Removing Links From Nazi Bunker Thread

[groomi]

I think the removal of all the links from the Nazi Bunker thread is akin to using a very blunt instrument. Links to businesses should be removed because of the advertising policy of this website, but removing links to other forums and web communities is now spoiling the thread. It is actually interresting to see where the story has spread to and also some of the sites linked have been quite interesting to look at.

I could certainly understand if it puts a few people off who have just signed up because of the thread - you only get one chance to make a first impression!

I feel this is censorship going too far again - shirley PH isn't this insecure about it's popularity?

[Pigeon]

Teehee yeah. I posted a humorous quote of Vixpy and someone else doing it which had my own entirely non-commercial non-business link at the bottom in the same style, was amusing to see that "swept" too

...Got a stload of hits off it while it was still up too

...Ah. And this reminds me of something. I think it would make sense to bring PH's url code into line with the standard BBCode url tag and the HTML A tag, because as it stands it's backwards and I keep forgetting and getting it the wrong way round and then wondering WTF has happened when I read my post, which is really annoying.

HTML is

<A HREF="url">link text</A>

Standard BBCode is
[NOWIKI]

PH is arse about face:
[NOWIKI]

...most confusing.

__________________________________________________________________
Pigeon
Be kind to pigeons

[Pigeon]

...oh for fk's sake.

This is what I typed, cba to work out how to fudge around the bug:

[Pigeon]

Pigeon said:

Teehee yeah. I posted a humorous quote of Vixpy and someone else doing it which had my own entirely non-commercial non-business link at the bottom in the same style, was amusing to see that "swept" too

...Oh look it's gone off this thread too. I was not aware that mention of Lucy Pinder was contrary to PH rules. Indeed, there are numerous threads which would have been deleted if that was the case.

The rest of the fake sig has been left in place... despite the known point that sigs are deprecated on PH.

Seems the words "non-commercial, non-business" have gone right over someone's head. May I then repeat it. That site is not a commercial venture. I don't make any money out of it, Lucy Pinder does not make any money out of it, and nor does anyone else. Indeed, the more people who visit it, the more it costs me in bandwidth charges. It's no different from putting up links to Pigeon's Nest and there are zillions of those on here posted by all sorts of people. It is not an advert any more than links to other celebrity fan sites are adverts.

The posting in the other thread was a joke. The posting in this thread was an experiment. The result in the other thread was kind of amusing. The result of the experiment pisses me off.

Petty, and pathetic... if it was to make my post conform with PH standards the fake sig would have gone as well. Leaving the fake sig in place makes it clear that it's just someone acting the arse.

[Kinky]

Pigeon,

I removed your link.

If you're not happy with that, then I suggest you discuss it with Garlick.

As you admit yourself in your post above .....

Pigeon said:

I was not aware that mention of Lucy Pinder was contrary to PH rules. Indeed, there are numerous threads which would have been deleted if that was the case.

And I've highlighted the issue I have with it. If it was just an occasional mention then fine - but numerous threads is just tiresome and tedious.

We can't have 1 rule just for you - if we did, then everyone would post their website URLs, and what a mess that would be.

And for the record - it's not just me that has a problem with it - we've received a number of complaints from other PHers.

Pigeon said:

Petty, and pathetic

I rest my case. Q.E.D.

K

[Pigeon]

Kinky said:

Pigeon,

I removed your link.

If you're not happy with that, then I suggest you discuss it with Garlick.

Thanks for the info. I must admit that you were not on my list of suspects...

Kinky said:

As you admit yourself in your post above .....

Pigeon said:

I was not aware that mention of Lucy Pinder was contrary to PH rules. Indeed, there are numerous threads which would have been deleted if that was the case.

And I've highlighted the issue I have with it. If it was just an occasional mention then fine - but numerous threads is just tiresome and tedious.

I am far from being the only one who mentions Lucy Pinder. There have been a few occasions recently when someone else has mentioned her... and innumerable occasions on which other models or well-known attractive women have been mentioned. That French newsreader, for example, she must hold some kind of record for mentions on PH. (I'm pretty sure the equivalent record on CTF is indeed held by Lucy Pinder, and not all the mentions are to be found in my posting history ) I'm not sure that it could be validly said that my username has appeared in "numerous threads" on PH recently, let alone my mention of a particular topic

Kinky said:

We can't have 1 rule just for you - if we did, then everyone would post their website URLs, and what a mess that would be.

I'm not asking for one rule just for me... plenty of people do post their website URLs. Prime example being a certain chap who runs a rolling road, if I was trying to think of a rolling road website the first one that would spring to mind is his (which I have never actually visited), purely because he's worked it into so many threads, many of which have had nothing to do with rolling roads.

Kinky said:

And for the record - it's not just me that has a problem with it - we've received a number of complaints from other PHers.

Which I can't be expected to know about if nobody ever says anything to me If people have a problem with something I do they can say it to my face. They can call me a dick in the thread or they can use the email link in my profile if they don't want to do it in public. Otherwise I'll never know about it until suddenly one day particular content for which there is considerable precedent for it being permitted starts disappearing for no apparent reason and I have to make an experiment to find out about it

[Kinky]

Pigeon said:

Thanks for the info. I must admit that you were not on my list of suspects...

Bugger. I wish I'd kept my mouth shut now

[Pigeon]

(...and FWIW I think the bug with the "literal" coding tag I mentioned above is a more important point )

[Kinky]

Pigeon said:

That French newsreader, for example, she must hold some kind of record for mentions on PH.

OK OK - I said there were no exceptions ..... but I'll allow one

[groomi]

...and back to the original question. Why remove links to other sites/forums/communities where people are introducing how they found PH?

[Kinky]

Pigeon said:

I think the bug with the "literal" coding tag I mentioned above is a more important point

You mean .... even MORE important than http://www.lucy-pinder.tv/

[Pigeon]

In the context of PH rather than my personal viewpoint... yes... it's been like that for a whiley and it is something of a pain for the poster to try and use a code tag and find it doesn't work as advertised, I've seen a few posts where people have been caught out by it.

[Kinky]

Pigeon - I guess that's a question for Racing Pete.

And to answer Groomis original question - IIRC a number of links and posts were removed as some posts were blatantly abusing it - hence the high number of complaints we received on some posts.

I think it's all back to normal now.

K

[CommanderJameson]

Legendary threads will always get "so and so checking in from forum.blah.com, great thread!" posts by the dozen. This is a GOOD THING.

[CY88]

Just out of interest, Mods, any idea what sort of traffic has been generated?

Apologies too for any extra work.

[Mrs Fish]

287 people have joined since monday.... Not sure how much has been generated from your thread though

[Wacky Racer]

Mrs Fish said:

287 people have joined since monday.... Not sure how much has been generated from your thread though

Probably over 200.......

[Wacky Racer]

Pigeon said:

[ Prime example being a certain chap who runs a rolling road, if I was trying to think of a rolling road website the first one that would spring to mind is his (which I have never actually visited

I think Pigeon's Volvo would blow up if he pushed it over 3000rpm......

[Pigeon]

Oi you

...actually the problem is that it needs a steel crank not to blow up if I were to push it over 200bhp. Unlike the fours, the I6 has problems with torsional deflection of the crank at high power levels. At standard power though... well if I put the pedal to the metal it changes up from 2nd to 3rd at about 80mph, which I guess is about 5500rpm

[Pigeon]

CY88 said:

Just out of interest, Mods, any idea what sort of traffic has been generated?

Me being just a pigeon on here I can't give any figures. But I think the thread attracted about 10 times the number of new readers than a P&P thread usually does... looks like most of them didn't actually register, but they're there all right.