NationStates Jolt Archive

Is this sort of thing really necessary, especially when it's a non-political, non-religious thread?

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=391792&page=249

Posts 3731 and 3735

Um...the picture that provoked the latter one hardly seemed appropriate in itself. And for the first one, you seemed to be playing on, really. I suspect it was a (poor) joke.

Is there a valid point to that thread at all, other than to oggle and drool over what you wish you had? And OMG with the huge pictures. Surely there ought to be some limit there at the very least if (since this thread looks to have been around for ages and seems to be have deemed legal enough), Jolt has to use up all that bandwidth for General's very own soft porn collection.

And yet again at Post 3738:

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=391792&page=250

This time making a derogotory comment about transgendered people.

And yet again at Post 3738:

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=391792&page=250

This time making a derogotory comment about transgendered people.

It's a derogatory comment about the poster, not about transgendered people. But I do agree, Cluichstan may need a time-out.

Is there a valid point to that thread at all, other than to oggle and drool over what you wish you had? And OMG with the huge pictures. Surely there ought to be some limit there at the very least if (since this thread looks to have been around for ages and seems to be have deemed legal enough), Jolt has to use up all that bandwidth for General's very own soft porn collection.

FYI, as Jolt does not seem to be hosting the pics, its bandwidth isn't used for them.

And the 95 or so pages of commentary/space it takes up at 40 views per page? I suppose that just magically comes from somewhere else as well? All so some folks can check out scantily-clad chicks in a convenient one-stop fee-free location, neh? I believe there's been warnings (unofficial or otherwise) before for overlarge pictures, so it isn't as though there isn't precedent for that, even if you dismiss all the rest.

FYI, as Jolt does not seem to be hosting the pics, its bandwidth isn't used for them.Which means that thread is stealing tons of bandwidth from various sites.

Hm. Perhaps this thread should be reexamined...

Which means that thread is stealing tons of bandwidth from various sites.

Hm. Perhaps this thread should be reexamined...
Around here "reexamination" imples deletion. This particular thread is one of the most popular threads I have seen since I began posting here on Jolt. The reasons for this should be obvious.

Bandwidth is a funny thing. Most sites never use anything even close to their maximum allowable bandwidth unless the major media pick them up as having something "unique." Most of the photographs posted on this particular thread are linked in from sites such as ImageShack, which encourage linking and even provide the link to use for "forums."

I seriously doubt this is problem is sufficiently grave to warrant closing a highly popular thread.

Around here "reexamination" imples deletion.Not necessarily.

This particular thread is one of the most popular threads I have seen since I began posting here on Jolt.No offense, but I don't really care, nor does that really factor into Moderation decisions.

The reasons for this should be obvious.People like drooling over cheesecake, yes. Nevermind the fact that you could do the same with http://images.google.com hmm?

I seriously doubt this is problem is sufficiently grave to warrant closing a highly popular thread.Again; Appeal to Popularity. Irrelevent.

Furthermore, bandwidth isn't the only reason I'm thinking the thread needs to be looked at.

Not necessarily.

No offense, but I don't really care, nor does that really factor into Moderation decisions.

People like drooling over cheesecake, yes. Nevermind the fact that you could do the same with http://images.google.com hmm?

Again; Appeal to Popularity. Irrelevent.

Furthermore, bandwidth isn't the only reason I'm thinking the thread needs to be looked at.
Moderation disregards popularity in its decisions about threads? Hmm.

So if bandwidth isn't the only reason for reconsideration, could you name the others? Please?

Moderation disregards popularity in its decisions about threads? Hmm.This is news?

So if bandwidth isn't the only reason for reconsideration, could you name the others? Please?The fact that it's little more than cheesecake? The fact that it adds nothing to the forums? The fact that it really doesn't fit in the theme of a politically based game?

This is news?

The fact that it's little more than cheesecake? The fact that it adds nothing to the forums? The fact that it really doesn't fit in the theme of a politically based game?
Sex isn't a consideration in politics? Heh! Can you say "Monica Lewinski," boys and girls?

Yep, we sure can. And the whole thing is as ridiculous today as it was then. Nothing but fluff and drama over a piece of ass when the real issue ought to have been the abuse of trust and lies.

Personally, I'd rather not see popularity rule the day in decisionmaking in Moderation. After all, it was popular belief that rats were spawned from old rags, maggots from meat, and that the world was flat.

Didn't make those popular beliefs right.

Sex isn't a consideration in politics? Heh! Can you say "Monica Lewinski," boys and girls?False analogy (http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/falsean.htm).

Moved to spam, as decided by multiple moderators. The entire thread can basically be summed up as:

1) Someone posts a link of a 'hot babe'.
2) Someone says either "OMG She's hot!" or "Where is she from?" or other variants.
3) Someone offers a counter to the picture saying "She's hotter." or another variant.

There is no discussion to this, there is nothing of value in the entire thread, so no, this thread no longer belongs here in NationStates.

I fail to see why this thread shouldnt be culled. Though, I am surprized as to how long its been allowed to stay open. Its a softcore pornography thread, whether you fail to acknowledge that or do. In the meantime, it serves no purpose than only for twelve year old boys to read, froth at the mouth, and do their dirty work over. Yes folks, I'm talking about wanking. Furthermore, the thread only really encourages others to post something more "revealing", and to break both Jolt's and the Nationstate's Moderation rules.

<Shrugs>. I fail to see your arguement at all on why this thread should remain open. And I fail to see any actual positive outcome of a thread like that being created / being left open. (Except as to provide a "one-stop fee-free location", as Nathi put it best.) In the meantime, google (http://www.google.com) seems to provide a handy service for that. So, you do the math.

--- AU's Player

Edit: Nevermind me Euro. Seems we posted at the same time, but a decision well made at least. *Shrugs*.

google seems to provide a handy service

ROTFLMAO

We're done here.

iLock.