Forum clogged?

It's nothing short of a labirinth in order to find previous references to a subject, hence repetitions on the same theme often occur. Annoying - at least - also embarrassing when one is told that there were zillions of threads previously dealing with the same subject. A lifetime wouldn't be long enough to explore all the topics covered here in order to avoid that happen. I just can't perceive starting a search exploring key words like: "In my opinion....", Is there...", "Anybody...", "How about...", "What do you...", "Do you think...", My best...", etc.     

My observation and brief checking on some Forum contributors reveal that many of those who clog the pages here have no record of having posted a single album review. In other words,  they had not earned their place for adding more data to these badly clogged pages. That's my opinion. 

My above observation will no doubt result in receiving unkind comments - but - I feel that there is a need to exclude some who are posting here, just because there is nothing on the TV? It would make life much easier for many of us who actually contribute, instead of putting out hooks in order to be entertained by responses.

A thorough culling of responses anything older say, two weeks, perhaps a month would make it easier for one to navigate the site, however I am still of the opinion that exclusion here would be warranted of those who only use the site without contributing in a form of coherent reviews.

Discussing the same subjects afresh may not be such a bad thing for "There are no old jokes, only old people. For a newborn, every joke is new". You get the drift?

I agree that it's hard to search for some things - if you make the criteria too wide, you'll probably get an SQL timeout anyway.

There are a few people who put completely useless comments in a thread. Maybe they should be yellow-carded by the admins after a few times?

I don't see a problem if subjects are brought up again (after a suitable period) as there will always be newbies who weren't around the first time.

Generally, we don't want to take all the fun out of the forums!

gdub411 wrote: Forums are meant to be fun by people who LISTEN to progressive rock. Not write reviews.  So now every forum I join I have to contribute something to it? You sound like just the elitist that the collaborators are looking for. Why don't you look into that avenue here and post your ridiculous comments there instead of polluting our fair forums with your pathetic ideas of exclusion.

Well said...

S Lang wrote: Trouserpress wrote: Snow Dog wrote: [QUOTE=gdub411] Forums are meant to be fun by people who LISTEN to progressive rock. Not write reviews.  So now every forum I join I have to contribute something to it? You sound like just the elitist that the collaborators are looking for. Why don't you look into that avenue here and post your ridiculous comments there instead of polluting our fair forums with your pathetic ideas of exclusion. Well said... Yes....      Minus the collaborator bit. Elitist? Hmmmm. Almost equals with a promotion, of course that wouldn't apply to collaborators, or yours truly? What makes a slight difference here is that in order to LISTEN, one has to provide the MATERIAL to listen to, also to run the site that's sometimes clogged with selfish, childish reactions, topics.  Somehow, it gives a warm, inner glow, knowing that some - like the collaborators - actually contribute whilst others just USE.... So, how does that put the collaborators in a negative light? Please explain and make an attempt to some civility - if you would....

What S Lang is saying is bearing some sense, but I see a small problem here - who is to judge what's childish or selfish in topics in forum and what's not, also whose contribution reviews-wise is good enough to qualify for the right to participate in forums and start threads there. Even in case someone is to judge these things and/or some rules are imposed, same might cause floods of idiotic incompetent reviews, just for the sake of it. I think not every person who is fun or interesting conversation on forum is in the same time good reviewer, and vise versa.

In my opinion mr S Land simply have not thought through his idea thoroughly enough but rather hurried up to show us all his anger and frustration. And if we follow his suggested line - we should limit his rights to post reviews here.    

S Lang wrote: I do respect your point Man Overboard and tend to agree on that many contributions in the Forum are interesting and valuable. I totally support it in principle. What creates a degree of discomfort however is that some selfish, hotheaded and often rather arrogant posts tend to undermine the credibility of the pages. Yes, it may be harsh to boot out people who are unable to contribute to the reviews, nevertheless some standards would be welcome. And please, don't get me wrong, I am not the enemy.....

Hoisted by your own petard!

Personally I feel there are too many reviews. I mean how many reviews does it take for a reader to decide whether or not he wants to purchase Yes..Close To The Edge? 250??...the last thing the archives need is a Clutter of reviews done on the same lps. The number of reviews/album needs to be cut down a lot. Also writing more reviews doesn't contribute to the forums. It contributes(and I say this VERY tentatively) to the archives. If you want to contribute to the forums then all you need to do is create a thread and write some posts.

Ouch!!!! Observing some of the unkind reactions here tends to affect that emerging inner glow that I was experiencing previously. That is to air a reasonable opinion in the company of people with a common interest - alas - it's not the first time that I was found "in bed" with the wrong company. I am getting used to it now and yet to turn the other cheek....

I see little evidence of constructive inputs in the guilt laden reactions, manifesting in arrogance, adding to my case that people are to contribute to the site before invited to the Forum pages. If it transpires as my discomfort with ones who just TAKE without putting something IN, you've got the picture then.