It seems like the frequency of reposts of threads has gotten high lately. Remember before you post to peruse the first page of this board to make sure you're not rehashing a subject there's already a thread for.
Read the first page
100,303 Views |
63 Replies |
Last: 4 yr ago by Wowzer
ThunderCougarFalconBird
Joined:
Oct 10, 2006
Posts:
49,119
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
TexAgs Traditions
- Not doing a search/not looking at existing topics before posting
- Commenting without reading the thread
- Commenting without reading the link in the OP
Haven't we already had a thread about all of this?
Seems I saw this topic discussed just yesterday.
My issue is with people who comment without reading the thread.
Yo Dawg, I heard you like posts about re-posts so I put a re-post in your post, so when you post its a re-post
https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/2975034
https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/2975034
I think this topic was discussed yesterday.
It's perfectly ok if you say "SIAP" first isn't it?
CanyonAg77 said:
TexAgs Traditions
- Not doing a search/not looking at existing topics before posting
- Commenting without reading the thread
- Commenting without reading the link in the OP
Meh. The TexAgs server meltdown of 2018 left several people bumfuzzled as to what had and had not been posted.
Move on.
Move on.
Are you going to post a link so we can read the first page. Ban OP, delete thread.
It seems like the frequency of reposts of threads has gotten high lately. Remember before you post to peruse the first page of this board to make sure you're not rehashing a subject there's already a thread for.blindey said:
It seems like the frequency of reposts of threads has gotten high lately. Remember before you post to peruse the first page of this board to make sure you're not rehashing a subject there's already a thread for.
CNN is an enemy of the state and should be treated as such.
ThunderCougarFalconBird
Joined:
Oct 10, 2006
Posts:
49,119
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
this thread is older than that thread.Markets are Superior said:
Yo Dawg, I heard you like posts about re-posts so I put a re-post in your post, so when you post its a re-post
https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/2975034
It seems like the frequency of reposts of threads has gotten high lately. Remember before you post to peruse the first page of this board to make sure you're not rehashing a subject there's already a thread for.BenFiasco14 said:It seems like the frequency of reposts of threads has gotten high lately. Remember before you post to peruse the first page of this board to make sure you're not rehashing a subject there's already a thread for.blindey said:
It seems like the frequency of reposts of threads has gotten high lately. Remember before you post to peruse the first page of this board to make sure you're not rehashing a subject there's already a thread for.
This topic has already been disscussed in multiple threads
It's poop again!!Doug Ross said:
No more fun taunting 2nd place posters
Snowflakes
Blue Star for Staph for the sticky.
Never let a crisis go to waste.
Tailgate88 said:
Blue Star for Staph for the sticky.
I'm glad they stickied it. I was about to post an admonishment to other posters that they should at least scan the first page before posting, when I saw this topic at the top.Tailgate88 said:
Blue Star for Staph for the sticky.
J/K
Trump will fix it.
Is this a case of the blindey leading the blind?
It would also help if the thread titles did better to indicate the topic. It is very understandable that someone might not notice if someone has already posted on the topic when the title of the thread was something as inane as "Read This" or "Winning" or "Democrats are Crying".
eric76 said:
It would also help if the thread titles did better to indicate the topic. It is very understandable that someone might not notice if someone has already posted on the topic when the title of the thread was something as inane as "Read This" or "Winning" or "Democrats are Crying".
It would also help if the thread titles did better to indicate the topic. It is very understandable that someone might not notice if someone has already posted on the topic when the title of the thread was something as inane as "Read This" or "Winning" or "Democrats are Crying".
Is this the first ever /16 sticky?
Pagina Juan!!!
Pagina Juan!!!
The appropriate image for this thread:
eric76 said:
It would also help if the thread titles did better to indicate the topic. It is very understandable that someone might not notice if someone has already posted on the topic when the title of the thread was something as inane as "Read This" or "Winning" or "Democrats are Crying".
QFT
I got griped at for starting a new thread when the previous thread had literally be entitled "Wow".
Yeah, thread titles should be policed better as well
The worst ones are "What would you think about..." or "Unbelievable!".SpreadsheetAg said:
Yeah, thread titles should be policed better as well
Make your title a one sentence summary of the subject!! NOT THAT HARD.
My issue is with people who comment without reading the thread.
But I thought it was ok if you prefaced your post with an SIAP.
What's this thread about? Tldr
Hey! If people quit doing this, a dozen or more posters will be out of a job! They make their living pointing it out! Think of the jobs!
Featured Stories
See All
Keys to the Game: No. 13 Texas A&M vs. Texas
by Luke Evangelist
69:56
1d ago
5.2k
11:45
1d ago
1.4k
Scouting Report: No. 13 Texas A&M vs. Texas
by Tom Schuberth
Seersucker Ag 2011
How Do the Ags Matchup with Texas (Basketball)?…..
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
47
The Shank Ag
Fred Kerley Arrested After "Confrontation" With Police
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
37