Groups in the Community

[gp0560]

I wanna join the "Suck My Cock" group. Please.

 

Qualifications?

[gp0560]

We sure could! Of course that further buries discussions in areas that visitors may not bother to visit. It's a two-edged sword that we constantly grapple with. Would you rather discuss Maria Callas with people who visit the "arts" forum or with the three people who bother to visit a more specialized forum?

 

We could have dozens of forums easily. Would it be an improvement?

 

 

 

Nothing here is unmoderated, and that's also a consideration. We already ask way too much of our already overworked but still magnificent moderators. We've tried to add more moderators over time, with mixed results. Cooper, for example, was added along the way and grew into the role as if born to it.

 

When you add more of this you have to add more of that .... and sometimes this is more difficult than that.

 

IMHO, the first point is important, but the second one is determinative. I suggest we abandon this investigation.

[instudiocity]

Qualifications?

 

He has a cock?

[instudiocity]

We sure could! Of course that further buries discussions in areas that visitors may not bother to visit. It's a two-edged sword that we constantly grapple with.

 

We could have dozens of forums easily. Would it be an improvement?

 

Well, I for one can recommend becoming a member and learning the website. That "New Posts" button shows EVERYTHING new since my last login without having to go through each forum. Now the only forum I regularly go to directly is the Gallery - Eye Candy never gets old.

[gp0560]

Well, I for one can recommend becoming a member and learning the website. That "New Posts" button shows EVERYTHING new since my last login without having to go through each forum. Now the only forum I regularly go to directly is the Gallery - Eye Candy never gets old.

 

Good point. But there would still be the overhead of the moderator time. (Wanna volunteer?)

[MiamiLooker]

I can still tell jokes about Sarah Palin's cunt

 

No you can't. This easily identifies MickeyMoosie. It's a TOS violation: "No personal information may be posted about other posters."

[leigh.bess.toad]

It's a little bit insulting to suggest we haven't thought of any of that over the last decade, but I know you didn't mean it that way.

 

You are correct Deej. I will take a backseat to no one on the forums in my admiration, respect and gratitude for all you, Daddy, and the moderators do for all of us to allow us to have the platform we have. There was no insult intended, nor will there ever be any insullt offered. I do have shortcomings as do we all. Howver, ingratittude is hopefully not one of them.

 

The point you make further down about the added work on the moderators is something I hadn't thought about and is an extremely valid point and must weigh heavily. Thanks for the reminder of that.

[+ FreshFluff]

 

You are correct about user groups. They have been central to user management on computers since computers were invented. But this thread is about social groups, a new feature. (A new POORLY NAMED feature. )

 

So there were user groups for mainframes in the 1950s and 60s? How did they communicate before ARPANET? Or were they just local groups?

[+ honcho]

I think Deej is using the term "user groups" to me "collections of accounts on an individual mainframe".

 

And the ability to send messages between users of a single computer, and between users on *different* computers definitely does predate

the ARPANET. I believe there was some kind of message passing facility between IBM mainframes called BITNET, and the worlds first

(inadvertent) computer virus may also predate the arpanet in that there was a christmas greeting that displayed a tree with flashing lights

on terminals, which was wildy replicated (voluntarily) by eager users forwarding to lots of their friends.

 

Even beyond leased line connections between computers, in the very early 70's (just about the time the arpanet was being

developed but limited to very few computers), an operating system developed at bell labs (unix) had the ability for for one computer

to dial another up with a modem and transmit a batch of stored emails. You might have to explicity route email through two or

three hops to get to a friend. but it was possible.

 

Any other participants of soc.motss on the board here? ;-)

[+ FreshFluff]

I think Deej is using the term "user groups" to me "collections of accounts on an individual mainframe".

 

And the ability to send messages between users of a single computer, and between users on *different* computers definitely does predate

the ARPANET. I believe there was some kind of message passing facility between IBM mainframes called BITNET, and the worlds first

(inadvertent) computer virus may also predate the arpanet in that there was a christmas greeting that displayed a tree with flashing lights

on terminals, which was wildy replicated (voluntarily) by eager users forwarding to lots of their friends.

 

I was thinking of a modern user group. Interesting about the early mainframes

 

I loved using Usenet around mid to late 1990s. Unfortunately, I posted some regrettable stuff back when almost everyone was posting in their own name. (For example, some guy asked if an average looking middle-aged man who wasn't wealthy could get a beautiful younger woman. I told him, "Sorry, not happening," which generated major flames. I got Google to delete that one from Groups, but others are still there.)