Potentially off topic posts wind up here

[jonottawa]

Glad to hear it, Keylime.

 

Speaking of cooler heads prevailing on this issue ...

 

I'd appreciate it if the readers of this thread would read and consider signing this petition I sponsored, based on a letter by Richard E. Willey and edited by Josh Donn.

 

Thanks.

 

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/USBFVeniceCupTeam/

 

Edit:

 

This was an on-topic post in this thread about reaction (the BW editorial response) to the controversy.

 

Ulven's post below (before he edited it) was a false claim that I am 'spamming' threads. A single on-topic post in a thread relating to the issue doesn't constitute spam.

 

I had a thread up on this particular petition and it was taken down.

[ulven]

Removed.

[Al_U_Card]

Yes spamming does require more than one mention as in spam spam spam spam spam spam spam spam....wonderful spam! M. Python. :(

[uday]

Perhaps a single mention in many threads does not constitute spam, but I think it does. Maybe I should not have said "spam" just now - spam has too many negative connotations. I only mean that off-topic posts usually detract from the main message of a thread, and we'd benefit if they were moved. Yes, whether a post is off topic or not is usually debatable. I expect to err on the side of caution for a day or two.

 

 

As you know by now, we rarely jump in to prune anything legitimate (as opposed to, say, ads for products that claim to enlarge body parts or whatever) .

 

Watercooler is the watercooler and we're generally relaxed about it.

 

Sometimes threads flare up and need a certain degree of attention. It isn't always "politics" at fault, or "religion" or "abortion" or whatever - we had a nice flame war going once while two tourney clubs went at each other. Toasty, for sure.

 

This will all simmer down eventually and we'll go back to the way things were. I'm hoping that whatever happens in SF will calm things down. Yeah, I know. "Good luck with that."

 

 

uday

[mrdct]

Perhaps a single mention in many threads does not constitute spam, but I think it does.

I also think Jonathan was spamming various threads in this forum with links to his petition but, Uday, you have also recently been posting links to your "Hoof and Mouth Disease" thread in several places and in your case without any comment or explanation which as an even more insidious form of spam as the user needs to follow the link to find out that it's spam - at least Jonathan was overt about it.

[uday]

This seems argumentative for the sake of being argumentative. Just in case you are being serious, and even if you are not...

 

My references to hoof and mouth disease had nothing to do with cattle farming, except by alluding to the "cure" for the disease (slaughter the herd to eliminate the problem) as a potential cure for our own disease.

 

The references were warnings to each thread that the thread was in danger of being shut down.

 

Each thread - indeed, the watercooler itself - exists only as long as it is more entertaining and enlightening (pick positive term) than it is troublesome, draining, offensive (pick negative term)

 

 

Here, from Rain's fingers to your ears:

 

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=12841

 

 

This isn't Usenet....

 

 

Uday

[jonottawa]

Since Justin's signature isn't spam (it's been the same for months, linking to a blog that no longer is active) I assume we can agree that my new signature isn't either.

 

All I asked for was one thread. I did not spam anything anywhere. There are 3 or 4 threads discussing this issue and I only posted my petition notice once in each of those threads. I loathe spam. I find signature lines to be spammy, which is why I haven't had one until now.

 

Edit: I guess I should clarify that the first post in this thread (by me) was put there by Uday. This post I entered here on my own.