[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

What about it? :S

Have a look at it. the same poster posting the same comment over and over and over again .... with an occasional slight variation.

[Jordan.]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

why... perhaps others may have joined in? this year's BB has not yet started - it doesn't mean suddenly all discussion in previous years shows cannot be discussed. (otherwise it seems pretty silly to have any threads at all on previous shows?)

Can you give me a good reason what bumping a thread about Sophie Reade running the London Marathon 2 years ago has to contribute now and what there is left to discuss on the matter?

Tbh Pyramid this thread just seems like you want to have a good moan about something.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by michael21

well that my point there nothing wrong with it yet some members will see it as a bump

It's not an old thread bump. Are you missing the point about the difference between bumping a discussion thread from yesterday compared to a random thread from years ago?

Although that Emma Crosby thread is just stupid and should be closed.

[michael21]

Originally Posted by Jordan.

Can you give me a good reason what bumping a thread about Sophie Reade running the London Marathon 2 years ago has to contribute now and what there is left to discuss on the matter?

Tbh Pyramid this thread just seems like you want to have a good moan about something.

well if yiu read the post you would see as i said i want Sophie Reade to go in cleb bb 2011

[Locke.]

Still waiting for a day to go past where Pyramid doesn't find something to moan or argue about

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Jordan.

Can you give me a good reason what bumping a thread about Sophie Reade running the London Marathon 2 years ago has to contribute now and what there is left to discuss on the matter?

Tbh Pyramid this thread just seems like you want to have a good moan about something.

You're entitled to your opinion Jordan, just as I am entitled to ask the question I have. Stop trying to turn it into something personal.

The comment highlighting Arista's constant bumping with nothing more to say apart from repeating: is a perfect example of my very point.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by michael21

well if yiu read the post you would see as i said i want Sophie Reade to go in cleb bb 2011

Then why not post in the appropriate "who do you want to go into CBB" thread in the relevant sub-forum?

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by michael21

well that my point there nothing wrong with it yet some members will see it as a bump

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

Have a look at it. the same poster posting the same comment over and over and over again .... with an occasional slight variation.

Two very different answers

I havent even seen that thread before actually i dont think

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Locke.

Still waiting for a day to go past where Pyramid doesn't find something to moan or argue about

Once again Locke, you enter a thread, do not comment on the OP or what the thread is about but continue to attack me personally and are allowed to doing so constantly.

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Two very different answers

I havent even seen that thread before actually i dont think

I can't comment on Michael's reply: but do you see the point I am making in respect of my own answer?

[Marsh.]

Woe is me.

[michael21]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Two very different answers

I havent even seen that thread before actually i dont think

i think you should lock that emma c thread now you have seen it

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by 08marsh

Woe is me.

yes. Either harrassing a member on a personal basis continually is allowed or it's not and I shoudl be allowed to post without being constantly baited and harrassed by such members - who still have offered nothing to the actual thread other than personal attack.

Rather than it being dealt with: it allows to continue with the result that threads are simply closed - rather than dealing with the culprits.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

I can't comment on Michael's reply: but do you see the point I am making in respect of my own answer?

I do. But I dont get what relevance it has to your OP actually.

I thought the point was that people shouldnt be told off for bumping threads :/

I'm a bit lost with the whole thing tbh

[Jordan.]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

You're entitled to your opinion Jordan, just as I am entitled to ask the question I have. Stop trying to turn it into something personal.

The comment highlighting Arista's constant bumping with nothing more to say apart from repeating: is a perfect example of my very point.

I know that but you must be able to see the difference in bumping a thread about someone running a marathon years ago compared to something like the Word Association thread being bumped? Also you're getting at the point mods complain when old threads are bumped yet haven't shown us any clear example of this happening.

& with Arista he bumps tv discussion threads, its not his fault no one cares

[michael21]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I do. But I dont get what relevance it has to your OP actually.

I thought the point was that people shouldnt be told off for bumping threads :/

I'm a bit lost with the whole thing tbh

stop being cleaver and close the emma cosby thread

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I do. But I dont get what relevance it has to your OP actually.

I thought the point was that people shouldnt be told off for bumping threads :/

I'm a bit lost with the whole thing tbh

The relevance is: at what point is it one or the other as far as 'not allowed to bump' / 'seek out previous threads'.

The Arista thread is an example of spamming and bumping, yet other old threads that have been added to - the poster gets aggro for it.

[Boothy]

Originally Posted by michael21

well if yiu read the post you would see as i said i want Sophie Reade to go in cleb bb 2011

What has that go to do with her running the marathon?

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Jordan.

