Offtopic forum showing signs of stupidity!

[nSe7eN 0]

I'm sick and tired of this forum nowadays. Yes, first of all I'd like to say that this forum has been my great internett revelation and joy the last years. I've made good friends here and have had interesting and informative debates going on. I've learned a lot and I'm happy to say that I sincerely like people I otherwise strongly disagree with politically - and I'm not talking about those IKEA people like Denoir!

Fact is that I'm tired and bored of having to read through people's lack of creativity and intellectual capacity. What the fuck is wrong with us if we cannot read and write something interesting. I'm primarily interested in what YOU have to say - and if it's backed up by quotes and links that's fine. However, having to read over 3000 quoted words in a single post in the Iraq/middle east/European politics thread etc is a bit tiring and to be honest a fucking insult to my intellectual capacity - whatever it's worth. I do read the fucking newspapers, I do follow news in genereal, I am used to reading a lot and I don't need to be nannied through the last 2 weeks of news.

It's causing me to loose my interests in this forum because I'm first of all interested in your views on things, not your lack of creativity and above all your "copy and paste hobby" . If you are so bloody good at it why the hell don't you start a newswatch agency and bore the hell out of companies with a fetish of seing its own name in the media!

I've complained to the moderators about this before and the comment I was given was something along "that as long as the pasted quotes are interesting to read it's fine" ! Well, it isn't anymore! Ulysses by James Joyce is also interesting and fine - but not quoted in its length here. And because I can read myself I'd rather be informed of what you think of it yourself! I'm sick of it!

Use your fucking brains and write something of your own for once my fellow retards!

Sincerely

Christian

Agreeing with you, that’s pretty annoying!

Just link the article and add some private comments, not just quoting the whole article and adding a smile aside to it, or give any opinions that you think its right, instead of quoting all the fo0kin time!

[Akira 0]

Quote[/b] ]I don't see how preventing people from making 20 quote sections and ansewering each with a single line (often just a word) limits their 'freedom of speech' in any way but making it easier to understand what crap they are pooring onto the unfortunate audience (to be fair: admittedly sometimes a good reply is also missed because of this).

I don't think it does either. However I don't think it makes it any harder as well.

Quote[/b] ][sARCASM]In the end they'd actually be forced to think up a full sentence or (gasp!) paragraph to answer with? Wow, grave injustice there![/sARCASM]

Full sentences or even paragraphs are usually not needed to reply to some statements. Whats wrong with one line or so?

Quote[/b] ]Imo this is simply a form issue - quoting ten or twenty sentences or short paragraphs from one (or worse: more than one) old mail and answering them with single words, smileys or just a short phrase simply ends up as a completely illegible mess for everyone. A mess in which the actual topic is often lost in favour of bickering and nit-picking.

Many people who are engaged in the debate topics usually straddle a number of posts in their replys. Quouting certain parts and replying directly to those statement makes it easier for the reader to understand to what they are refering. If someone were to just suddenly go off on a five paragraph reply, the reader may or may not understand fully what that person is refering to if they have missed a post or if the original post is a page or more back. It is not just nitpicking.

Also I find it funny that people that demand full paragraphs and interesting and full sentences still can't manage to type out "in my opinion."

[nSe7eN 0]

Quote[/b] ]I don't see how preventing people from making 20 quote sections and ansewering each with a single line (often just a word) limits their 'freedom of speech' in any way but making it easier to understand what crap they are pooring onto the unfortunate audience (to be fair: admittedly sometimes a good reply is also missed because of this).

I don't think it does either. However I don't think it makes it any harder as well.

Quote[/b] ][sARCASM]In the end they'd actually be forced to think up a full sentence or (gasp!) paragraph to answer with? Wow, grave injustice there![/sARCASM]

Full sentences or even paragraphs are usually not needed to reply to some statements. Whats wrong with one line or so?

Quote[/b] ]Imo this is simply a form issue - quoting ten or twenty sentences or short paragraphs from one (or worse: more than one) old mail and answering them with single words, smileys or just a short phrase simply ends up as a completely illegible mess for everyone. A mess in which the actual topic is often lost in favour of bickering and nit-picking.

