A thread of threads

[jeff of pa]

I'm concerned. I stated a possible title and approach to the presentation and Jeff stated that he felt the thread would be deleted. I don't want to waste my time if that's the case.

I shouldn't have to say this todd

it depends on your intentions, and the type of responses you receive.
I think it's already been said, if your just posting it to
copy & paste his posts and comment on them in a negative way, yes
it will probably be gone. copying & pasting members posts to other threads is the quickest way of
getting complaints.

if your seriously interested and not doing it to make a joke of his thread

your thread will probably survive, but not all the posters to it may

I don't promise anything, Because I don't want members looking for Loopholes.
Like those who think If it isn't in the Rules it's a free for all

 

[spaceman]

This is an extremely active forum. IMHO the threads go from verifiable to highly suspect.

If I stated that the lead was highly suspect it seems that I would be banned from what I am reading. I surfed and found nothing that I would say is verifiable but a guess if someone had a good lead they would keep it to themself. Thank you for the info though.

 

[Todd from PA]

I shouldn't have to say this todd

it depends on your intentions, and the type of responses you receive.
I think it's already been said, if your just posting it to
copy & paste his posts and comment on them in a negative way, yes
it will probably be gone. copying & pasting members posts to other threads is the quickest way of
getting complaints.

if your seriously interested and not doing it to make a joke of his thread

your thread will probably survive, but not all the posters to it may

I don't promise anything, Because I don't want members looking for Loopholes.
Like those who think If it isn't in the Rules it's a free for all

Thanks Jeff, I was just put off a little by your response. I can assure you that I'm drop dead serious about this and have no intentions to mock anyone or mock the other thread, although I can't say as much for others who may post.

Let me ask this. If copying and pasting comments from another thread is a no-no, what about referring to a post # or a link to a particular comment? Again, just want to be certain that I'm doing things on the up and up.

And I also want to let you, Treasure Hunter and the other mods know that most everyone appreciates what you guys do here and the time that it takes. I've worn the "forum moderator hat" in the past and it was no picnic.

 

[flyadive]

It won't be your thread Todd that gets deleted, it will be other peoples post that disagree with you that will be deleted.
Some can't help themselves. Also I think the OP will not post there either. ??
I will not cause trouble! Promise.

 

[Peyton Manning]

got to wondering why I posted, I have no horse in this race and am not a Mod. Ignore my comments

 

[vor]

It won't be your thread Todd that gets deleted, it will be other peoples post that disagree with you that will be deleted.
Some can't help themselves. Also I think the OP will not post there either. ??
I will not cause trouble! Promise.

Yeah. And neither will I.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using TreasureNet

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

If I stated that the lead was highly suspect it seems that I would be banned from what I am reading. I surfed and found nothing that I would say is verifiable but a guess if someone had a good lead they would keep it to themself. Thank you for the info though.

Saying you don't believe a lead or story or think a lead means something different will not get a member in trouble, calling someone a liar or implying they are lying will.

Starting a thread to present a different scenario for a treasure story is fine, starting one to mock another thread is not.....

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

[jeff of pa]

Thanks Jeff, I was just put off a little by your response. I can assure you that I'm drop dead serious about this and have no intentions to mock anyone or mock the other thread, although I can't say as much for others who may post.

Let me ask this. If copying and pasting comments from another thread is a no-no, what about referring to a post # or a link to a particular comment? Again, just want to be certain that I'm doing things on the up and up.

And I also want to let you, Treasure Hunter and the other mods know that most everyone appreciates what you guys do here and the time that it takes. I've worn the "forum moderator hat" in the past and it was no picnic.

Referring to other posts by # sounds good at this point.

All you really need to remember is if a post disappears & you are warned,
heed the warning. You don't necessarily need to take this as being in trouble,
Just an advisement at that time.

again, I can't / won't say anything is 100% ok because some may twist things & then
throw my words up against me

Yes we are just here to Help out, keep things in some type of order & enjoy
the forum too. we are not your enemy.

 

[vor]

Todd:
Don't think that referring to a post number will work.
1) The reader will have to switch back and forth between threads and most will not take the time to look it up then when they do:
2) Numbers will change as prior posts are deleted (which has been known to happen on many occasions) and will cause more confusion,

Anything wrong with stating and quoting "Joe said ...." in a copy/paste?

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Why do you even have to refer to the other thread at all? I thought the purpose was to present a different opinion.

If you start quoting posts or numbers it will end up becoming attacks. Just present your interpretation of the hunt or story...

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

[Todd from PA]

Fine, then if someone ask what the heck I'm referencing I'll just tell them to "RTOT".

 

[vor]

Fine, then if someone ask what the heck I'm referencing I'll just tell them to "RTOT".

Is this a hostage negotiation or just a posting of some facts
V

 

[ECS]

So if I (hypothetically) have difficulty believing the claim of a poster on this forum, and ask questions regarding that post, I am somehow violating the rules? I have a problem with that.

If the posting privilege on TN you want to save
Pay attention to what the mods say
Don't argue,name call or misbehave
Or give back for what a poster gave
Better get a Burma Shave!

 

[vor]

Since we are talking rules here; I don't see anything wrong with discussing blogs on here (no, not other boards/forums).

 

[flyadive]

Todd; not to be nosey or anything but I checked out your profile here on TNET and I noticed you never started a thread as of yet. Was just seeing if you started the sepa thread is all. You joined just before the Yuletide in Dec. 11.

 

[bevo]

I think the thread on Ted Cruz is awesome!

 

[Todd from PA]

Is this a hostage negotiation...
V

Almost feels like it.

 

[Todd from PA]

Todd; not to be nosey or anything but I checked out your profile here on TNET and I noticed you never started a thread as of yet. Was just seeing if you started the sepa thread is all. You joined just before the Yuletide in Dec. 11.

No, I haven't started yet. Getting my ducks in a row and writing things up, but still considering otherwise.

Yes, I joined December 6th 2011. I'm a local history nut and came across the PA section of this site while researching the Fingal Castle, Morgantown Pa., but I'm not sure what my join date has to do with anything.

 

[Todd from PA]

No need for my findings at this point. The "other thread" seems to be doing just fine.

 

[Doubter in MD]

Here is my take on the "buried treasure" thread...

While there appears to be a handful of believers, I think that most people, like me, believe it to be nothing more than an elaborate story. It generates a lot of traffic for various reasons. Some find the story itself entertaining while others find the arguments over its validity entertaining. It stays alive because it has really gotten under the skin of a few here on T-Net. I know the mods have suggested on more than one occasion that the the dissenters are the main reason the thread has continued chugging along. I agree with this.

Speaking of the mods, there have been accusations that the mods are "protecting" the OP of that thread. Hell, I did it myself and got a vacation for it. I now understand that the mods are just doing their job. Look at it this way...

Lets say "Mod A" feels that LRLs, and dowsing in general is a raft of crap. Would it be fair if "Mod A" came in and shut down all of the threads supporting this because they think "it isn't true"? Of course not, because some people do believe it. The same is true of the "buried treasure" thread. Whether the mods believe it or not they have to treat it like any other thread. Even though the content may stretch the limits of credibility for many of us, I don't believe there is any collusion. I think they're just trying to moderate as evenhandedly as possible across the board. Of course if you're vehemently opposed to the contents of that thread it might appear to you that they're "protecting" it. But I don't believe it. (any more)

That's my two cents.

EDIT: Moved a comma, added a period.