psa Forum Rules Refresher. PLEASE READ

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

Since it's the offseason and also because of what's been going on since the free agent signings, it's a good time to remind everyone of some of the forum rules.

I've posted a few warnings in threads but wanted to put a reminder where everyone will see it.

From the forum rules:

· DO post a link reference (or cite the TV/radio source) when reporting breaking news, reports, etc. Threads started without this information may be deleted or moved.

When posting a trade or signing, please provide a link to a reputable source as confirmation. This time of year people often make fake twitter accounts so make sure the tweet you're linking to is a verified account from a reputable source.

· DO post constructively. If you can't add anything meaningful to a discussion, don't bother.

Before hitting reply, just take a second to think about what impact your post will have on the discussion. Is it making it better or worse?

· DON'T post duplicate topics. Before posting your new thread be sure to check the first two pages of the forum to make sure the topic isn't already being discussed. Multiple violations of this rule by a single member is punishable by temporary suspension from the forums.

· DON'T post false and/or misleading topics. Members caught doing so will be banned IMMEDIATELY with NO chance of reinstatement.

The punishment may seem severe but if people start posting fake trade threads, the forum becomes total chaos. LGW should be a resource for solid hockey talk and information.

· DO refrain from using vulgar language. There is a curse/bad word filter currently on the forum and members that purposely attempt to circumvent this filter will be subject to a suspension of account privileges.

No alternate spellings. No blanking some of the letters. Let the profanity filter do its job.

· DON'T personally attack other members. This includes name-calling, flame-baiting, etc.. If you can't discuss your point with maturity then don't discuss it. People that violate this rule will be dealt with swiftly.

In short, debate the content of someone's argument, not the person themselves.

This includes broad insults against people on this forum and their level of fandom. Like it or not, complaining about the Red Wings can be on topic. If you don't like it, don't read it. If they've clearly violated forum rules, report it to bring it to a moderators attention. If you really don't like anything a person here has to say, you can put that member on your ignore list.

As I've said before, this forum relies entirely on content generated from its members. You are all the authors of this forum, so it will only be as good or bad as you make it. The ultimate goal of all of these rules is not to punish people, but to make LGW a source of lively, respectful, informed discussion.

Thanks!

(link to the full forum rules for reference)

http://www.letsgowings.com/forums/index.php?app=forums&module=extras&section=boardrules

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

An update:

I know people are unhappy about the signing, but enough with the Cleary jokes in every single thread on the forum.

For starters, they're usually not that funny as it gets old very fast. Second, it makes it difficult to carry on a conversation about the actual topic.

Thank you.

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

I stated it in the original post but it apparently needs repeating.

If you want to guarantee your post will be deleted, be sure to include statements about other fans here whining and crying.

[Euro_Twins 4,485]

I stated it in the original post but it apparently needs repeating.

If you want to guarantee your post will be deleted, be sure to include statements about other fans here whining and crying.

Don't forget the differentiating between real fans and us "fake fans"

[hillbillywingsfan 794]

Don't forget the differentiating between real fans and us "fake fans"

http://www.imdb.com/video/screenplay/vi1274609945/

[LidstromIsASuperhero 29]

I would like to bring up a rule I'm not sure I like on here. It regards the whole problem with starting multiple threads for the same topic. I've seen new threads about something fairly important get deleted because they were being discussed, and buried, in another large thread. Then, when you see an old thread about the topic get brough back, it'll get deleted too. Why have a million pages of forum topics if we can't start a new discussion or read or talk about a specific thing? I don't want to read through 85 pages of text to talk about one signing, it's a waste of time.

[TheXym 2,606]

I would like to bring up a rule I'm not sure I like on here. It regards the whole problem with starting multiple threads for the same topic. I've seen new threads about something fairly important get deleted because they were being discussed, and buried, in another large thread. Then, when you see an old thread about the topic get brough back, it'll get deleted too. Why have a million pages of forum topics if we can't start a new discussion or read or talk about a specific thing? I don't want to read through 85 pages of text to talk about one signing, it's a waste of time.

I empathize, but there is a forum search function, and recent topics aren't that far back.

Plus if you make a great point, it is best to do it in the existing thread so more will see it.

Edited July 27, 2014 by TheXym

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

I would like to bring up a rule I'm not sure I like on here. It regards the whole problem with starting multiple threads for the same topic. I've seen new threads about something fairly important get deleted because they were being discussed, and buried, in another large thread. Then, when you see an old thread about the topic get brough back, it'll get deleted too. Why have a million pages of forum topics if we can't start a new discussion or read or talk about a specific thing? I don't want to read through 85 pages of text to talk about one signing, it's a waste of time.

There is always going to be some grey area as to what constitutes a duplicate thread. In general we try to let threads live if there's good conversation going on in each of them and they aren't a clear duplicate, but obviously people may disagree with that judgment from time to time.

However, if there is an existing thread on a topic, no matter how long, we will delete the newly created one. No one is asking or expecting you to read all 85 pages of a thread before you post. The conversation evolves and people are welcome to chime in about the topic at any point.

For signings, there's the general thread for smaller signings but people are welcome to create threads to discuss a specific signing. The main thread is sort of a catch-all for updates regarding the minor signings.

[LidstromIsASuperhero 29]

Makes sense, and I acknowledge the grey area that can be complicated to deal with. Overall it's pretty well controlled, so I'd say if a new thread pops up with which could be a duplicate, let the quality of discussion dictate the survival of the thread. overall it's not too bad, and I think anything that is newsworthy, like a big hit, suspension,injury or a nice goal, should be enough justification for a new thread. thanks. and the cleary/holland/franzen bashing is getting a bit old, whether it's justified or not imho.

[Matt 1,049]

Makes sense, and I acknowledge the grey area that can be complicated to deal with. Overall it's pretty well controlled, so I'd say if a new thread pops up with which could be a duplicate, let the quality of discussion dictate the survival of the thread. overall it's not too bad, and I think anything that is newsworthy, like a big hit, suspension,injury or a nice goal, should be enough justification for a new thread. thanks. and the cleary/holland/franzen bashing is getting a bit old, whether it's justified or not imho.

In most, if not all, of these instances the duplicate threads are merged, with the one that was started first keeping the topic title (this is by default).