Moderator Action Sticky

Submitted by formerlyanonymous on

Brian has requested that instead of deleting each individual comment in the Moderator Action Sticky, that we instead just create a new thread. It takes hours of less time, preserves the comments for future explanations, and just clears things up faster.

You'll notice that the previous thread is now locked, and will slowly fade back into darkness. For the time being, the link from the Useful Stuff menu will point to the wrong location. We're working on a fix for that.

This thread is an ad-hoc way of tracking what threads and comments get removed. Mods that remove a thread should post the title here with a brief reason as to why the thread is gone.

NOTE: if you leave an irrelevant comment in this thread it will be deleted.

New Thread.

MGoBoard
Recruiting
meta
moderator action sticky

MGoTarHeel

December 1st, 2010 at 7:46 PM ^

Can we please de-bump the CC- Why was Rich Rodriguez hired and how that affects our perception "diary"? It is an embarassment to the integrity this blog maintains.

Joined: 09/03/2009

MGoPoints: 5556

formerlyanonymous

December 2nd, 2010 at 1:24 PM ^

OT: IGN.com hottie Jessica Chobot hangin' in AA

Contrary to one guy who knows nothing about our policy's opinion....

NO OFF TOPIC UNTIL AFTER THE BOWL GAME.

Also, posting about "hotties" coming to Ann Arbor... no.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 38964

Papochronopolis

December 2nd, 2010 at 3:13 PM ^

I'm not sure if I should be posting this here but I couldn't think of another way to get ahold of you.  I spent a long time putting together a post that was meant to be a Diary but I accidently put it up on the MGoBoard.  Can you consider bumping it to Diary for me?

The post is named:

"CC - In depth analysis of Stanford's D under Harbaugh" 

Thanks for your consideration.

Joined: 09/17/2009

MGoPoints: 1863

profitgoblue

December 3rd, 2010 at 10:49 AM ^

I'm not sure if this is the appropriate place to ask the following question and, if not, I apologize in advance, but is there any way we can get a ban of f...spartan bob?

Joined: 09/01/2009

MGoPoints: 19559

UM2k1

December 3rd, 2010 at 2:13 PM ^

FA - I was wondering why my AHHH... thread met an untimely death.  It was my attempt to stop the prolifiration of pointless repetative threads (I know, by creating a thread).  Did this thread end any less substance to the board (by attempting to increas signal/noise ratio) than:

Dee backing off because of Hayes?
Hail!
OT(?) - Which song should RichRod have picked?
 
I really apprciate what you mods have to go through, and I was only trying to elminate some of the threads you would need to delete/combine.
 
 

Joined: 01/29/2009

MGoPoints: 3294

formerlyanonymous

December 3rd, 2010 at 2:23 PM ^

My philosophy is that you can vote down stupid. Therefore you can do that. Posting threads complaining about stupid isn't necessary as it should be done in the threads about stupid that you downvote.

Therefore, I delete threads complaining about stupid, unless they are in somewhat actually really funny. What constitutes as really funny is totally subjective to the mood I'm in.

I honestly don't really read half of the comments/threads anymore, just skim for long strings of replies back and forth so I can delete fires. The best way to deal with stupid, as always, is negbang.

Negbang. Long. Negbang. Hard.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 38964

Waters Demos

December 5th, 2010 at 12:41 PM ^

I'm hesitant to post here, given my lack of status in the community.

However, my humbly submitted request is that someone take a look at the "Big Ten Coaches - Richard Craniums" thread. 

It strikes me as incredibly (1) stupid; and (2) immature.  I think it makes a board/site of this one's sophistication look bad.  Further, while there has been some negative reaction to it, I'm shocked at the amount of positive reinforcement that it has received in the form of comments and points awarded to comments. 

Thanks in advance, and apologies if this isn't the proper forum for my request. 

Joined: 08/19/2010

MGoPoints: 3522

aaamichfan

December 5th, 2010 at 1:17 PM ^

I've gotta say, it might be wise to use the banhammer liberally for the next couple of days. This place has been completely overrun by trolls in the past week.

Joined: 10/23/2009

MGoPoints: 14362

formerlyanonymous

December 6th, 2010 at 10:05 PM ^

Bellichick Sucks

Off Topic.

The Shawn Conway thread just lost half it's comments. Two guys are banhammered.

Michigan basketball struggling with Concordia

There's an open thread for this.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 38964

bleednblue

December 8th, 2010 at 2:32 PM ^

What was wrong with the OT-Woodhead post?

Edit:  Probably the "OT"part of it I assume now that I've read the "No OT until after the Bowl game" rule.  Whoops

Joined: 08/12/2009

MGoPoints: 239

formerlyanonymous

December 8th, 2010 at 8:02 PM ^

I think all the blue hairs will have to resort to this if they get anymore frustrated with Rich Rod...

This is off topic.

Who's Twitter do you read?

Would be on topic if it was Michigan sports/college football only. It quickly became not. #offtopic #explanationin140charactersorless

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 38964

formerlyanonymous

December 9th, 2010 at 7:50 AM ^

OT: Carl Crawford agrees to massive deal.

Frozen. Would have been deleted because not signing a player is not big news and ergo not thread material here. Just big news for DETROIT based teams and open threads for Detroit based teams (fans from outside of Detroit are encouraged to include all NFL teams comments for Lions Threads, all NHL for Red Wings threads, etc).

Threads discussing future plans of Detroit teams are not big news.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 38964

formerlyanonymous

December 9th, 2010 at 7:59 AM ^

OT-best looking sports reporters other than Erin Andrews.

To quote the first comment, it was going to be either really awesome or really creepy.

To quote the second comment, they always start really awesome, then get really creepy.

It got really awesome.

Then it got really creepy.

Had it not gotten creepy, it would have stayed under Blog Ethic "It's a Picture of Boobies!" - Exception:

Arguments about hot chicks are always welcome as long as denoted in the subject title and the specific purpose of a thread. Also exempt are pictures of Scarlett Johansson.

I will admit the line of creepy is a subjective one, and my tolerance is slightly less, especially when my girlfriend looks at my screen and sees all of it.

/whipped

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 38964

formerlyanonymous

December 10th, 2010 at 8:15 AM ^

Calling anyone a "faggot" for listening to Josh Groban - in all caps, nonetheless- is instant banhammer. Obviously. Calling anyone a "faggot" is certainly a banhammer anyway.

Signing up an hour later under multiple troll names doing troll things, that'll also get you sent back to your cave.

If any comments seem out of place, other comments might not show up.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 38964