Many people who are engaged in the debate topics usually straddle a number of posts in their replys. Quouting certain parts and replying directly to those statement makes it easier for the reader to understand to what they are refering. If someone were to just suddenly go off on a five paragraph reply, the reader may or may not understand fully what that person is refering to if they have missed a post or if the original post is a page or more back. It is not just nitpicking.

Also I find it funny that people that demand full paragraphs and interesting and full sentences still can't manage to type out "in my opinion."

The annoying part is quoting the whole page; you can just link the article or anything you referred to! And I Agree with that, excuse me for any spelling errors if you talked to me I m careful with that, that costs money or life’s sometimes , making spelling errors I mean but if anyone keep doing that after this post and the page you quoted just a waste of space, then you are a real fuckup or professional spammer!

[Acecombat 0]

Quote[/b] ]Part of the problem is, as more clearly evidenced in the religiously themed topics, is the refusal to agree to a common framework of ideas for debate. For example, those of us active and professing/confessing believers generally insist on integrating 'spiritual' and 'natural' realms, in some cases as a combined realm of discussion. To not do so is a cheating ourselves at best, and moral suicide at worst. Conversely, to strictly rational atheists, not only is that blending unacceptable, but it also disqualifies the subject as being delusionally incompetent. With such mutually exclusive parameters, it's not feasible to conduct an argumentive or analytical debate.

@shinraiden:

So whats your solution to that?

We shut down all threads with religious arguments in them? Along with political ones too as you seem to think not highly of them either?

[Akira 0]

Quote[/b] ]The annoying part is quoting the whole page; you can just link the article or anything you referred to! And I Agree with that, excuse me for any spelling errors if you talked to me I m careful with that, that costs money or life’s sometimes , making spelling errors I mean but if anyone keep doing that after this post and the page you quoted just a waste of space, then you are a real fuckup or professional spammer!

If you are refering to articles, then yes I agree, but I was more refering to qouting certain parts of a persons posts (like I did ) as a better means to help the reader know to what you are refering. And no...I wasn't refering to you as you didn't post any of the qoutes I listed

And I usually don't care about spelling, given that I am a horrible speller. But I was more meaning the "internet abbreviations" like "imo" for "in my opinion" or "imho" for "in my humble opinion" etc. I found it funny that someone who is complaining about not having full, intelligent sentences and paragraphs started their paragraph with "imo". Doesn't take that much more energy to type it all out.

[DracoPaladore 0]

Quouting certain parts and replying directly to those statement makes it easier for the reader to understand to what they are refering.

The biggest problem with this is that in many cases some posters take it as a personal attack as a reply will nit-pick at every word. I do it, and I like to make sure that whome I am referring to knows what I am talking about. But I've noticed that some people here and in other places take this as a personal attack agaisnt their beleifs and ideals.

[Daddl 10]

Akira, I'll give you an example what I (as a reader) find an illegible post that I wouldn't even begin reading but skip it completely (one of your posts from the US politics thread):

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]

It has to do with the concept of "never ever" using a nuclear weapon. It has lots to do with Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Umm. No. It has a lot to do with the knowledge we have gained at how destructive and dangerous these weapons are.

Quote[/b] ]Yes, the avaerage American knows all about MIRVs.

You think they don't know Peacekeeper? Minuteman? MX? I was only about 8 when I knew all about them, and not from reading but from the news, and television and films. Yes. The average American knows about MIRVs even if they don't know what they are actually called.

Quote[/b] ]I must be not average. I don't know what you're talking about.

Megaton and Kiloton. Pretty easy.

Quote[/b] ]Gallop can just ask you from now on what the average American thinks and save lots of effort and money in their research. Remember me. I get a fider's fee.

Blah blah blah. Maybe all the Arab nations should just have you as a spokesperson since you equally know what they want and what their goals are.

Quote[/b] ]1. What does "if need be" mean?

Does it matter? Chances are the respondents didn't ask before answering.

Quote[/b] ]2. Ignorant about nuclear weapons? I would say that's true from the vast majority of people.

