# Drive by posts.



## Phydeaux (Jan 22, 2013)

Am I the only one that finds these annoying?

Most web forums don't even allow them. But, who am I to say.. :ignore:


----------



## AwayWeGo (Jan 22, 2013)

*? ? ?*




Phydeaux said:


> Drive by posts.


I don't know what that is.

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## Don (Jan 22, 2013)

AwayWeGo said:


> I don't know what that is.
> 
> -- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


you're not alone.


----------



## Sandy VDH (Jan 22, 2013)

I assume random interjections, without really following up or following the thread.


----------



## Sea Six (Jan 22, 2013)

Drive-bys seem to be more popular on forums where they display your post count.


----------



## Phydeaux (Jan 22, 2013)

I'm referencing posts that simply contain a web link without including the posters own viewpoint or opinion to generate intelligent discussion. A simple copy/paste, then gone.

Sorry, I thought the drive by expression was known. Most forums I've participated in dont even allow drive by posts. This forum seems to be flooded with them. But again, maybe I'm alone here.


----------



## DeniseM (Jan 22, 2013)

Phydeaux said:


> I'm referencing posts that simply contain a web link without including the posters own viewpoint or opinion to generate intelligent discussion. A simple copy/paste, then gone.
> 
> Sorry, I thought the drive by expression was known. Most forums I've participated in dont even allow drive by posts. This forum seems to ne flooded with them. But again, maybe I'm alone here.



We delete [posts that violate the TUG posting rules] immediately - if you see one, click the red triangle and it will be removed and the poster banned.

*I have edited my response - I thought you were referring to spam posts.


----------



## ouaifer (Jan 22, 2013)

*Definition*

_Drive by posts and other Forum definitions._


----------



## ace2000 (Jan 22, 2013)

Phydeaux said:


> I'm referencing posts that simply contain a web link without including the posters own viewpoint or opinion to generate intelligent discussion. A simple copy/paste, then gone.



If you're talking about posting a link to a news story or article, without an opinion, that seems to be allowed here.


----------



## zinger1457 (Jan 22, 2013)

Phydeaux said:


> I'm referencing posts that simply contain a web link without including the posters own viewpoint or opinion to generate intelligent discussion. A simple copy/paste, then gone.



Although I'm not sure this is the true definition of a 'drive by post' I agree there is a lot of this in the TUG Lounge.  Often times just posting a non-descriptive link to a news story with no comments to generate any discussion.  But expecting intelligent discussion might be asking too much .


----------



## MichaelColey (Jan 22, 2013)

I would prefer to see a snipet of the content so I can see if it's even worth looking at.

I do find many of the "drive by" posts from Richard interesting, and apparently many others do too, because most get a pretty good discussion going.

I think that's the key.  If they get posted and nobody discusses anything, they serve no real purpose.  But if they provoke discussion, they're good.

I've been on other forums where similar posts are made automatically, with 90% receiving no response.  That's useless and annoying.  At least with Richard, they're things he has read and thought might be interesting to us.


----------



## stmartinfan (Jan 22, 2013)

As a regular visitor to TUG, I find Richard's posts with links to interesting news articles very enjoyable.  I can usually tell from the title if the topic's of interest to me and I also know from the name of the publication that it's often going to be well written and well researched.  If those fit the definition of drive by posts, then I don't see why they are a problem.  Since he's a regular, it's easy to recognize his name and simply skip those posts if they aren't of interest.  For me, I find I always learn something I wouldn't have found on my own.

Of course, if a post is something from a unknown poster or a spam link to sell something, then I agree they have no place here.


----------



## DeniseM (Jan 22, 2013)

Phydeaux said:


> I'm referencing posts that simply contain a web link without including the posters own viewpoint or opinion to generate intelligent discussion. A simple copy/paste, then gone.
> 
> Sorry, I thought the drive by expression was known. Most forums I've participated in dont even allow drive by posts. This forum seems to be flooded with them. But again, maybe I'm alone here.



The posts you are referring to are from a long-time TUG member and do not violate any posting rules as long as they are in the TUG Lounge - please do not report posts, unless they specifically violate the TUG Posting Rules.


----------



## Passepartout (Jan 22, 2013)

stmartinfan said:


> As a regular visitor to TUG, I find Richard's posts with links to interesting news articles very enjoyable.
> 
> Since he's a regular, it's easy to recognize his name and simply skip those posts if they aren't of interest.
> 
> Of course, if a post is something from a unknown poster or a spam link to sell something, then I agree they have no place here.



I've made this very point in the past. The consensus seems to be that more people find Richard's links beneficial than annoying. So be it. My preference would be that those who post such presumed articles of interest either paraphrase them, or include some snippet that invites discussion.

