brothers and I’m blunt as hell. I think that scares people. I wouldn't call you blunt, Lee.. I'd call you down to Earth.. and yeah.. I think you're nice too, but I always thought so. Didn't have to be convinced about it. [;)] Celeste edited to add:: Egads.. and if someone doesn't care for the links, by all means.. pass them by and continue the thread. You have the permission of collarme to do so.. but think about this.. if you are starting a new thread and there's already one of the same nature going on... your thread might get lost or swallowed by the other and a link can take you to the exact place you need to be to get your questions answered. ::shrugs::

becca333 -> RE: linking to topics in past forums... (6/7/2006 1:42:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tade I've noticed in the year or so I have been part of this wonderful communtiy that a few of us like to answer questions (often by newer members) by linking to other posts about whatever the topic may be. Personally I find this condesending and rude. Perhaps the poster didn't know about the search feature (can't imagine that, but hey... benefit of the doubt and all) but the posting of "Link to 19 discussions on this", "Link to 35 discussions on that" runs the risk of making them not posting on another topic, for fear of being made to feel dumb for asking. It's also not very friendly. (Sorry about that last part...trying to techer our son the value of being nice and it wears off on me sometimes). I know we're all adults, or at least supposed to be,so I'm not as concerned with someone's feelings getting hurt as I am by not getting the exchange of ideas that comes from a posted topic being up on that first page when I log onto the forums. If it is done for the sake of helping others advance their knowledge by reading what others had written, then more power to you. However most of the time that is far from the feeling I get when I see it done by someone with thousands of posts to someone with only a handfull. Hell I would have thousands of posts under my belt if I answered every forum with a link to any other post that contained the same word, but I only chose to add to the discussions rather than gloat about my ability to use the search funtion... And just so this will be linked to in the years that follow... Fisting, music, crop, flogger, singletail, needle, water, switch, top, bottom, bear, worship, scold, punish and Fred... There's a search feature?

BlkTallFullfig -> RE: linking to topics in past forums... (6/7/2006 2:14:07 AM)
quote: linking to other posts about whatever the topic may be. Personally I find this condesending and rude. I disagree. I find that gesture kind, servile, and benevolent on the part of the person/s providing the links. Nowhere does it say that just because link is provided the discussion should end; the link is simply provided to add information, not curtail it. I am grateful to the people with the skills and desire to do it. Thanks LuckyAlbatross and Proudsub, and anyone else who provides this kind service. [sm=flowers.gif] M

darkinshadows -> RE: linking to topics in past forums... (6/7/2006 2:47:46 AM)
quote: Darkinshadows we are going to have to settle for being mutually offended at each other. I clearly when complaining and using the word arrogant offended you and I certainly will apoligize for my strong and negative language. I am also very offended at you for grossly misscharacterizing my statements. If you would have taken the time to actually read my three previous posts, I clearly do not rip or call arrogant anybody who lists posts in other threads. In fact, I clearly state that for the most part I think that people who do take offense they have a miss conception of the purpose people do it for the most part. I really do not appreciate you taking my statements in that area and saying I ripped people like LA or Proudsub or called them arrogant when I did no such thing. I am not offended. So don't assume that. I just disagree. If you are offended just because I disagree with you, I won't apologise so do not expect it. People disagree - fact. World does not spin around individual egos or ideas. Second point - quote: People who feel the need to voice their opinion on every thread that is a frequent subject on this site, THIS DOES NOT MEAN POSTING LINKS FOR HELPFUL PURPOSES, and feel obligated or frustrated because they write something over and over and/or want to refer people back because of something they wrote is arrogant. It becomes about them and not the subject. So you didn't call anyone who lists posts in threads to other threads on this site - arrogant? Then what is that? And for goodness sake stop putting words in other peoples mouths. I did not name ANYONE. You are the person who keeps mentioning specific people. Where did I mention names? Please show me. No - do really. If you keep insisting on naming the same people over and over, it only looks like you already have it in your head who you had in mind when you wrote these posts. The only specific thing you mentioned was this site. So please do not try to make it look like other people are casting insinuations when you are the person naming names. What size shovel would you like?

marieToo -> RE: linking to topics in past forums... (6/7/2006 4:56:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: happypervert quote: The whole purpose for starting a topic is to find a fresh answer to your discussion. LOL! Yeah, those old answers have gone stale and aren't good anymore . . . even though the fresh answers are exactly the same. I will state that the thread posting doesnt bother me. But I can understand a person wanting a "conversation", and not reading material. Have you ever discussed the same topic in real life with two different people? Or discussed even the same topic with someone but done it a year later?