And you would be wrong. I take it you weren't living in the US during the 80s?

They maybe ignorant about the technical side, or names, or how they work, but we all know what they are capable of and that is all that matters.

Quote[/b] ]This was not the way I understood the poll's question but that's why ambiguity makes the question and results practically irrelevant.

Really? Then when would be a good time to use nuclear weapons against terrorists? Please give us your opinion.

Quote[/b] ]I thought racial slurs weren't allowed here on the forum.

Good thing mine was out of sarcasm...not belief.

Quote[/b] ]And what if tomorrow's major threat are terrorists from anywhere else? Would that change people's minds? What difference does it make what the terrorists wear? It's what they attempt to do.

You think the average American is going to care? How many years has it been engrained that those from the Middle East are terrorists? They could be Chinese or Martian, and the average American will still think they are from the Middle East and Muslim.

A positive example (also from you and the same thread) shows several quotes, too - but it's still legible:

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]S. Korean military doesn't have the strength to hold the DMZ. Plus, I wasn't talking about the Korean War. UN personnel were involved in Somalia, check yer facts.

The Berlin Wall was peacekeeping, on both sides, yep, the USSR was "Peacekeeping" as well, what difference does it make regarding my arguement?

I guess the EU will have fun when Russia goes back into commie mode.

Whether you think they have the strength to hold the DMZ or not, that is exactly what is happening. Link

Link

Quote[/b] ]"But U.S. officials are concerned their troops may be too close to the border, so that if the North attacked, they would automatically be involved in the conflict."

Seems to me TBA doesn't want to be "automatically" drawn into a conflict with N. Korea. Also,

Quote[/b] ]Alongside moving troops south, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said in April troops could be moved to other countries in the region or brought home, under a global realignment of U.S. troops.

So you are saying that modern day, the US are "peacekeeping" in S. Korea. Perhaps, though I would term it more as "detering." In any case they won't be there much longer to "deter."

Regarding Somalia, I believe it is you that need to check your facts. I never stated the UN wasn't involved in Somalia, in fact the US was involved under the UN for a short time. Then the US went off on their own, and were no longer apart of the UN mission. The US went from "peacekeeping" to "search and apprehend" in full Lone Wolf mode. Only time we worked with the UN was when we needed them to pull our guys out of the shitstorm we caused.

And considering the EU and Russia agree on a lot more than the US and Russia agree with, I don't think they have much to worry about really. And I highly doubt Russia will go into "commie-mode" again anytime soon.

The point I'm trying to make: if I find it to tiresome to read I won't, thus I'll ignore the respective post. Of course the person your answer was directed at will probably have more patience than me, but if your answers were only directed at one single reader you could also take it to pm. So if you want more debate the post must be legible - and at some point moderation is needed to enforce it.

I'm not worried about a single post like that, but some people have made it more a habit than the exception to post like that. I'd be happy if no moderation was nescessary, but it is for me the most important factor in making me follow the discussions with less and less dedication. And that is what this discussion is about.

Regarding news posts: I have no problem with relevant news posted to a thread, even if only a short comment is given, although I'd prefer the poster to quote only the (from his point of view) relevant parts and provide the link for those who want to check the source.

[Akira 0]

I can't speak for everyone, but the style or form of the reply that I type is largely based on the previous post or the post I am answering to. For the above examples, for instance, Avon Lady had put quite a few topics or points that I wanted to address specifically (whether one line or not ). beaker's post (the second example) wa a rather all encompassing post with similiar topics that I could easily address in a general post rather than with specific lines. Also, if the post I am replying to is right above mine then I usually won't qoute line by line (though sometimes I will). Basically what I am saying is that a lot of variables determine my post style. I wouldn't expect someone to follow each of my posts unless they were already in the topic (though it is annoying when someone comes in and says the exact same thing I said right after my post).

However, having said that, I think I can agree that quoting entire articles is a little unnecessary. Quoting relevant parts and leaving the link for the reader to scan would be a good practice. Also it should be mentioned that other forums usually don't allow entire articles to be copy and pasted because of copyright (it could be considered duplication). I think also some form of referencing should be used...ie this is an AP article at BBC, or this is an editorial, etc.

