Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[kphoger]

the history of Grand Alan Garfunkel

[Scott5114]

On the whole, the idea that some people may edit in annoying ways is not a valid reason to remove the option for the rest of us. Dealing with problem users as they arise is exactly the right approach.

"One person used a thing to do something sucky so now we're going to make it a rule that NOBODY can have it!" was a fundamental management axiom at my last job, which was one of the reasons why working there was so obnoxious.

I must say, that's pretty much exactly how I feel about the stats page being canned...

So you think only people who have posted about stats should be blocked from seeing them? Hmm...

[tolbs17]

On the whole, the idea that some people may edit in annoying ways is not a valid reason to remove the option for the rest of us. Dealing with problem users as they arise is exactly the right approach.

"One person used a thing to do something sucky so now we're going to make it a rule that NOBODY can have it!" was a fundamental management axiom at my last job, which was one of the reasons why working there was so obnoxious.

I must say, that's pretty much exactly how I feel about the stats page being canned...

So you think only people who have posted about stats should be blocked from seeing them? Hmm...

The thread that Roadgeekteen made (which is now locked), lists them.

[webny99]

On the whole, the idea that some people may edit in annoying ways is not a valid reason to remove the option for the rest of us. Dealing with problem users as they arise is exactly the right approach.

"One person used a thing to do something sucky so now we're going to make it a rule that NOBODY can have it!" was a fundamental management axiom at my last job, which was one of the reasons why working there was so obnoxious.

I must say, that's pretty much exactly how I feel about the stats page being canned...

So you think only people who have posted about stats should be blocked from seeing them? Hmm...

No, that wasn't exactly my interpretation of "dealing with problem users as they arise". I'm thinking more along the lines of a PM that said something like "Stop talking about stats and starting stats threads or the page will be canned for everyone!" That would have gotten the message across.

Instead, I feel really disappointed that I wrecked it for everyone without realizing until it was too late.

[webny99]

The thread that Roadgeekteen made (which is now locked), lists them.

Sadly, no. There used to be much more detailed stats visible here:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?action=stats

[tolbs17]

The thread that Roadgeekteen made (which is now locked), lists them.

Sadly, no. There used to be much more detailed stats visible here:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?action=stats

Surprisingly right now I can't see it... ;(

[webny99]

The thread that Roadgeekteen made (which is now locked), lists them.

Sadly, no. There used to be much more detailed stats visible here:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?action=stats

Surprisingly right now I can't see it... ;(

None of us can. That's why I said "used to".

[JoePCool14]

I think editing a title should need mod approval. That way we know what the thread was originally about. Other edits, no.

Definitely no. Sometimes threads can warrant having new titles. There's also the case for fixing typos.

[Roadgeekteen]

On the whole, the idea that some people may edit in annoying ways is not a valid reason to remove the option for the rest of us. Dealing with problem users as they arise is exactly the right approach.

"One person used a thing to do something sucky so now we're going to make it a rule that NOBODY can have it!" was a fundamental management axiom at my last job, which was one of the reasons why working there was so obnoxious.

I must say, that's pretty much exactly how I feel about the stats page being canned...

We should bring back the forum stats! It's been four years since all the incidents caused by them. (That thread about sleep patterns was my mistake and wasn't caused by that page)

[JoePCool14]

On the whole, the idea that some people may edit in annoying ways is not a valid reason to remove the option for the rest of us. Dealing with problem users as they arise is exactly the right approach.

"One person used a thing to do something sucky so now we're going to make it a rule that NOBODY can have it!" was a fundamental management axiom at my last job, which was one of the reasons why working there was so obnoxious.

I must say, that's pretty much exactly how I feel about the stats page being canned...

We should bring back the forum stats! It's been four years since all the incidents caused by them. (That thread about sleep patterns was my mistake and wasn't caused by that page)

What kind of stats were even on that page? I don't remember looking at it back when it was thing.

[1]

On the whole, the idea that some people may edit in annoying ways is not a valid reason to remove the option for the rest of us. Dealing with problem users as they arise is exactly the right approach.

"One person used a thing to do something sucky so now we're going to make it a rule that NOBODY can have it!" was a fundamental management axiom at my last job, which was one of the reasons why working there was so obnoxious.

I must say, that's pretty much exactly how I feel about the stats page being canned...

We should bring back the forum stats! It's been four years since all the incidents caused by them. (That thread about sleep patterns was my mistake and wasn't caused by that page)

What kind of stats were even on that page? I don't remember looking at it back when it was thing.