MrDiscipline44 -> RE: linking to topics in past forums... (6/7/2006 6:27:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tade I've noticed in the year or so I have been part of this wonderful communtiy that a few of us like to answer questions (often by newer members) by linking to other posts about whatever the topic may be. Personally I find this condesending and rude. Perhaps the poster didn't know about the search feature (can't imagine that, but hey... benefit of the doubt and all) but the posting of "Link to 19 discussions on this", "Link to 35 discussions on that" runs the risk of making them not posting on another topic, for fear of being made to feel dumb for asking. It's also not very friendly. (Sorry about that last part...trying to techer our son the value of being nice and it wears off on me sometimes). I know we're all adults, or at least supposed to be,so I'm not as concerned with someone's feelings getting hurt as I am by not getting the exchange of ideas that comes from a posted topic being up on that first page when I log onto the forums. If it is done for the sake of helping others advance their knowledge by reading what others had written, then more power to you. However most of the time that is far from the feeling I get when I see it done by someone with thousands of posts to someone with only a handfull. Hell I would have thousands of posts under my belt if I answered every forum with a link to any other post that contained the same word, but I only chose to add to the discussions rather than gloat about my ability to use the search funtion... And just so this will be linked to in the years that follow... Fisting, music, crop, flogger, singletail, needle, water, switch, top, bottom, bear, worship, scold, punish and Fred... IMO, your over reacting just a tad, tade. Yes within the first ten responses there will most likely be someone that will either tell the post to search for the topic and read those threads or simply post a link to those threads. But it's not like thats the only response they get. Peoples opinions change over time and others like to reiterate what they've said before, so they post regardless of the link post. If I really am fed-up with a topic that keeps coming up over and over, I simply don't post to it. It's that simple. Posting links is considered condescending and rude? Nah. Arrogant? Maybe but you have to really know the person posting to really say that. Helpful? They're trying to be at least. Silly to think that someone is going to read over a myriad of links on a post topic to see if their question is going to be answered? Just a little. But thats IMO only.

Sensualips -> RE: linking to topics in past forums... (6/7/2006 9:38:29 AM)
I find it pretty handy and have been directed to some valuable discussions I would not have otherwise seen. It does not stop me from posting or repeating though. What I find incredibly annoying is the one liner chit chat posts that go on between 2-3 people. (I tend to get a little chatty somtimes, but I try not to let it ever go beyond one or maybe two posts.) No matter how cute or witty the banter may be, if it does not relate to the topic or involve me directly then I just don't care. I understand these people are just enjoying themselves so I generally just skim over it. However, it could be considered a little arrogant to assume everyone wants to read these personal small talk conversations. Scrolling past dozens of these types of posts to get to the rest of the thread is irritating. I am stunned this topic is up to four pages. Who knew linkage was such a critical issue?