I know that but you must be able to see the difference in bumping a thread about someone running a marathon years ago compared to something like the Word Association thread being bumped? Also you're getting at the point mods complain when old threads are bumped yet haven't shown us any clear example of this happening.

& with Arista he bumps tv discussion threads, its not his fault no one cares

It happens believe me.

I said earlier: next time I see it happening -I'll post on here.

As for Arista - are certain members allowed concessions and not expected to follow the same rules as others then? I'm being serious.

Either bumping threads for no good reason is allowed or it's not.

[michael21]

Originally Posted by Boothy

What has that go to do with her running the marathon?

well lots as the person running it was who i wanted to go in the house and there both for charity

[Locke.]

Arista bumps his thread near enough daily when the TV show he is talking about is on. He has a perfectly good reason for doing it, which is that the TV show is on.. He does it in other threads about TV shows but people actually care about them and talk about the shows in the threads so you don't really notice it. All he is doing is reminind people that it is on.

Posting in threads that haven't had a reply for years is completely different.

ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU DO IT IN MULTIPLE THREADS ALL THE TIME MICHAEL21 AND THEBEAST

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

The relevance is: at what point is it one or the other as far as 'not allowed to bump' / 'seek out previous threads'.

The Arista thread is an example of spamming and bumping, yet other old threads that have been added to - the poster gets aggro for it.

Aristas thread(while being pretty pointless IMO) is being bumped to inform people that 'fit emma' is on tv at that time. Thus having a (very slight) reason behind the bumping.

Lets take for example...a thread about davina presenting BB + the million pound drop 2 years ago or whatever. This gets bumped. What possible reason is there for that? You could argue that the poster wanted to know what davina was up to NOW, but why bump the old thread...why not make a new one?

The looking for old threads before making a new one thing...this is more for during BB really. We do expect people to at least scan through the first page of threads in the BB forum before starting another thread. Reason being...otherwise we would likely have about 20 threads on exactly the same subject. We do not expect you to do a proper search to check every thread that you make, thats just ridiculous. I know some members do say things like 'theres a thread on this, it was made in 2005 ' and whatever, but tbh thats just them being awkward.

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Aristas thread(while being pretty pointless IMO) is being bumped to inform people that 'fit emma' is on tv at that time. Thus having a (very slight) reason behind the bumping.

Lets take for example...a thread about davina presenting BB + the million pound drop 2 years ago or whatever. This gets bumped. What possible reason is there for that? You could argue that the poster wanted to know what davina was up to NOW, but why bump the old thread...why not make a new one?

The looking for old threads before making a new one thing...this is more for during BB really. We do expect people to at least scan through the first page of threads in the BB forum before starting another thread. Reason being...otherwise we would likely have about 2 threads on exactly the same subject. We do not expect you to do a proper search to check every thread that you make, thats just ridiculous. I know some members do say things like 'theres a thread on this, it was made in 2005 ' and whatever, but tbh thats just them being awkward.

So it is okay to bump threads that are pretty pointless, that have no real relevance (when all is considered) and just keep putting up the same comment.

I agree with 7 year old threads etc totally ridiculous, agree 100% with you: but surely a thread from say last year, if there is some comment that is still relative, it should be allowed?

You see why I ask the question now?

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

So it is okay to bump threads that are pretty pointless, that have no real relevance (when all is considered) and just keep putting up the same comment.

I agree with 7 year old threads etc totally ridiculous, agree 100% with you: but surely a thread from say last year, if there is some comment that is still relative, it should be allowed?

You see why I ask the question now?

But again, I have NEVER seen this happen. Until you give an example of this(which shouldnt be hard as it happens all the time) I cant really comment. :/

[michael21]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Aristas thread(while being pretty pointless IMO) is being bumped to inform people that 'fit emma' is on tv at that time. Thus having a (very slight) reason behind the bumping.

Lets take for example...a thread about davina presenting BB + the million pound drop 2 years ago or whatever. This gets bumped. What possible reason is there for that? You could argue that the poster wanted to know what davina was up to NOW, but why bump the old thread...why not make a new one?

The looking for old threads before making a new one thing...this is more for during BB really. We do expect people to at least scan through the first page of threads in the BB forum before starting another thread. Reason being...otherwise we would likely have about 20 threads on exactly the same subject. We do not expect you to do a proper search to check every thread that you make, thats just ridiculous. I know some members do say things like 'theres a thread on this, it was made in 2005 ' and whatever, but tbh thats just them being awkward.

because channel 4 are showing a movie on the 17th that why channel5 move bb to the 18th i was saying i bet channel 4 put on the MPD when bb on what wrong with its better then saying on now right