Would Richard be a 'regular' if not for posting uncommented-on links to non-timeshare related subjects? I suspect much less regular. This is commentary on my part and not to be construed as anything personal. Please, Richard, continue to research and post. Just increase the editorial comment. I have posted any number of links to articles myself, but do try to make a comment that invites discussion or describes why it might be of general interest. 

As to the spam posts- even those that are linked to old TUG threads- I have clicked the red triangle and reported more than my share. Good riddance to them.

Jim


----------



## ace2000 (Jan 22, 2013)

Passepartout said:


> My preference would be that those who post such presumed articles of interest either paraphrase them, or include some snippet that invites discussion.


 
That would be my preference also.  It would be nice to know why the OP thought he was posting  an article of interest.

For example, posting a random link to a Microsoft article... sometimes I think Richard makes his post with a link about Microsoft, and then leans back with a drink and popcorn, and watches with excitement as the fireworks begin!  And then, it never fails to attract the same crowd, like feeding meat to the alligators.


----------



## Beefnot (Jan 22, 2013)

I too appreciate MULTIZ321's posts.  I thought be drive-by posting, the reference was to folks like e.bram.


----------



## Beefnot (Jan 22, 2013)

ace2000 said:


> That would be my preference also.  It would be nice to know why the OP thought he was posting  an article of interest.
> 
> For example, posting a random link to a Microsoft article... sometimes I think Richard makes his post with a link about Microsoft, and then leans back with a drink and popcorn, and watches with excitement as the fireworks begin!  And then, it never fails to attract the same crowd, like feeding meat to the alligators.



But that's all good, keeps things interesting.


----------



## Elan (Jan 22, 2013)

ace2000 said:


> That would be my preference also.  It would be nice to know why the OP thought he was posting  an article of interest.
> 
> For example, posting a random link to a Microsoft article... *sometimes I think Richard makes his post with a link about Microsoft, and then leans back with a drink and popcorn, and watches with excitement as the fireworks begin!*  And then, it never fails to attract the same crowd, like feeding meat to the alligators.



  Yeah, I've thought that also and I think that's great!  As I've said before, I can only read so many threads where someone's whining that their TPU dropped 1 point overnight.  

  I read a vast majority of the links Richard provides.  If they're tech related (most are), I typically comment.  I don't even really care if he includes a summarizing snippet, as most of the time the title gives a good enough indication of whether I'll be interested in the content.


----------



## LAX Mom (Jan 22, 2013)

There are lots of threads started on TUG that don't interest me and I just ignore them. If a thread is about a point system or exchange company that I don't belong to, I'll likely not read the threads in that section. I generally click on new posts and read those that interest me. 

I don't see why it's a problem if someone posts a link to an article that might interest others. There is usually enough info in the description that I can tell if I want to read it.

I appreciate others taking the time to share information that have discovered. So I guess I don't have a problem with "drive-by" posts.


----------



## Phydeaux (Jan 22, 2013)

My feeling is posting a web link without any comment on why the poster feels it is relavent, interesting, or how they themselves feel about the subject is just fluff. It's like filler. It reminds me a little of posters that copypaste information that they have zero background or experience with. I find this annoying also. 

To generate numerous posts inevitably pushes other posts off the page. In other words, posting a web link without any personal commentary is, well, simple. Posting a stack of such threads is annoying, to some of us.


----------



## Beefnot (Jan 22, 2013)

LAX Mom said:


> I appreciate others taking the time to share information that have discovered. So I guess I don't have a problem with "drive-by" posts.



Agree.  

What irks me is vague or misleading thread titles.  Or thread titles with errant apostrophes in simply plural words (e.g. *fee's*--one of our long-time and respected TUGgers is good for this, bless his heart).  Everything else, well that's what makes TUG a vibrant, sometimes eclectic, community.  Lighten up and smile


----------



## Beefnot (Jan 22, 2013)

Phydeaux said:


> My feeling is posting a web link without any comment on why the poster feels it is relavent, interesting, or how they themselves feel about the subject is just fluff.



I don't agree that one must state an opinion in order for information to be of value.  I guess one man's trash, another man's treasure.



Phydeaux said:


> To generate numerous posts inevitably pushes other posts off the page.



How so?


----------



## Elan (Jan 22, 2013)

Beefnot said:


> I guess one man's trash, another man's treasure.



  That's how I see it.  There's a lot of stuff in the Lounge I find uninteresting.  I'm happy your kid got into XYZ college or that you have a new grandson, but I don't care to read about it because those topics don't typically lend themselves to meaningful discussion.  Yet, I see a thread has numerous replies, so I acknowledge that some others must be at least interested (or courteous) enough to comment.  Similarly, I get that others don't find technology interesting.  But it interests me.  

