August 10th, 2009 at 1:51 PM ^
You realize that FormerlyAnonymous writes for the site, and mods the board?
August 10th, 2009 at 1:57 PM ^
Yeah, but that doesn't make year old bumps any less annoying.
August 10th, 2009 at 1:59 PM ^
If you have a problem with a year old bump go see your primary care physician.
August 10th, 2009 at 2:10 PM ^
The urge to make a Tyler Moeller "month old bumps" joke....
August 10th, 2009 at 1:52 PM ^
Did you know that?
August 10th, 2009 at 3:19 PM ^
That shouldn't matter. As for the critics, most of it was reminiscing. I had planned to stop about 30 minutes before this thread was created, and the idea is to stick with that plan. There may be an occasional thread that pops back up as I find things of awesomeness, just not as frequently.
Also, just because a thread makes it to page two does not mean it's totally useless. I started this binge with the thread on what books we've read recently while specifically looking for something to read. I find many of our mgocommenters have a very interesting taste in literature.
The thread about ESPN predicting a terrible season is somewhat interesting to today's threads. As preseason predictions come out, while many of us take them with a level head, sometimes we should remember that sometimes the so-called-experts are experts, even if they do fail 75% of what they do. The post was still entertaining.
Take it easy and don't think for a second that me contributing the occasional piece makes me mightier than thou. Well, unless you type like a 12 year old from a Michigan State board, then you can think I am mightier than thou because it's true. I hate you and get off this board (here's looking at you McFarlin lurker).
Thank you, and good night.
August 10th, 2009 at 1:55 PM ^
where the mgoboard tab used to be, is f-ing with me a little bit, though.
August 10th, 2009 at 2:02 PM ^
yeah me too
August 10th, 2009 at 2:17 PM ^
Fuck. Yes. Move it back, plz. kthxbai
August 10th, 2009 at 2:25 PM ^
Agreed. I've been to the MGoStore about 10 times today so far, none of which were intentional.
August 10th, 2009 at 2:26 PM ^
Same. Or was this done on purpose!!?!! dun dun dun...
August 10th, 2009 at 2:26 PM ^
Yeah, I've had to back-up like 37,000 times today.
August 10th, 2009 at 2:33 PM ^
I had commenter's remorse immediately.
August 10th, 2009 at 1:56 PM ^
I've been visiting here off and on all day, and haven't seen FA in evidence once. Aside from the fact that FA is now part of the staff, what in hell is he talking about?
August 10th, 2009 at 2:03 PM ^
Does anyone else think the resurrected posts are utterly hilarious?
August 10th, 2009 at 2:05 PM ^
Yes.
August 10th, 2009 at 2:06 PM ^
It's keeping me on my toes, to say the least.
August 10th, 2009 at 2:06 PM ^
If this is the case, then FA is doing the site no good deed. And the implied idea that we are not supposed to criticize those who work or write for the site is pretty communistic. It might be interesting to re-read old threads, but only to a certain extent.
Don - Hard to believe you have been visiting here off and on and not noticed it. Epic fail? really? I think not. They are starting to fade off the screen, but here is a few:
http://mgoblog.com/content/dont-write-feagin
http://mgoblog.com/content/espn-blogging-first-practice
http://mgoblog.com/content/1st-practice-recap
http://mgoblog.com/content/espn-michigan-08-nd-07
August 10th, 2009 at 2:10 PM ^
No. Those aren't anywhere close to the front.
August 10th, 2009 at 2:13 PM ^
Perhaps not now dumbass. I said they are now fading off the front page. My complaint was not a snapshot but referred to experience on the board throughout the day.
August 10th, 2009 at 2:14 PM ^
Quit bitching.
August 10th, 2009 at 2:12 PM ^
suggesting you not criticize the sites authors promotes an economy that attempts to eliminate classes?
If you have a problem with the way the authors/mods organize/run the blog you're always welcome to GTFO.
August 10th, 2009 at 3:15 PM ^
It's called an analogy, and I will spell it out for you. Not allowing for critiques, for variety in opinion in how a site is run forces a reduction in variation, an increase in routinization and structure. It leads to efficiency and economy in how the site is run, but also homogenization. You and I would be in different classes, but I would not be allowed to participate. Can you see it yet? Let me know if you need further illustration.
And thanks also for the thoughtful advice about getting the fuck out. Nice.
August 11th, 2009 at 5:38 AM ^
its a weak analogy. If its really going to chap your ass that badly that there are "oh noes old threads11!!!!!" on the board you should GTFO and not post/read here. Since you thought "let's get all upset about something no one else on the board seems to mind" rather than GTFO, I would say yes... it was thoughtful advice.
August 10th, 2009 at 2:08 PM ^
Stop complaining. You can tell if they are old if you look at the Mgoboard. If it is not there it probably is old.
August 10th, 2009 at 2:09 PM ^
Dude... you do know that if you go pages back into a thread, the page of MGoBoard that you're looking at appears on the side, right?
August 10th, 2009 at 2:09 PM ^
blueblueblue is all f*#@ed up.
Get over it. It takes .1 second to see that the thread is from 2008. It's infinitely more entertaining than reading about whether or not JT and Witty have qualified for the millionth time.
August 10th, 2009 at 2:19 PM ^
You get all worked up over someone commenting on old threads, and this inconvenienced you so much, like 5 minutes, that you take additional time to post an entirely new thread whining about it?
That really shouldn't be a big deal; you obviously have plenty of time on your hands.
And have you read what FormerlyAnonymous wrote? A lot of it was pretty funny.