[nSe7eN 0]

If you are refering to articles, then yes I agree, but I was more refering to qouting certain parts of a persons posts (like I did ) as a better means to help the reader know to what you are refering.

Its seems you didn’t understand what I meant, I m talking about anyone who quoting a complete article or any other kind of information without giving a helpful input related to the quoted information he\she posted or even a comment, and not quoting the other members inputs, and what I requested from those members if they like is to link this article instead of quoting all of it, thanks for saying its forbidden in many other forums, yes it is, because some moderators cant handle opening threads by themselves(threads they don’t post in, or posting extremely neutral replays:p), because the damn thread full of 600 pages Of useless posts most of them actually quotations and not private opinion or a part of referred info related to that member input!

And no...I wasn't refering to you as you didn't post any of the qoutes I listed

And I only read the first post in the topic and the last page, to avoid the pure bullshit

And I usually don't care about spelling, given that I am a

horrible speller. But I was more meaning the "internet abbreviations" like "imo" for "in my opinion" or "imho" for "in my humble opinion" etc. I found it funny that someone who is complaining about not having full, intelligent sentences and paragraphs started their paragraph with "imo". Doesn't take that much more energy to type it all out.

Oh sure, but making anything you post understandable for any other members that reading it showing how much you are serious about the opinions you posting!

Quote[/b] ]Part of the problem is, as more clearly evidenced in the religiously themed topics, is the refusal to agree to a common framework of ideas for debate. For example, those of us active and professing/confessing believers generally insist on integrating 'spiritual' and 'natural' realms, in some cases as a combined realm of discussion. To not do so is a cheating ourselves at best, and moral suicide at worst. Conversely, to strictly rational atheists, not only is that blending unacceptable, but it also disqualifies the subject as being delusionally incompetent. With such mutually exclusive parameters, it's not feasible to conduct an argumentive or analytical debate.

@shinraiden:

So whats your solution to that?

We shut down all threads with religious arguments in them? Along with political ones too as you seem to think not highly of them either?

Such members should take such argument outside this forum, because they manipulating most of the other members and I m one those damn members in this forum from replaying on the main issue in any topic, when they start to insult each other political or religious beliefs!

Just use private messaging or move to chat rooms, and start bitching each other all day, they are going to love that!

[Heatseeker 0]

Offtopic= . Everyone seems to want to be the bright star on the forum posting their fascinating opinions and theories about war, politics, society, etc. The politics, war and conflicts threads bore me with the same stuff we see in the paper and news and talk about everyday, too much excitement over war, bombs and killing imo, and then comes the threads about new military equipment and new ways of eliminating human life from the planet, not many good, creative nor inspired topics here, its like a big "we are all gonna die" section.

Let the Iraq, us politics and all negative threads go, im tired of people going crazy everytime a bomb goes off or Bush farts.

Theres also the huge posts with 10 quotes that dont lead anywhere really, this is a forum, dont write big boring articles that break discussion, type a bit less and get to the point, its anoying when someone takes almost a full page of a thread and nobody will read half of it anyway, be more specific and direct in your posting, i think this would help .

[LepparD 0]

One thing I dont like about these boars, the the subjectiveness of the mods.

Dont get me wrong, its really nice to have so many active moderators watching the boards, we cant live without them - but they are killing the offtopic section (all other sections are fine) with subjective closings. They close every thread which has nothing to do with OFP or military, unles its in the interest of the mods, for example

Hunter S. Thompson dead

Whats the deal with that?

Topics not revelant (according to forum rules) but interesting to the moderators = fine?

[nSe7eN 0]

Why particularly that topic?

Many better topics been closed, and not only this one, as I noticed the topics was not the reason, but some members replays, its official forum as you see, some offensive topics against other companies or races could cause some issues, off-topic is highly moderated area here!

By the way there is war between placebo and lukemax in off-topic section!

