BoxRec

Locking every thread was definitely overkill.

The only other forum I frequent is very strictly regulated. Create a thread on a topic which already exists and what you get is a mild telling off up to a full on broadside, depending on a number of factors, like whether you're a newbie, a serial offender etc.

Another rule is your post can only contain one quote/ unquote, which means the reader isn't confronted with half a metre of text he read two minutes before, posted by five different people, differing only in as much as the sixth person has added an emoji.

It might seem a bit draconian and it does require a little thought, discipline, and restraint, but it means you know which thread to post in and you don't waste time wading through the same posts repeated ad nauseam. it saves the site operator a lot of bandwidth which makes him / them, very much at peace with the world.

Since I've been on here I do occasionally get frustrated by the scatter-gun approach, but mainly I find myself back-sliding, simply adding my post to the end of the train. If you can't beat 'em ...

world ranked wrote:I get why they do it and I'm happy no more point making six threads on the same point. We should be smart enough to not make similar post nut obviously we not.

Just avoid the topics man.

People come her to talk boxing, and obviously, people were interested in the threads that were locked. Nothing was going on that was against the rules. Why is it up to someone else to decide what and how much something can be talked about as long as it sticks within the guidelines of forum rules? I'm not a fan of an over abundance of threads discussing the same fight. But, that is just my opinion. This is a forum where people should be allowed to express their opinions as long as it falls within the framework of acceptable forum behavior... which all these were.

That's fine, they don't mod anything here. I hate the mile long chains, especially when most of them contain posts from my ignore list. The least they could do is delete the threads. I also don't see the old locked icon on them so I opened several and read responses I can't respond to.

candyslim wrote:The only other forum I frequent is very strictly regulated. Create a thread on a topic which already exists and what you get is a mild telling off up to a full on broadside, depending on a number of factors, like whether you're a newbie, a serial offender etc.

Another rule is your post can only contain one quote/ unquote, which means the reader isn't confronted with half a metre of text he read two minutes before, posted by five different people, differing only in as much as the sixth person has added an emoji.

It might seem a bit draconian and it does require a little thought, discipline, and restraint, but it means you know which thread to post in and you don't waste time wading through the same posts repeated ad nauseam. it saves the site operator a lot of bandwidth which makes him / them, very much at peace with the world.

Since I've been on here I do occasionally get frustrated by the scatter-gun approach, but mainly I find myself back-sliding, simply adding my post to the end of the train. If you can't beat 'em ...

Understandable. But you stated that it is posted in their forum rules. So, people should understand what they are getting into when joining that particular forum. As far as I know, there aren't such rules in this place. If there are, I apologize for my outburst.

Impractical Poster wrote:

candyslim wrote:The only other forum I frequent is very strictly regulated. Create a thread on a topic which already exists and what you get is a mild telling off up to a full on broadside, depending on a number of factors, like whether you're a newbie, a serial offender etc.

Another rule is your post can only contain one quote/ unquote, which means the reader isn't confronted with half a metre of text he read two minutes before, posted by five different people, differing only in as much as the sixth person has added an emoji.

It might seem a bit draconian and it does require a little thought, discipline, and restraint, but it means you know which thread to post in and you don't waste time wading through the same posts repeated ad nauseam. it saves the site operator a lot of bandwidth which makes him / them, very much at peace with the world.

Since I've been on here I do occasionally get frustrated by the scatter-gun approach, but mainly I find myself back-sliding, simply adding my post to the end of the train. If you can't beat 'em ...

Understandable. But you stated that it is posted in their forum rules. So, people should understand what they are getting into when joining that particular forum. As far as I know, there aren't such rules in this place. If there are, I apologize for my outburst.

Even if it is, I'm sure they have something on aliases and trolling in the rules. I stopped posting in the history forum because I was being trolled by a mod.

That's true IP at least I assume it's true - I don't think I ever read the rules but I soon learned about those ones. I bet most would be spitting feathers at first if they were to introduce them on here, but you very soon learn to adapt and it becomes second nature.

Then you start to appreciate the benefits and wouldn't want to go back to how it was.

world ranked wrote:I get why they do it and I'm happy no more point making six threads on the same point. We should be smart enough to not make similar post nut obviously we not.

Why not just close the duplicate ones then instead of all them, even ones which were about different topics?

tonymaccaroni wrote:

world ranked wrote:I get why they do it and I'm happy no more point making six threads on the same point. We should be smart enough to not make similar post nut obviously we not.

Why not just close the duplicate ones then instead of all them, even ones which were about different topics?

Or merge them.

Merged threads are brutal

Ricky_ wrote:

AntonS wrote:
Perhaps, they're unaware it's wasting unnecessary space on our server - which ain't cheap

Does replying in 1 large thread take up less space than posts spread across multiple threads?

..I was also wondering..

boxing_rocks wrote:

Tarkus wrote:I just saw another one pop up. Kova holding on his dick thread.

It has been locked.

The director of NSAC proved on live TV that he is a crook and a liar when he forced a ref of the Rigo fight to change his decision and then lied about it in front of cameras. He also lied about what HBO crew told him about timing of the last Rigo's punch.

You can't expect these crooks to objectively investigate the matter of Ward vs Kova decision.

NSAC was responsible for Weeks, Moretti, and Feldman, the unholy trinity... They all had robbery in their hearts as did the NSAC...

It makes it look like some American is trying to protect some American cheater indeed.

asdfjkl wrote:It makes it look like some American is trying to protect some American cheater indeed.

Boxrec is run by Al Haymon Dark Chancellor of Laniakea .

BitPlayer wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:It makes it look like some American is trying to protect some American cheater indeed.

Boxrec is run by Al Haymon Dark Chancellor of Laniakea .