  If it weren't for Richard's posts, my interest level would drop considerably.  In fact, I'll take this opportunity to once again thank Richard for posting his links.  I only wish I had the time to discover so much interesting stuff.


----------



## TUGBrian (Jan 22, 2013)

I personally dont mind random links....as long as its interesting and I get a little taste of whats in the link before I click it.

I rarely just click a post that contains only a link and nothing more.


----------



## Conan (Jan 22, 2013)

If you're referring to Richard MULTIZ321's posts, here's another vote in favor of them.


----------



## Fern Modena (Jan 22, 2013)

I know that Richard posts a lot of interesting links from things he subscribes to and places he finds on the web.  However, I do wish he'd include at least a line or two to explain what the link is about (or why he posted it).  I, too, am much less likely to click on links without any added information.  I would say that because of the way he posts them, I probably click on less than 1 in 20 of his links.  

I know that there are some others who feel the way I do, and others who don't. Because I feel the way I do, if I post a link, I always try to give you readers an idea of what it is about or why I posted it.

Fern


----------



## ricoba (Jan 22, 2013)

Fern Modena said:


> I know that Richard posts a lot of interesting links from things he subscribes to and places he finds on the web.  However, I do wish he'd include at least a line or two to explain what the link is about (or why he posted it).  I, too, am much less likely to click on links without any added information.  I would say that because of the way he posts them, I probably click on less than 1 in 20 of his links.
> 
> I know that there are some others who feel the way I do, and others who don't. Because I feel the way I do, if I post a link, I always try to give you readers an idea of what it is about or why I posted it.
> 
> Fern



I am in agreement.  

Like others I occasionally, click the link and read the info, but most times I don't feel compelled to do so, since I really am not sure what it's about or why it was posted.  The one's that bother me are one's that lead to a site that requires you to sign in or join, such as the Wall Street Journal.

When I post a link, say to a news article, I try to give a personal point of view or insight into why I posted it.


----------



## Beefnot (Jan 22, 2013)

ricoba said:


> I am in agreement.
> 
> Like others I occasionally, click the link and read the info, but most times I don't feel compelled to do so, since I really am not sure what it's about or why it was posted.  The one's that bother me are one's that lead to a site that requires you to sign in or join, such as the Wall Street Journal.
> 
> When I post a link, say to a news article, I try to give a personal point of view or insight into why I posted it.



So for the "Netflix, Redbox and More: What You Need to Know" thread, let's say he found it to be interesting perspective on the merits of each, and/or that we may find something useful to learn about streaming services, and/or he would just like to hear a lively debate if people have a strong perspective about either.  I don't know that it adds anything to the post by him saying as much.  It kind of stands on its own.  He's simply providing some edification or red meat or whatever it is for those who care to take a peek.  Read it or don't.  Reply or don't.  

I ignore some of the threads and read others.  I really don't get the big deal.  There are way more meaningful things to get irritated about on TUG than this.  Why am I even feeding this whole silliness by even continuing to post?  I'm an idiot.


----------



## pjrose (Jan 22, 2013)

I very much like MULTIZ123's links to articles in which we might be interested.  They're not drive-bys, just brief and that's fine with many of us   Sometimes there's a bit of description, and often the title itself is sufficient. 

I think of Drive-By Posts as the ones that say Help, I just Bought a Timeshare, Now What?, to which we respond with lots of helpful information, but we never hear back.  Did the OP read our info?  Follow it?  Did it work or not?  How about a Thank You?  I don't know about other areas, but these pop up every so often on Mexico, and it's rare that we hear back.  

I wouldn't disallow these queries from newbies; providing helpful info is part of what many of us are here for.  It is kind of frustrating, though, and the occasional "Thank You, I called xxx and emailed yyy and got my money back!" posts are so nice to read


----------



## Kagehitokiri2 (Jan 22, 2013)

the one thing *MULTIZ123* should do is add a differentiator in case he ever had a normal thread


----------



## RX8 (Jan 23, 2013)

I also enjoy multiz123's posts. Do I read every one?  No, only the ones that raise my interest. I have no problem deciphering what the link is about by either the link name or the post's heading.  Where else would I have found out about the website where they have 150,000 animal sounds???

To me, a drive-by post is one where a new user posts something, usually a question or request for advice, only to "drive off" into the sunset never be heard from again.  I wonder if they even came back just to look at the replies!

I have browsed the user list and I am amazed at the number of ID's with just one post.


----------



## Ken555 (Jan 23, 2013)

Elan said:


> I can only read so many threads where someone's whining that their TPU dropped 1 point overnight.



