Edited by iBond, 30 April 2011 - 08:51 PM.
Double Posting...
Started by
iBond
, Apr 30 2011 08:50 PM
2 replies to this topic
#1
Posted 30 April 2011 - 08:50 PM
I noticed that some of my topics haven't been touched for at least a few days with me being the last to post. Would it be an exception to double post to get more people to look at the topic? Also, if I wanted something new to add to the discussion, would that be alright to wait a few days and then add what I wanted to add? I mean, I think that would make more sense than having to start a new topic that would still fit in the same topic. Just curious. I wouldn't want to get banned or warned is all. Thanks for understanding!
#2
Posted 01 May 2011 - 04:52 AM
No real harm in posting new thoughts into threads one has started, even if others aren't doing so (which may be because, this being a longstanding board, they've been discussed before and in a "news" downtime it tends to be the more established members who stick around. Members who have been chivvying away at each other on such things since the dawn of recorded time. Not to say they won't contribute but do bear that in mind).
Bumping something up to try to get it or one's self more attention is, however, the work of an utter scoundrel.
Starting new versions of topics one has already created is unsporting; would make one come across like an absolute stinker, the ghastliest of ghastly ticks and the sort of person who would wear a wing collar shirt or hold their knife like a pen.
Quoting one's own material demonstrates rapscallion tendencies and is a clear indication of moral retrogression with little chance of bouncebackability.
Bumping something up to try to get it or one's self more attention is, however, the work of an utter scoundrel.
Starting new versions of topics one has already created is unsporting; would make one come across like an absolute stinker, the ghastliest of ghastly ticks and the sort of person who would wear a wing collar shirt or hold their knife like a pen.
Quoting one's own material demonstrates rapscallion tendencies and is a clear indication of moral retrogression with little chance of bouncebackability.