Running thread on the running thread debate

Sports Journalists Forum – Media, Newsroom & Reporting Talk

Help Support Sports Journalists Forum:

Status
Not open for further replies.

Freelance Hack

Active Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2002
Messages
14,120
City & State/Province
Louisville, KY
Seems like we're discussing whether or not running threads are a good thing for this board.

For the most part, I loathe running threads. There's so much that happens in one game, not to mention one week or one season, that one thread does not do it justice. And I'll be damned if I'm combing through pages of whatever to see if someone might have discussed what I wish to post and discuss.

I'm sure there are some topics that are worthy of running threads, but lately it's been overkill. And it's getting to the point where I think a moratorium on starting running threads is needed.

And, the last time I checked, Flying Headbutt is not a troll. He's never been a troll, nor will he become one in the days ahead.

That's all.
 
Well, we now have 6...count 'em 6... NFL/Colts/Manning/Super Bowl/Black coaches threads that are basically variations on the same theme.
Is that better?
 
More than one thread related to the biggest single sporting event in American sports. On a sports message board. For shame.
 
spnited said:
Well, we now have 6...count 'em 6... NFL/Colts/Manning/Super Bowl/Black coaches threads that are basically variations on the same theme.
Is that better?

It's better to have separate threads on the discussion of numerous topics, IMO. There's no need to clutter up one thread with all this.

It's like a sidebar -- it's probably not worth discussing in the main story, but it's still something worth discussing.
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change.
This is stupid. If we didn't have a running thread, the only threads on the first page would have been about the Colts/Pats game. We don't need six threads that say the same thing in a new variation. All of this was started because flying headbutt was mad when a thread got started. As someone on the thread posted, if you don't like that a Super Bowl thread was started, don't ****ing read it. It's pretty simple.
 
spnited said:
Well, we now have 6...count 'em 6... NFL/Colts/Manning/Super Bowl/Black coaches threads that are basically variations on the same theme.
Is that better?

Lets have a running thread about what an a-hole you are day in and day out. ;D ;)
 
Freelance Hack said:
And it's getting to the point where I think a moratorium on starting running threads is needed.

HOW DARE YOU LIMIT MY FREE SPEECH RIGHTS???!!! IF I WANT TO START A RUNNING THREAD ABOUT JEMELE HILL'S ATTEMPT TO WRITE ABOUT WILLIS MAGAHEE'S BABY MOMMA DRAMA NO ONE OTHER THAN A MODERATOR IS GOING TO STOP ME!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU SUCK! YOU SUCK, SUCK, SUCK!


Sorry. I just wanted to pass that comment along from the last time I proposed a moratorium on a certain kind of thread. Carry on.
 
Freelance Hack said:
spnited said:
Well, we now have 6...count 'em 6... NFL/Colts/Manning/Super Bowl/Black coaches threads that are basically variations on the same theme.
Is that better?

It's better to have separate threads on the discussion of numerous topics, IMO. There's no need to clutter up one thread with all this.

It's like a sidebar -- it's probably not worth discussing in the main story, but it's still something worth discussing.

I don't disagree with this post, necessarily. The thread regarding the black coaches aspect or a thread regarding the two best place kickers in the NFL are not bad threads to have, but during the game, there needs to be one thread that people can post on. Otherwise, there's going to be 30 new threads just saying, "Did you see that great TD pass?"
 
I said that, spup, but I said it nicer. ;D

Edit: Boom shoots, he scores!
 
Wow:
I didn't know the Pats-Colts game was the biggest single sporting event in America.
I didn't know that cheering for the Colts was the biggest single sporting event in America.
I didn't know 2 black coaches in the super bowl was the biggest single sporting event in Amrica.
I didn't know that Peyton not being a fraud was the biggest single sporting event in America.
I didn't know that debating the "greatest" whatever about tonight's game was the biggest single sporting event in America.

I do know, however, that you pallister are one of the biggest single assholes in the history of SportsJournalists.com.
 
spup1122 said:
This is stupid. If we didn't have a running thread, the only threads on the first page would have been about the Colts/Pats game. We don't need six threads that say the same thing in a new variation. All of this was started because flying headbutt was mad when a thread got started. As someone on the thread posted, if you don't like that a Super Bowl thread was started, don't ****ing read it. It's pretty simple.

Yes, we should talk about everything related to the biggest sporting event in the world on one thread. That's it. Nothing anywhere else.

But then again, the Deciders of All That Is Relevant, Necessary, and Worthy of Discussion declared this stupid. So I guess that's your answer, Freelance.
 
pallister said:
I said that, spup, but I said it nicer. ;D

Edit: Boom shoots, he scores!

I think it is a foregone conclusion that you're nicer than me. I think we knew that in July.
 
Boom_70 said:
spnited said:
Well, we now have 6...count 'em 6... NFL/Colts/Manning/Super Bowl/Black coaches threads that are basically variations on the same theme.
Is that better?

Lets have a running thread about what an a-hole you are day in and day out. ;D ;)

Sorry, boob, you and pallister have the asshole-ism locked up tight.
 
spup1122 said:
This is stupid. If we didn't have a running thread, the only threads on the first page would have been about the Colts/Pats game. We don't need six threads that say the same thing in a new variation. All of this was started because flying headbutt was mad when a thread got started. As someone on the thread posted, if you don't like that a Super Bowl thread was started, don't ****ing read it. It's pretty simple.

Doubtful, but yeah there'd be quite a few threads on it simply because it was the biggest game of the day.

I really believe the explosion of running threads -- although they were started with the best of intentions -- have seriously diluted the quality of posts on the board in recent weeks. I don't think I'm the only one out here who believes this.
 
Flying Headbutt said:
spup1122 said:
This is stupid. If we didn't have a running thread, the only threads on the first page would have been about the Colts/Pats game. We don't need six threads that say the same thing in a new variation. All of this was started because flying headbutt was mad when a thread got started. As someone on the thread posted, if you don't like that a Super Bowl thread was started, don't ****ing read it. It's pretty simple.

Yes, we should talk about everything related to the biggest sporting event in the world on one thread. That's it. Nothing anywhere else.

But then again, the Deciders of All That Is Relevant, Necessary, and Worthy of Discussion declared this stupid. So I guess that's your answer, Freelance.

Keep reading the posts before you respond. Then get back to me.
 
You know I'm talking about the Super Bowl, spinted. And coming from you, I'll take that as a compliment. Glad I could **** you off.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top