Proprietrix -> RE: linking to topics in past forums... (6/7/2006 10:40:13 AM)
(Fast reply) I see a few problems with excessive and consistent link posting. I’ve been given a list of links before. I didn’t bother following any of them because I really don’t care about a conversation that 20 people who are no longer here had 2 years ago. I’m looking for discussion, not just information. If I wanted flat information, I’d go to google rather than collarme. Or I could go to the millions of websites that are just textual information. I’m not on a community forum chat board for the sake of transcripts. I’m here for communication. Also, if I wanted to read past discussions, I would have used the search feature myself in the first place. I tend to think that most of us in the year 2006, using the internet, have a general idea of how to use search features. The feature is there. Let people use it or not use it as they wish. It’s simply not necessary for someone to be the search feature for thread after thread, after thread. When I’m wanting discussion and discourse, rather than reading material, it makes sense that I’m going to bring up the topic "here and now". I want to be able to learn and grow, and to do that, I need to have an interactive approach. I need to trade ideas, rebut or point out things, have things rebutted and pointed out to me. I need to be able to have someone say "here’s the error I see in your logic" and then ask them to explain the parts I don’t understand. I need the discussion to be interactive, not just reading material. I don’t think the people who consistently and excessively post list of links are necessarily ill-intended, but it often comes across that way. It absolutely smacks of arrogance in the way it’s presented sometimes. If one is going to take the time to dig up the older links, I think they should take a few extra seconds to present that information courteously. It's really not much more time or effort to type "Here’s what some other folks had to say on this topic in the past if you’d like to read those opinions as well." than it is to type "31 discussions on this topic". It’s the manner in which it’s presented. I also think compulsive link posters should wait a bit and actually give the new thread a chance instead of jumping in the first hour or two with a list of links. Why shouldn't a new group of people have a new conversation on an old topic? If the thread is going to be full of discourse and ideas, it will run its course naturally. If everyone is sick of that particular topic and no one wants to respond, or only smart-asses are "rolling eyes at the newbie", then a list of links might be helpful. Another problem I see with link listing is that it does kill a thread dead in its tracks. I’ve even seen numerous threads where someone will post "I bet someone comes along and kills this thread with a list of links." That’s precisely why someone can’t just skip over a link post. Because there’s nothing to skip to. It kills the conversation. It comes across as "This question need not be replied to anymore, because we already replied to it." It’s almost like it invalidates the OP. In a way, it takes away the ability to continue a conversation. I also think that relying on archived written words takes a lot of the ‘human’ aspect out of interaction. It’s almost ridiculous if you think about it in terms of conversation rather than the written word. If we were all sitting around at a coffee shop discoursing and someone walked in and brought up a subject we discussed last year, we wouldn’t pull out a little transcribed notebook for them to refer to. We’d probably have the conversation again and occasionally say things like "When we had this conversation last spring, I mentioned that I didn’t like XYZ." But we wouldn’t say "refer to conversation 1-A of Spring 2004 because we have nothing to offer on this subject." The whole point of conversation is interaction.

spankmepink11 -> RE: linking to topics in past forums... (6/7/2006 10:56:02 AM)
I can't say that i take offense to those who post multiple links on any given topic, as i'm sure their intent was to be helpful. I almost never click on the links personally, because i just don't have a burning desire to read everything ever posted on said subject, however it doesn't stop me from appreciating the fact that someone went to the trouble to do so.

mnottertail -> RE: linking to topics in past forums... (6/7/2006 11:06:19 AM)
excessive and consistent link postings could (under certain circumstances) be accurately considered a link-posting fetish.... Now, I am fairly certain you wouldn't stand in the way of a harmless kink, would you? Ron

marieToo -> RE: linking to topics in past forums... (6/7/2006 11:13:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail excessive and consistent link postings could (under certain circumstances) be accurately considered a link-posting fetish.... Now, I am fairly certain you wouldn't stand in the way of a harmless kink, would you? Ron lmfaoooooo.