Posts and threads started for every single day, new users for every single day, most posted in threads overall, most viewed threads, forum members with most logged in time, male:female ratio (I'm actually interested in this one), and a few other things that I can't remember.

I support bringing the stats back.

[US 89]

On the whole, the idea that some people may edit in annoying ways is not a valid reason to remove the option for the rest of us. Dealing with problem users as they arise is exactly the right approach.

"One person used a thing to do something sucky so now we're going to make it a rule that NOBODY can have it!" was a fundamental management axiom at my last job, which was one of the reasons why working there was so obnoxious.

Oh god, that’s like going back to first grade. “Johnny and Ben were mean to the kids sitting across from them, so we’re going to take away everyone’s recess today! Hopefully that will make Johnny and Ben not do that again.”  And you know what? It never works. All it does is piss off the rest of the class.

[formulanone]

There's an easier way to handle this: Shame the hell out of them and tell them they're terrible roadgeeks.

That'll work.

Or just report constant disruptions that actually affect you to the mod staff.

[1]

There's an easier way to handle this: Shame the hell out of them and tell them they're terrible roadgeeks.

That'll work.

That would have turned webny99 away permanently.

[SectorZ]

I think editing a title should need mod approval. That way we know what the thread was originally about. Other edits, no.

But if there's a typo in the title?

And be deprived of everlasting threads like "Sine salad"?

[Hot Rod Hootenanny]

 
If we're going to have much ado about nothing, lets have some fun with it.

[webny99]

There's an easier way to handle this: Shame the hell out of them and tell them they're terrible roadgeeks.

That'll work.

That would have turned webny99 away permanently.

I think he was being sarcastic, but yes.

Obviously, I'm very disappointed in myself about what happened, but I do feel there was (and still is) a pathway for the stats page to remain.

[tolbs17]

There's an easier way to handle this: Shame the hell out of them and tell them they're terrible roadgeeks.

That'll work.

That would have turned webny99 away permanently.

I think he was being sarcastic, but yes.

Obviously, I'm very disappointed in myself about what happened, but I do feel there was (and still is) a pathway for the stats page to remain.

And Marf....

[1]

There's an easier way to handle this: Shame the hell out of them and tell them they're terrible roadgeeks.

That'll work.

That would have turned webny99 away permanently.

I think he was being sarcastic, but yes.

Obviously, I'm very disappointed in myself about what happened, but I do feel there was (and still is) a pathway for the stats page to remain.

I was actually referring to the time you deleted all your OPs, not the stats incident.

[webny99]

There's an easier way to handle this: Shame the hell out of them and tell them they're terrible roadgeeks.

That'll work.

That would have turned webny99 away permanently.

I think he was being sarcastic, but yes.

Obviously, I'm very disappointed in myself about what happened, but I do feel there was (and still is) a pathway for the stats page to remain.

I was actually referring to the time you deleted all your OPs, not the stats incident.

Gotcha. That's my bad, I misinterpreted formulanone's post. As I recall, I deleted all my OP's because I was so steamed off about the stats incident. However, I did go back and fix them eventually.

[Roadgeekteen]

There's an easier way to handle this: Shame the hell out of them and tell them they're terrible roadgeeks.

That'll work.

That would have turned webny99 away permanently.

I think he was being sarcastic, but yes.

Obviously, I'm very disappointed in myself about what happened, but I do feel there was (and still is) a pathway for the stats page to remain.

And Marf....

I forgot all about him LOL! 
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=21868.msg2287970#msg2287970

[Roadgeekteen]

On the whole, the idea that some people may edit in annoying ways is not a valid reason to remove the option for the rest of us. Dealing with problem users as they arise is exactly the right approach.

"One person used a thing to do something sucky so now we're going to make it a rule that NOBODY can have it!" was a fundamental management axiom at my last job, which was one of the reasons why working there was so obnoxious.

I must say, that's pretty much exactly how I feel about the stats page being canned...

So you think only people who have posted about stats should be blocked from seeing them? Hmm...

I don't think that anyone should be banned from seeing them. We got our four year break from seeing the forum states, I think we deserve another chance.

[plain]

About the editing:

I generally do it after I post pictures. I always use Tapatalk to post them, so it's just easier for me to add context to them by going back into the browser and modifying it (especially if the post has more than one pic).

Also like others said, I might catch a slight typo and have to correct it lol

[Roadgeekteen]

I no longer think that we should ban users from editing, most people use it correctly.

[tolbs17]

I no longer think that we should ban users from editing, most people use it correctly.

So I say just moderate