the thread about nothing...

I don’t understand about this whole thread diggin’ “rule”?

If it’s wrong then why haven’t y’all deleted the old threads from NT all together?
To clarify: it is not necessarily the case that every attempt to reply to an old thread represents a rule violation. That's a rule that exists on other forums, but not ours.

The issue is that, often, when people reply to an old thread, it's for the purpose of trolling. In this instance, the reply was used to dig up dirt on a NikeTalk member who was engaged in some social media feud whose contents are inherently disrespectful and inappropriate for our community. Nothing positive would be gained by leaving it open to further replies.

If, on the other hand, someone has a legitimate update or something relevant to add to an old thread, we have not considered that to be a rule violation.


Automatic locking for threads over X years old is something we've considered, but it hasn't stood out as a significant enough issue to warrant modifying the site. For best performance and reliability, we try to run the platform as close to stock as possible.
 
To clarify: it is not necessarily the case that every attempt to reply to an old thread represents a rule violation. That's a rule that exists on other forums, but not ours.

The issue is that, often, when people reply to an old thread, it's for the purpose of trolling. In this instance, the reply was used to dig up dirt on a NikeTalk member who was engaged in some social media feud whose contents are inherently disrespectful and inappropriate for our community. Nothing positive would be gained by leaving it open to further replies.

If, on the other hand, someone has a legitimate update or something relevant to add to an old thread, we have not considered that to be a rule violation.


Automatic locking for threads over X years old is something we've considered, but it hasn't stood out as a significant enough issue to warrant modifying the site. For best performance and reliability, we try to run the platform as close to stock as possible.
Since you’re in here, why was my “would you eat dog thread?” deleted? It was a genuine question and ppl eats dogs around the world? That thread was getting good responses especially from the user that admitted to actually having tried. What was wrong w/ that thread?
 
giphy (1).gif
 
I used to be 13 minutes on the nose from the age of like 16 to 25. The older I get, the more that time increases.

I do not get naked but I do take off my pants...in fact I only leave my underwear on one leg/foot to avoid all restrictions.
 
Thanks but I know how everything here works. Would you like it if I personally refunded your donation? I'll even triple it if you promise to log out forever. I can easily cover your end here. As much as this site values your donation, we don't need people like you slapping us with it when you don't get your way. I once raised over $2000 here thru 1 raffle. You don't see me doing what you're doing now, do you?

If he implied that our system could issue refunds, or that it was our policy to offer refunds, he was mistaken. This is a recently implemented system. It’s possible that he was misinformed or making an offer to personally reimburse you.

He’s since been made aware of this and given a quick refresher on how we expect situations like this to be handled.

Was this before or after he made the statements above highlighted in red and yellow?
 
If that is the proper procedure, it was pretty poor form for your mod to come into this thread and threaten to lock it. Piss poor, in fact.

Also the "disrespectful squabble" was described as an "obvious joke" by your mod. The lack of cohesion is ridiculous.
The lack of cohesion kinda makes sense now that we know one of em doesnt get paid
 
Back
Top Bottom