August 12th, 2009 at 11:04 AM ^

We've got a guy here (BlockM) who is posting these every day.


Rule = if your proposed Michigan news topic is more than 12 hours old, you should probably assume it's already been posted here. There is a flock of Wolverine fans here who monitor the web for all news Wolverines related. So, if you think it may have been posted, CHECK TO SEE IF IT HAS.


August 12th, 2009 at 11:17 AM ^

Yeah, that architect is a terrible punter.

As a general rule, if a story is a day or two old and you want to break it, you can pretty much forget about it. Assume everyone has already seen it and move on, unless it's from some super-secret source.

If the story is brand spankin' new, you don't have to go through every single board post ever, just click the >> a couple times and make sure that the same thing has already been posted. (That's also why people are getting jumped on for not being clear and specific when they name their posts... it just adds to the confusion.)

People have been getting more and more worked up about this as the summer has gone on (rightfully so IME) and you're gonna get a lot of shit for doing it. Don't take it personally, it's for your own good.


August 12th, 2009 at 11:29 AM ^

don't seem to discourage this behavior adequately. What we need is a Scarlett Letter for thread duplicators. Brian could impose a signature on the offenders' posts reading: "I must learn to use the search function," or "I have Tressel's balls in my mouth." Something to that effect.


August 12th, 2009 at 11:33 AM ^

I think that negative points fix the problem since he's now back under 20 and can't start a new topic again.

I see where they don't work as well for people that post a lot and thus don't fear going under 20 but still manage to duplicate a lot of threads. I think eventually this will be controlled via some kind of mod system.

Still, these boards continue to impress me. I don't think that many college football dedicated boards would have people posting references a Hawthorne novel very often.


August 12th, 2009 at 12:29 PM ^

I don't know about you, but I've noticed a sharp uptick in the amount of diaries that are posted. Many are good, some are great, and most of them could easily have been handled with a simple forum topic.

The diaries have started becoming hit or miss, and many times you'll see the same topics over and over, with zero new value added.

Now that I think about it, it kind of reminds me of Student Government at Michigan.


August 12th, 2009 at 1:56 PM ^

I attribute at least part of it to the fact that people without MGoBoard posting privileges (i.e., 20+ points) can still create diaries. At least, last I knew that was still the case.


August 12th, 2009 at 3:22 PM ^

I'm 99% sure that that still is the case.

And I agree with Tacopants that there have been many many diaries that are essentially forum topics but are posted there due to the 20 point limit. I would expect that Brian will eventually impose a limit on diary entries as well (I'd suggest higher than 20 points).


August 12th, 2009 at 11:48 AM ^

I'd personally like to see the Mgoblog list to be longer. Also, can we prevent people from posting until they have actually read all prior posts first. If there is a topic up that hasn't been read, and someone clicks on "new post", there should be a warning message to say the person has unread posts and may duplicate others.

Yesterday, I posted the bowl predictions within the Schabach hot/not hot, and someone else went ahead and made it a new post. We don't need to completely separate everything into a new post, otherwise we all get flooded with 45 new topics in the right margins.

Tim Waymen

August 12th, 2009 at 2:39 PM ^

Much appreciated. People should learn to embrace their inner 13 year old. I learned this in Dr. Tobias Funke's The Man Inside Me, which I read on a flight from San Francisco to NY a while back.

And yes, I did manage to beat Joe Kane for the Heisman. Thank God for alcoholism!


August 12th, 2009 at 11:56 AM ^

So here's my question to the MGoPeanutGallery:

Since the guy wanted to discuss this, would it be a faux pas to go post on the original thread on page 2, therefore bringing up zombie posts? There's been some *cough* resistance to that idea.


August 12th, 2009 at 12:03 PM ^

I only use the sidebar, so I didn't notice any of what the people in that thread were complaining about. I'd say, though, that going and posting on a past thread is fine, just don't run through 10 of them at once commenting on stuff. If you've got something to add to an old post, great, write it. If you're just posting the exact info with a little joke, don't bother.