August 10th, 2009 at 3:26 PM ^
No, the issue was just that - I dont have plenty of time on my hands and got tired of trying to make sense of a comment only to realize that it was on a year-old thread. Thus a waste of the little time I have. I didn't know the throne FA sits on around here, and thought he/she was just someone with too much time fooling around. So I thought I was doing the board some good.
But the majority has spoken, I will take my bitching elsewhere.
EDIT: Go ahead and neg me into oblivion, I could not care less at this point.
August 10th, 2009 at 2:51 PM ^
I have been on countless threads where people really come down on a guy and quite literally call for his head because he has posted something that had been posted before. I have been on others where the respondents have complained loudly because someone hasn't provided a detailed enough title and they "clicked" on it only to find it was something they weren't interested in and, therefore, wasted their time.
I don't see how this is all that different. Some posts have said "it only takes a second to figure out that it was a year old post". By that sentiment, it only takes us a second to find out that the posters title wasn't what we thought and therefore we don't have to read it. Yet I often read the posts and people complain about how the posters have to do better and give more information so we don't have to waste our time.
I am not really disagreeing with anyone here, to each his own. I am merely bringing up discussions that I have seen on this site in the past that would lead me to believe that many people actually have agreed with what blueblueblue is saying here under different circumstances.
Just sayin'.
August 10th, 2009 at 2:52 PM ^
I swapped the board/store links. As for the zombie threads: I have no idea what's going on there. I think it's a bug, but it's a really weird one.
August 10th, 2009 at 2:54 PM ^
Aren't they just getting bumped because FA is commenting on them?
August 10th, 2009 at 2:56 PM ^
It wasn't a huge deal, just a minor inconvenience.
August 10th, 2009 at 3:27 PM ^
and navigate from the "All Recent Posts" tab for the most part. But I also like to go to the "My Recent Posts" but that has been giving me a "The requested page could not be found" response. This has been going on for about a week, and assumed that it was due to the changes going on with the blog.
Is this been a Blog-wide thing, or specific to my account?
August 10th, 2009 at 3:30 PM ^
So it's at least not specific to your account. I've been working around the by going into "My Account" and selecting the "Track" tab. That shows everything thread you've posted in chronologically, just like the "My Recent Posts" tab.
August 10th, 2009 at 3:35 PM ^
in the process of expunging his blog of all of my dumb posts.
August 10th, 2009 at 3:40 PM ^
Has the formattting for the All Recent Posts page been messed up recently for anyone else? It's all bold, all the items say "Updated" any time someone comments on them (instead of just when the original post is updated), the table doesn't stretch from one sidebar to the other anymore (I use the widescreen Stylish script someone posted about a year ago). Just randomly started happening late last week.
August 10th, 2009 at 3:46 PM ^
I think Brian has been changing the formatting.
I liked it previously, as the "updated" only showed up when the OP actually updated his post, rather than just having new posts on the thread, which is redundant with the "new" link under the "comments" heading.
August 11th, 2009 at 3:15 PM ^
After all my time on the board yesterday, I got used to MGoBoard and MGoStore in their initial layouts and have gone to MGoStore 3-4 times. No one else had that problem?
August 10th, 2009 at 3:20 PM ^
Dates confuse me, too. Just like the VCR and Pez.
And no matter how hard I shake my fist, those damn kids won't get off my lawn.
Where the hell is Elno? I need to go yell at some clouds.
August 10th, 2009 at 3:27 PM ^
I agree with the OP. I'm not "confused" by the old threads; I know they're old. What I don't like is that this massive thread-bumping is pushing a lot of very recent threads off Page 1 of the board.
Here's an idea. If you think the year-old threads are hilarious, start a diary with links to them. Then they can be read without obscuring new content from this board.
August 10th, 2009 at 3:33 PM ^
What I don't like is that this massive thread-bumping is pushing a lot of very recent threads off Page 1 of the board.Turn the Page It really aint so hard.
August 10th, 2009 at 3:51 PM ^
wash your hands...
August 10th, 2009 at 3:55 PM ^
You would think so, but most board visitors don't seem to like going back a page. Once a thread gets pushed back to Page 2, it's usually done for.
I find it hard to believe that more readers here care about 12-month-old threads than day-old ones. If this is formerlyanonymous's shtick, let him start a "funny threads from last year" diary.
August 10th, 2009 at 4:10 PM ^
not being in the actual thread would lose some of their context and thus their impact.
A good thing I like about FA reviving some of these threads is (1) it adds an element of accountability (hey, I predicted 9-4 last year!), which never is a bad thing, and (2) after a year, with all of the perspective that that time provides, some threads become a little more interesting.
And finally, some threads ("That Darn Wolverine's" OP and "Sammy Little's" (I think) response OP mocking "That Darn Wolverine" are a couple, but there were a number of others that were great) were so good that bringing them to the front would probably provide a lot of entertainment to a lot of readers.
You may not be one, and that's OK. But I do suspect some are enjoying some of them.
August 11th, 2009 at 6:44 AM ^
I first read that as "Ann Arbor's own Bob Saget" and rushed to Wikipedia. I was disappointed with the result.
August 10th, 2009 at 3:36 PM ^
jesus....is it really that bothersome?
August 10th, 2009 at 4:15 PM ^
... in which the board is fuxxxxxored up:
A couple times today after clicking on the mgoboard link today I've gotten a popup dialog (I use the current version of Firefox) telling me that I've asked to launch some kind of octet stream and I need to choose an application.
After I say wat, cancel that out and click on the mgoboard link again it works.
Anyone have any idea why?
(and yes, COMPUTER FAIL on my end is entirely possible)