And even they have no option left but ranking Povetin above Wilder, who now managed to delay a fight so much, his opponent isn't even ranked any more.

asdfjkl wrote:

BitPlayer wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:It makes it look like some American is trying to protect some American cheater indeed.

Boxrec is run by Al Haymon Dark Chancellor of Laniakea .

And even they have no option left but ranking Povetin above Wilder, who now managed to delay a fight so much, his opponent isn't even ranked any more.

It's like with the cold war. People still don't realiise it was started purely to stop American fighters from having to fight Russians. The escalating issues recently between Russia and America have Al Haymon's signature all over them.

Sometimes it reminds me of ww2 indeed, all the Americans involved at the time still get honoured very much, not realising the Russians had well over 20 times as much deaths in that same war.

It's sad to see the Americans being this uneducated.

Impractical Poster wrote:

world ranked wrote:I get why they do it and I'm happy no more point making six threads on the same point. We should be smart enough to not make similar post nut obviously we not.

Just avoid the topics man.

People come her to talk boxing, and obviously, people were interested in the threads that were locked. Nothing was going on that was against the rules. Why is it up to someone else to decide what and how much something can be talked about as long as it sticks within the guidelines of forum rules? I'm not a fan of an over abundance of threads discussing the same fight. But, that is just my opinion. This is a forum where people should be allowed to express their opinions as long as it falls within the framework of acceptable forum behavior... which all these were.

The point is don't make multiple threads on the same subject which is idiotic.

Unless you're a creator or mod you shouldn't have a say in it, you don't know how it runs behind the scenes. It's already been said it costs a lot to have the space to cope with all these threads. Why should there be numerous amounts of threads? It was a big fight, yes! It was controversial, yes! But that doesn't mean you can't voice your opinions on the same thread? You can a number on conversations on the same thread.

Unless you participate in the money side, to keep this site running, just be grateful that boxrec exists!

BitPlayer wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:

BitPlayer wrote: Boxrec is run by Al Haymon Dark Chancellor of Laniakea

It's like with the cold war. People still don't realiise it was started purely to stop American fighters from having to fight Russians. The escalating issues recently between Russia and America have Al Haymon's signature all over them.

... and some fell on stoney ground

Laniakea eh? - didn't realize he was into Swedish furniture.

world ranked wrote:

Impractical Poster wrote:

world ranked wrote:I get why they do it and I'm happy no more point making six threads on the same point. We should be smart enough to not make similar post nut obviously we not.

Just avoid the topics man.

People come her to talk boxing, and obviously, people were interested in the threads that were locked. Nothing was going on that was against the rules. Why is it up to someone else to decide what and how much something can be talked about as long as it sticks within the guidelines of forum rules? I'm not a fan of an over abundance of threads discussing the same fight. But, that is just my opinion. This is a forum where people should be allowed to express their opinions as long as it falls within the framework of acceptable forum behavior... which all these were.

The point is don't make multiple threads on the same subject which is idiotic.

It's inevitable man... This fight was huge among most boxing fans. And in the current boxing climate, it's like an oasis in the world boxing. Ward/Kovalev is the main topic, yes... but there are tons of sub topics on the subject. To enforce a limit, especially without warning, is unfair and irritating.

Impractical Poster wrote:

world ranked wrote:

Impractical Poster wrote: Just avoid the topics man.

People come her to talk boxing, and obviously, people were interested in the threads that were locked. Nothing was going on that was against the rules. Why is it up to someone else to decide what and how much something can be talked about as long as it sticks within the guidelines of forum rules? I'm not a fan of an over abundance of threads discussing the same fight. But, that is just my opinion. This is a forum where people should be allowed to express their opinions as long as it falls within the framework of acceptable forum behavior... which all these were.

The point is don't make multiple threads on the same subject which is idiotic.

It's inevitable man... This fight was huge among most boxing fans. And in the current boxing climate, it's like an oasis in the world boxing. Ward/Kovalev is the main topic, yes... but there are tons of sub topics on the subject. To enforce a limit, especially without warning, is unfair and irritating.

Starting to lock new threads when theres already 5 or so threads on the matter is fine... but dont lock them all ffs!

Clowns like Fergus (Unenlightened One) need reigned in. Whose the other guy that thinks alot of his posts and predictions... Jip? These guys make new threads because they think their opinions are too important to simply be replies in established threads.

Sometimes people don't see a thread about certain topics & make a similar thread. I have done this by mistake & so have others but when you go on the current scene board & it's 3 pages of threads covering the same fight it's foolish & unnecessary. Post it all under the same thread. No need to make 646363646363 new threads about it. I guess locking the thread is what has to be done to get you people to get on board.

joe strong wrote:Sometimes people don't see a thread about certain topics & make a similar thread. I have done this by mistake & so have others but when you go on the current scene board & it's 3 pages of threads covering the same fight it's foolish & unnecessary. Post it all under the same thread. No need to make 646363646363 new threads about it. I guess locking the thread is what has to be done to get you people to get on board.

How about looking first it doesn't hurt.

Ricky_ wrote:

Impractical Poster wrote:

world ranked wrote:
The point is don't make multiple threads on the same subject which is idiotic.

It's inevitable man... This fight was huge among most boxing fans. And in the current boxing climate, it's like an oasis in the world boxing. Ward/Kovalev is the main topic, yes... but there are tons of sub topics on the subject. To enforce a limit, especially without warning, is unfair and irritating.

Starting to lock new threads when theres already 5 or so threads on the matter is fine... but dont lock them all ffs!

Clowns like Fergus (Unenlightened One) need reigned in. Whose the other guy that thinks alot of his posts and predictions... Jip? These guys make new threads because they think their opinions are too important to simply be replies in established threads.

Agreed add the montreal guy as well and bnovelist.