BattierBeMyDaddy said:

Awww...no need to be flattered Batti.

Give Special Ted a big squeezy poo......go on...

(((group hug)))

SexLovely said:

You two are scaring me!

in the name of love...before you break my heart

SexLovely said:

Sexlovely, you depress me.

draggin' my heart around

BattierBeMyDaddy said:

Sexlovely, you depress me. [/quote]



Poor Batti...

Me and Special Ted are going to go watch X-Files now...U want come with us and have huggy poos while we watch TV.vision??



If not......bye bye bunny and me and teddy be back in 45mins...

MrBliss said:

Me gusta los aviones, me gustas tú, me gusta viajar, me gustas tú, me gusta la mañana, me gustas tú...

using sex as a weapon

Boob said:

Isn't a "co-sign" just a bump in disguise? Come clean!

It's irritating and should be illegal. The guilty party should receive a warning, or have their account suspended.

The reason most databases are saved, is for archiving...that is retrieval of information for future use.

It's one thing to bump 20 threads to annoy, and another to bring back some interesting topics for discussion.

The only threads that are "dead" are those that are locked and/or deleted.

Therefore, I personally don't see the bumping of threads as means to get anyone in trouble.

In fact, oftentimes a person is scolded for duplicating a thread that's already been made. That was the main reason for the search function when it was operational. It was to bring back a topic, or topics you wanted to discuss.

In this case, it happened to be mine...it could have been the threads of anyone else in here. It's been done before, and will continue to be done...that's why all the old threads aren't deleted or locked.

One other thing...the reason I see that Ian posted his message on Haystack's thread, is because Haystack basically said...let's to bump ALL of MrBliss's threads, and not just revive some good ole threads...

This is a good thread II.

tommyalma said:

I responded within two minutes of the original thread, how is that a bump? I think you should click here: http://www.acsu.buffalo.e...youare.swf

I don't see anything wrong with bringing up old threads.
They're here for a reason, and that reason is to discuss the topics.
That's what's been done. It wasn't done for "bumping" reasons or whatever you wanna call it.
Those are actually fun topics to discuss, so why not enjoy them?

Heavenly said:

If you look at a lot of the threads, there are only about 3 people just responding over and over and over again.

Natsume said:

And those people are enjoying those threads. so your point would be...?
Those threads aren't flaming anyone. and as IceNine complained earlier and a lot of you agreed with him, most of the recent topics are about sex, so there you go, different subjects which most of them have nothing to do with sex.

LaVisHh said:

Of course there is nothing wrong with retrieving old threads and reviving them, people do it all the time.

I think it turns into something else when one person bumps numerous threads, from one single person, within minutes of one another.

Ian addressed this the other day when Haystack thought it would be fun, and I don't think Haystack literally meant bumping ALL of Bliss' threads.

AzureStar said:

Quite agree. The reason this stuff doesn't feature in the site rules is because there is nothing wrong with OCCASIONALLY resurrecting a great thread, if you have something new to add to it.

However this constant "bumping" is ruining the forum for others and won't be tolerated any further.

Heavenly said:

Hey buddy, go back to that thread and you can see I didn't agree with him.

This has nothing to do with sex, IMHO, so your argument about Ice doesn't apply here. The real issue is that Lav's old, dead topics are being bumped up continuously. It's not like the same person is going through and finding all of the sex threads created by different people - they are specifically finding Lav's threads and bumping them up, regardless of their subject matter.

AzureStar said:

Well put, Azure.

ian said:

Thank you. Muchas gracias.

ian said:

There are always ways around it. I actually have nothing to say but will bump this thread at least four more time for an example.
[This message was edited Sun Feb 2 15:49:28 PST 2003 by theC]

theC said:

What! Nobody is gonna say anything?

theC said:

C, you know... I'm going to have to explain this I think, so that you can understand. It's been said I don't know how many times in this thread.

Resurrecting the occasional thread is okay. Say I missed one "X" weeks ago by orger "X" and I want to put my two cents in.

It becomes annoying when one orger is running around resurrecting threads that have not been posted on since fucking November...And not just doing it because they want to add their opinion, but because they think they're being cute/funny, whatever. Nothing constructive gets added, it's just a bump. Then, not to mention, it's not just one thread that is bumped that way, or 3 or 4 threads from different users, it's fucking 50 from one orger.

theC said:

Yeah, you know what? I'm fixing to fucking say something. Take whatever stick you have in your ass, and bring it out. You're being a total fucking prick. How's that?

BattierBeMyDaddy said:

OK i guess i can't express an opinion. I am showing ways people bump threads in here all the time. They ain't fooling no one. But i will keep my thoughts to myself.

theC said:

i knew what you were doing .. and i thought it was a good point...

theC said:

You can express an opinion in a way that isn't asinine. You know I appreciate your thoughts, C. However, I think we all understand that when one posts on a thread, you bump it.

MrBliss said:

Thanks Bliss, i was trying to show that you can bump a thread without saying anything relevant and yet look like you are not bumping the thread. Instead of saying bump i could do this :LOL:

theC said:

You just don't get it. That's it. I'm going to beat my fucking head on my desk. I really can't take it anymore.