[denoir 0]

Erm, the second we start enforcing this suggestion, we will have dozens of people jumping down our neck, accusing us of impeding their freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Quite honestly, I don't see why we should have such big influence in debates, is it that hard to organise yourselves and make yourselves post in the manner you wish?

Indeed. This is not a moderation question, it's a plea for members to add a little more content to their posts.

And there are plenty of relevant posts where only a news story is posted. It's just that it tends to be a bit too much of that and too little debate. But it's certainly not a problem that the moderators should have to deal with.

Besides, just as Ex-Ronin says, the minute they start enforcing it, people will start loudly objecting about censorship.

[Dallas 9]

From an outside point of view, i consider it all a part of forum dynamics.

What is the purpose of game off-tpoc forums? To me it's mere entertainment and a way to socialize, using different methods varying from oppinion poles, association games and other forms for chit-chat.

Even serious discussions often becomes quoting games, where complex matters are discussed like Rock, Paper, Scissors. This game has a set of rules. One of the rules is to provide sources, quotes and links and as the number of players increase the speed and overflow of oppinions and information does so too. The seriousness usually drown in more or less hidden personal insults and huge novel sized quotes. We locate sources that confirm our own prejudices, quote them and serve them as facts to our opponent, who dismisses it as biased and vice versa. It wears most people down by time, unless you're fanatical or simply are seeing the whole process as a game.

I've stopped participating in such discussions, because I don't have the mental stamina to continue a discussion about who's cemented prejudices are best.

I find the huge quotes supporting someones viewpoint a complete waste of time and a proof of the authors lazyness. I'm interested in personal oppinions and interpretation , rather than uninteresting 'internet oppinion browsing', where you locate a place to collect material to win 'forum discussion games'. If you locate a sepcific quote that captures the essence of what you've just descibed, go ahead and use it. Otherwise just link to the damn source. Like a written assignment, the sources are there only to support your analysis. You don't get an A+ for handing in quotes.

I'm not much for the picking someones complete post apart and treat it like a check list, you have to respond to and beat in a checklist kind of manner:

Quote[/b] ]...

wrong...

Quote[/b] ]...

I disagree...

Quote[/b] ]...

You got it all wrong...

To be honorst, I think off-topic discussions have too many 'players' and pittalls to attempt to provide serious and productive discussions. The media is simply too superficial and high-speed to succeed in that. I think it takes a real effort from all participants if you truely wants to maintain something that isn't superficial or simply selfconfirment.

I've see other forums reach the same level of discussion fatigueness, because after hunderds of pages and threads, people are still nowhere near the conclusion or agreement that will allow them to take a break.

Dallas

Disclaimer: Language, grammar & spelling. I've not participated in BI-forums discussions and I've only browsed the huge threads, but I've seen them so many times, of similar size and content in more than five other game off-topic forums.

[nSe7eN 0]

I find the huge quotes supporting someones viewpoint a complete waste of time and a proof of the authors lazyness. I'm interested in personal oppinions and interpretation , rather than uninteresting 'internet oppinion browsing', where you locate a place to collect material to win 'forum discussion games'. If you locate a sepcific quote that captures the essence of what you've just descibed, go ahead and use it. Otherwise just link to the damn source. Like a written assignment, the sources are there only to support your analysis. You don't get an A+ for handing in quotes.

Nice to see another one that cares for personal opinions here , and not just browsing and quoting, but no can do, its seems its ok here!

Quote[/b] ]I'm not much for the picking someones complete post apart and treat it like a check list, you have to respond to and beat in a checklist kind of manner

For some reason I m having twin rofls when I see that, they just terminates the *opponent* opinion as they consider each other here with a bullshit responses!

Quote[/b] ]Indeed. This is not a moderation question, it's a plea for members to add a little more content to their posts.

With 30899 registered users I don’t think so, some members are here for other reasons than loving the game; it’s a bit complicated here!

[Postduifje 0]

I see it differently; I learn the most from disscussions I don't participate in. That way you can analyse two or more views and decide for yourself which one sounds more plausible to you.

