Posting in the name change log

[Fake Boris]

So I challenge the administration: if ever anyone (not of the admin, obviously) manages to get a shot in the name change log, should he be awarded a symbolic prize/recognition for his total lack of a life?

[Locutus]

More likely he'd get a hefty punishment for doing something he knows he's not supposed to do. (Plus, you don't actually have to unlock a thread to post in it if you're a moderator.)

Question asked, question answered. Spam Thread closed.

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Locutus
(Plus, you don't actually have to unlock a thread to post in it if you're a moderator.)

You know too much

[Locutus]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
You know too much

One of the advantages of being a moderator

[Dis]

I want to know why you guys keep changing your names from good names to stupid names. .

[Skanky Burns]

Although FakeBoris could do with a namechange...

[H Tower]

Originally posted by Dissident
I want to know why you guys keep changing your names from good names to stupid names. .

I agree with Dissident.

[Last Conformist]

Most name changes are for the worst.

But you can't deny Kuciwalker's was an improvement.

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by Locutus
(Plus, you don't actually have to unlock a thread to post in it if you're a moderator.)

Really? What explains the incidents where moderators have opened threads to post updates and then forgot to close them? I'm sure that happened a few times.

[Locutus]

If that was a long time ago, then that's because the feature hasn't always existed.

If it happened more recently, then the mod in question may not realise he needn't have the thread open to post (or is stuck in an old habit).

[Ming]

Originally posted by DrSpike


Really? What explains the incidents where moderators have opened threads to post updates and then forgot to close them? I'm sure that happened a few times.

No need for that anymore... any mod that has those forum rights can post in a closed thread, unlike in the real old days.

However, sometimes a thread will remain open because two people have closed it at about the same time. I've had situations where I've been checking a thread... make the decision to close the thread, and by the time I've pulled the trigger, somebody else beat me to it, and all I'm doing is reopening the thread instead of closing it... that has actually happened many times

[DrSpike]

Thanks.....both of those posts explain what I am thinking of.

[Qilue]

Thanks Ming, that clears up something that's been confusing me lately. Many threads, I read Mark, Dan or a moderator stating a thread is closed, yet it wasn't.

I usually just assumed they had simply forgotten to do so and further posting in said thread would be russian roulette.

[Ming]

The admin thread option is:

"open/close thread"

There is not a seperate command for each... you either open or close the thread. If when you do it, somebody has already done so, it has the opposite action.

Rah and I are famous for doing just that...

On the other hand... I've posted "case closed" a few times, and then indeed forgotten to close the thread after doing so

[Skanky Burns]

Originally posted by Qilue
I usually just assumed they had simply forgotten to do so and further posting in said thread would be russian roulette.

We had a famous case of that once too.