juliaoceania -> RE: linking to topics in past forums... (6/7/2006 12:25:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Proprietrix (Fast reply) I see a few problems with excessive and consistent link posting. I’ve been given a list of links before. I didn’t bother following any of them because I really don’t care about a conversation that 20 people who are no longer here had 2 years ago. I’m looking for discussion, not just information. If I wanted flat information, I’d go to google rather than collarme. Or I could go to the millions of websites that are just textual information. I’m not on a community forum chat board for the sake of transcripts. I’m here for communication. Also, if I wanted to read past discussions, I would have used the search feature myself in the first place. I tend to think that most of us in the year 2006, using the internet, have a general idea of how to use search features. The feature is there. Let people use it or not use it as they wish. It’s simply not necessary for someone to be the search feature for thread after thread, after thread. When I’m wanting discussion and discourse, rather than reading material, it makes sense that I’m going to bring up the topic "here and now". I want to be able to learn and grow, and to do that, I need to have an interactive approach. I need to trade ideas, rebut or point out things, have things rebutted and pointed out to me. I need to be able to have someone say "here’s the error I see in your logic" and then ask them to explain the parts I don’t understand. I need the discussion to be interactive, not just reading material. I don’t think the people who consistently and excessively post list of links are necessarily ill-intended, but it often comes across that way. It absolutely smacks of arrogance in the way it’s presented sometimes. If one is going to take the time to dig up the older links, I think they should take a few extra seconds to present that information courteously. It's really not much more time or effort to type "Here’s what some other folks had to say on this topic in the past if you’d like to read those opinions as well." than it is to type "31 discussions on this topic". It’s the manner in which it’s presented. I also think compulsive link posters should wait a bit and actually give the new thread a chance instead of jumping in the first hour or two with a list of links. Why shouldn't a new group of people have a new conversation on an old topic? If the thread is going to be full of discourse and ideas, it will run its course naturally. If everyone is sick of that particular topic and no one wants to respond, or only smart-asses are "rolling eyes at the newbie", then a list of links might be helpful. Another problem I see with link listing is that it does kill a thread dead in its tracks. I’ve even seen numerous threads where someone will post "I bet someone comes along and kills this thread with a list of links." That’s precisely why someone can’t just skip over a link post. Because there’s nothing to skip to. It kills the conversation. It comes across as "This question need not be replied to anymore, because we already replied to it." It’s almost like it invalidates the OP. In a way, it takes away the ability to continue a conversation. I also think that relying on archived written words takes a lot of the ‘human’ aspect out of interaction. It’s almost ridiculous if you think about it in terms of conversation rather than the written word. If we were all sitting around at a coffee shop discoursing and someone walked in and brought up a subject we discussed last year, we wouldn’t pull out a little transcribed notebook for them to refer to. We’d probably have the conversation again and occasionally say things like "When we had this conversation last spring, I mentioned that I didn’t like XYZ." But we wouldn’t say "refer to conversation 1-A of Spring 2004 because we have nothing to offer on this subject." The whole point of conversation is interaction. I agree with everything in this post

MistressOfGa -> RE: linking to topics in past forums... (6/7/2006 12:36:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Vancouver_cinful quote: ORIGINAL: tade And just so this will be linked to in the years that follow... Fisting, music, crop, flogger, singletail, needle, water, switch, top, bottom, bear, worship, scold, punish and Fred... Crap!! Here I was doing an innocent search for Fred, and landed up in this thread. ::wanders off grumbling:: Cin, lmao!! To the OP: Yes when I first started posting it did get on my last nerve how Emerald would post links, but over time I have just clicked past if I didnt find them useful to me. <Shrugs> It ain't no thang <s> Life is just to freakin' short to worry about all this shit. I agree with the person who said that if one gets upset over something a total stranger posted or sent in email, perhaps they should re-evaluate their own lives and their own priorities.

sweetnessforsir -> RE: linking to topics in past forums... (6/7/2006 2:27:51 PM)
LMAO. I thought I would get to the links by now. In most cases, not in all, it does seem as if the link poster is trying to be of assistance. For me, that cannot be interpreted as rude. In a few cases I have seen the "how many times are we going to get this question" link post as well. I find it a little amusing that we have an entire thread on the audacity of posting links in a thread with all the recent name calling on the boards. Hey, I guess it is a phase of the moon, or the sun, or the economy . . .. just seems like a lot of people are all out mean this week and last. s.

Dustyn -> RE: linking to topics in past forums... (6/7/2006 2:31:19 PM)
I personally think it is awesome that LA goes to the effort of pulling up links to other threads that can potentially answer the poster, since some of the posts in those old threads were made by people that may or may not still be lurking around. I've never once taken any sort of offense to her doing this, though I'm not sure if she's ever pulled up links on my posts or not. I think it's pretty damned cool and fairly bad ass that she is willing to go to that much of an extreme to help others. Frankly, if you take offense to it, you need to just back up a step and realize she, and other that do it, though none more often than LA, is just trying to help, not slam or insult. At least that is how/why I see her doing it.

JohnWarren -> Heat not light RE: linking to topics in past forums... (6/7/2006 2:35:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Proprietrix . I’m looking for discussion, not just information. If I wanted flat information, I’d go to google rather than collarme. Well, we have multiple votes for this. If we get much more, I guess I'll shift over to another site since it will be obvious my input isn't needed here. It's so nice to feel that people aren't interested in information.

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125