And these aren't actually discussions you know, they're debates. Mostly people aren't reaching a mutual agreed conclusion, and your not suppose to alter your opponents mind. It's purely informative for 3rd party viewers.

[der bastler 0]

So once again, I think it is best expressed with graphs:

http://www.tacticalblunder.com/Image1.gif

http://www.tacticalblunder.com/Image2.gif

As if the EURO 2004 soccer thread was that bad!

But one thing I don't like, too: Posting whole news article without a comment. It's exhausting to browse pages of one-big-quotation posts only containing old news without useful statements. In another forum they got the rule that at least 25% of a post must be non-comment content...

[crashdome 3]

Wow..

I have to agree 100% with Dallas on this one.

It's amazing to me the amount of discussion and opinions expressed on off-topics within a forum based solely around a game, but I utilize this off-topic forum for entertainment purposes only. There is a very remote chance I am going to hear a solution to the world's problems here. I'm better off going to a forum dedicated to that topic. Or better yet, a library or university. I understand there is some expertise on subjects by certain people, but throw in the mass amounts of casual discourse and voila!! a perfectly low-quality discussion on in-depth topics. You were all expecting different??

EDIT: bah... after further thought, I can see I've been lead astray from the main point. I guess the quality of topics has been certainly getting worse. I've tended to avoid this off-topic forum more and more lately because of the consistant problems I mention above. Perhaps more people willing to display well-thought topics are in the same situation as me. All-in-all this has been one of the few off-topic forums I can find a variety of opinions based on it's diverse cultural make-up of the communty. I really loath the biased boards of specialized or localized forums. In those I've never found as much diversity of opinion as here.

[Leveler 0]

Enforcing new rules will not solve this problem: you will need to relax them instead and allow threads of more varied content in the OFFTOPIC forum. There is only so much you can hear or say about war, history, politics, technology, war, disasters and war; most people eventually get bored and run out of ideas.

[nSe7eN 0]

Enforcing new rules will not solve this problem: you will need to relax them instead and allow threads of more varied content in the OFFTOPIC forum. There is only so much you can hear or say about war, history, politics, technology, war, disasters and war; most people eventually get bored and run out of ideas.

Agreed with get bored part, but the most active topics are the politics related, and its very active here some members pretty good with and its helpful, eh some of them better than known politicians , but I hate politics , posting other issues will be nice, just they need to be patient when creating other kinds of topics, and to see if it really worth’s it, any topic worth to be discussed, unless its against the forum rules only, in my opinion!

[breaker44 0]

I like debating debates. I'm a master-debator, I thank you!

Shagadelic!

-BreakerOut

[Placebo 29]

They close every thread which has nothing to do with OFP or military, unles its in the interest of the mods, for example

Hunter S. Thompson dead

Whats the deal with that?

Topics not revelant (according to forum rules) but interesting to the moderators = fine?

This isn't the "ask a mod" thread so I won't go into details as to why threads were closed or not closed.

However I will quickly respond to why the Hunter S. Thompson thread wasn't closed. If members feel the need to reflect and share their grief and sorrow at the passing of someone that has had an impact on their lives then it does no harm at all to allow that to happen and serves to reflect that we are a community here, often with common interests, goals and feelings.

I think that it should be quite clear to anyone why such a thread has a place and validity compared to one for example where someone cannot configure their Outlook (no offence intended LukeMax ).

breaker44 don't spam please

[LepparD 0]

They close every thread which has nothing to do with OFP or military, unles its in the interest of the mods, for example

Hunter S. Thompson dead

Whats the deal with that?

Topics not revelant (according to forum rules) but interesting to the moderators = fine?

This isn't the "ask a mod" thread so I won't go into details as to why threads were closed or not closed.

However I will quickly respond to why the Hunter S. Thompson thread wasn't closed. If members feel the need to reflect and share their grief and sorrow at the passing of someone that has had an impact on their lives then it does no harm at all to allow that to happen and serves to reflect that we are a community here, often with common interests, goals and feelings.

