2
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Why is my abiotic oil thread on the Poli Board anchored?
Posted on 4/24/12 at 4:13 pm
Posted on 4/24/12 at 4:13 pm
It is an interesting subject that I have never seen discussed there and anchoring it early this morning killed it from receiving the contributions of people who are likely familiar with the subject.
Was it because the title was abiotic oil? Why is that title not sufficient? Would it really have made a difference if it was titled "Is abiotic oil real?" or something like that? Anyone familiar with abiotic oil knows that it is purely theoretical at the moment thus that would be a redundant title anyhow.
Whoever anchored it unnecessarily killed what could have been an interesting and seldom talked about topic.
Was it because the title was abiotic oil? Why is that title not sufficient? Would it really have made a difference if it was titled "Is abiotic oil real?" or something like that? Anyone familiar with abiotic oil knows that it is purely theoretical at the moment thus that would be a redundant title anyhow.
Whoever anchored it unnecessarily killed what could have been an interesting and seldom talked about topic.
Posted on 4/24/12 at 4:15 pm to ChewyDante
see stickied topic above.
Posted on 4/24/12 at 4:17 pm to ChewyDante
fail
Posted on 4/24/12 at 4:21 pm to Chicken
quote:
Would it really have made a difference if it was titled "Is abiotic oil real?" or something like that? Anyone familiar with abiotic oil knows that it is purely theoretical at the moment thus that would be a redundant title anyhow.
It's not like I posted a thread on the Rant titled "Jordan Jefferson" of something on the Poli Board titled "Barack Obama election." There's no confusion or obscurity to the topic or subject matter of my thread. I assume the intent of the subject line rule is to prevent threads that no one knows what they are about and clutters up the front page with obscure, redundant, and confusing subject matter. I don't see how one could argue that my thread title was indicative of anything such.
Anyhow, wouldn't a comment or message have been better than killing the thread? Can we unanchor it and I'll make the title longer?
Posted on 4/24/12 at 4:22 pm to ChewyDante
quote:who has the time? how can you not know that your title sucked to begin with?
wouldn't a comment or message have been better than killing the thread?
This post was edited on 4/24/12 at 4:23 pm
Posted on 4/24/12 at 4:23 pm to ChewyDante
quote:
Anyhow, wouldn't a comment or message have been better than killing the thread? Can we unanchor it and I'll make the title longer?
Easier to make a single click than to type out a message that is already stickied on the help board. You're welcome.
Posted on 4/24/12 at 4:25 pm to theunknownknight
the perfect title was inside your post:
what are the opinions on the theory of abiotic oil?
what are the opinions on the theory of abiotic oil?
Posted on 4/24/12 at 4:25 pm to Chicken
Why isn't this anchored then? There are titles like this all the time.
LINK
And I reject your premise that the title sucked. It was a thread on the discussion of abiotic oil, which I've never seen discussed there before is purely theoretical. Tell me why the title sucks so bad? What would someone click on it and think it is about which the title did not clearly indicate?
LINK
And I reject your premise that the title sucked. It was a thread on the discussion of abiotic oil, which I've never seen discussed there before is purely theoretical. Tell me why the title sucks so bad? What would someone click on it and think it is about which the title did not clearly indicate?
Posted on 4/24/12 at 4:27 pm to Chicken
go ahead and update your thread title and then link me to it...
I don't think we are asking much for people to put more effort into their subjects...the field is not intended to be used to enter the key word or phrase being discussed in the thread...if you have a question, ask it...if you there is a main point to your thread, put that statement in the subject...I think it makes the site much more readable and enjoyable.
I don't think we are asking much for people to put more effort into their subjects...the field is not intended to be used to enter the key word or phrase being discussed in the thread...if you have a question, ask it...if you there is a main point to your thread, put that statement in the subject...I think it makes the site much more readable and enjoyable.
Posted on 4/24/12 at 4:27 pm to ChewyDante
that thread was anchored three minutes ago...any more bad questions?
Posted on 4/24/12 at 4:28 pm to ChewyDante
quote:I reject your rejection...it sucked.
And I reject your premise that the title sucked
Posted on 4/24/12 at 4:28 pm to Chicken
quote:
what are the opinions on the theory of abiotic oil?
Well then how about we unanchor it and I'll change the title? It's just a little frustrating that a thread gets anchored for that but some of the crap titles like this are on the board all the time:
LINK
Posted on 4/24/12 at 4:29 pm to ChewyDante
threads with shitty subjects get anchored as soon as we see them...some boards are not enforced like others (eg, food board or money board), but that day will come eventually.
Posted on 4/24/12 at 4:29 pm to ChewyDante
I also anchored that one when I saw it five minutes ago...
Posted on 4/24/12 at 4:44 pm to Chicken
quote:
see stickied topic above.
* Sans Pectus' post, mind you.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News