I think that it should be quite clear to anyone why such a thread has a place and validity compared to one for example where someone cannot configure their Outlook (no offence intended LukeMax ).

breaker44 don't spam please

Sure, I can understand why that topic wasnt closed, but I think you mods should allow more offtopic discussion ín the offtopic area. Sure, a topic about setting up youre outlook wouldnt be much interesting for most people here, but others can be very fun and interactive.

Maybe allow more humor inhere, that may be able to help members stay on the forum and wait for ofp2 (Cause ofp2 news isnt really massive atm). Its not just about having good discussion expressing our oppinions, its also (as you say) about a certain community having the same interest and waiting for the same thing. All ask for is a little looser about the "not-revelant" rules (as you practised in the hunter-thread), and let us post a little more than the 90% politics right now, cause if I would come by the forum right now not knowing about the game, my first thought would be "Wow, what a bunch of boring intellectuals - I wonder how this game would be".

Leppard

[nSe7eN 0]

They close every thread which has nothing to do with OFP or military, unles its in the interest of the mods, for example

Hunter S. Thompson dead

Whats the deal with that?

Topics not revelant (according to forum rules) but interesting to the moderators = fine?

This isn't the "ask a mod" thread so I won't go into details as to why threads were closed or not closed.

However I will quickly respond to why the Hunter S. Thompson thread wasn't closed. If members feel the need to reflect and share their grief and sorrow at the passing of someone that has had an impact on their lives then it does no harm at all to allow that to happen and serves to reflect that we are a community here, often with common interests, goals and feelings.

I think that it should be quite clear to anyone why such a thread has a place and validity compared to one for example where someone cannot configure their Outlook (no offence intended LukeMax ).

breaker44 don't spam please

Sure, I can understand why that topic wasnt closed, but I think you mods should allow more offtopic discussion ín the offtopic area. Sure, a topic about setting up youre outlook wouldnt be much interesting for most people here, but others can be very fun and interactive.

Maybe allow more humor inhere, that may be able to help members stay on the forum and wait for ofp2 (Cause ofp2 news isnt really massive atm). Its not just about having good discussion expressing our oppinions, its also (as you say) about a certain community having the same interest and waiting for the same thing. All ask for is a little looser about the "not-revelant" rules (as you practised in the hunter-thread), and let us post a little more than the 90% politics right now, cause if I would come by the forum right now not knowing about the game, my first thought would be "Wow, what a bunch of boring intellectuals - I wonder how this game would be".

Leppard

Flashpoint still alive, just look at the amount of the addons that been released every week, and many other things also, even new fan websites been created as so, so the game still alive even better than newer games, the community is very active as you see, so no reason for saying that help us to wait, and you asking to allow more humor, what kind of humor?

Even with all of these restricted rules you can notice a big deal of spam, and allot of stupid propaganda, and the proper place to ask such question is ask a mod thread . And not here, so we keep on topic and avoiding another good thread to be closed, simply I don’t blame our moderators for any action they take in off-topic section, it’s pretty clear by now, many unrelated replays to the main issue in many topics, closing the topic is understandable after that!

Anyhow they decide and not we!

[SpecOp9 0]

Sheesh Chill out, I'm back now... no need to get worried

But you know..I really sadly have to agree with him. Only not in such a harsh way... you guys can talk about whatever yall want, I'll make my own threads and talk about what I want. That's how it goes.

Nobody is forcing you to read this stuff however, it's not their fault they are boring you.

But really the Iraqi threads and all that is like a "whoopty do" section of the forums. George Bush is an idiot. That's all. Move on.

I have not been active on the forums lately... every time I come onto the offtopic section I look at the sticky threads above and roll my eyes, and make a thread to talk about chocolate or something, and then get my thread locked by Placebo and Ralph.

I would rather have the off topic section expanded into really off topic stuff. Nothing is really off topic, everything turns into a discussion one way or another. And that's why I crap on this forum lately and go elsewhere.

What would really get things heated if BIS would give any type of announcement, with screenshots and OFP2 or XBox stuff. It's 2005 already and yet no official news. We are here for more than just talking about Iraq.

I'm just happy the forums are still 'alive' and not croaking in the corner. We need excitement!!!!!!!!