+5 points for a timeshare reference!


----------



## MULTIZ321 (Jan 23, 2013)

Well, some Tugger's like my posts and others don't - or at least the fact that on many I don't provide commentary on why I've posted the link.  I certainly did not have the intent of annoying anyone.

If you're not interested - no need to click.  I think the title of many of the links provides enough information to whet one's interest on whether or not to read further.

I'd like to reiterate what I've written in previous posts
about why I post items to the extent that I do.  It's my way of giving back to Tuggers for all the advice I've received over the years  about timeshares and life issues in general.   I'm very appreciative and have formed some great online friendships.

Thank you to all the Tuggers who have offered words
of support and to those who have offered constructive criticism.  

I do intend to keep posting about items and topics that I think are of interest to other Tuggers.  I will try to add some commentary but can't promise that I'll do it all the time.

Kage - I'm not sure what a differentiator is.

Best regards to all,

Richard


----------



## Kagehitokiri2 (Jan 23, 2013)

[LINK] vs [ME TALKING] etc


----------



## theo (Jan 23, 2013)

*Keep up the good work...*



MULTIZ321 said:


> <snip> *If you're not interested - no need to click. * I think the title of many of the links provides enough information to whet one's interest on whether or not to read further.
> 
> I'd like to reiterate what I've written in previous posts
> about why I post items to the extent that I do.  It's my way of giving back to Tuggers for all the advice I've received over the years  about timeshares and life issues in general.   I'm very appreciative and have formed some great online friendships.
> ...



Well said. I for one have noted previously that your interesting contributions are welcomed and genuinely appreciated. Since this is  the "Lounge" forum, topics presented here also need not be "timeshare related" in any way. 

As you have correctly (and quite diplomatically) noted above, those not interested in a particular topic can simply just ignore the post and move right along on their merry way without somehow becoming "annoyed"...


----------



## Htoo0 (Jan 23, 2013)

I don't mind Richard's posts in the least. I click on a few which sound interesting to me and ignore the rest. However, I can understand the OP's concern. I do frequent several forums and some seem to have a policy against simply posting links (or at least if I see one, it disappears quickly). Doesn't mean I think TUG should do the same but I can understand someone asking the question. Still, I suppose next we'll have someone posting multiple useless links just to test the policy.


----------



## MuranoJo (Jan 24, 2013)

I enjoy Richard's posts, too. Especially the ones about finance, retirement, and technology.  

Agree with PJ in that I always thought of a drive-by poster as someone who would post a question or request for help and then you'd never hear from them again after trying to help them.


----------



## siesta (Jan 24, 2013)

I definitely enjoy multi's/richards posts, alot of times, if not most of the time, he is posting things that I have not come across myself and often are very interesting.  I'll take this opportunity to say thank you Richard, you have kept me entertained on many daily train rides to Chicago Union Station, please keep up the drive bys, especially the tech ones!

I wanted to add: there is no need to add lines from the article, the titles are usually indicative of what the reader would expect, you are a trusted tugger so noone needs to worry about a link you provide, and if they are too lazy to click the link to read a few lines themselves to see if it intrigues them ... Too bad for them. Let them get spoon fed somewhere else. Dont change a thing!


----------



## AwayWeGo (Jan 24, 2013)

*Thank You.*




MULTIZ321 said:


> I do intend to keep posting about items and topics that I think are of interest to other Tuggers.


Keep'm coming.

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## pgnewarkboy (Jan 24, 2013)

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hit-and-run_posting


----------



## Phydeaux (Jan 24, 2013)

pgnewarkboy said:


> http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hit-and-run_posting



There you have it. I knew it as "drive by", when referred to as hit and run.

Majority of folks here have no problem with it. So I guess that opens the door for anyone to begin posting numerous drive by posts in succession.

Perhaps instead of finding it annoying, I'll join in.


----------



## Passepartout (Jan 24, 2013)

MULTIZ321 said:


> I'd like to reiterate what I've written in previous posts about why I post items to the extent that I do.  It's my way of giving back to Tuggers for all the advice I've received over the years  about timeshares and life issues in general.
> Richard



I can only hope that all the folks that have been helped by TUGgers don't feel the need to repay us in the same way. I can't begin to imagine the number of 'helpful', 'interesting' unassociated links to sort through.


----------



## Beefnot (Jan 24, 2013)

Phydeaux said:


> There you have it. I knew it as "drive by", when referred to as hit and run.
> 
> Majority of folks here have no problem with it. So I guess that opens the door for anyone to begin posting numerous drive by posts in succession.
> 
> Perhaps instead of finding it annoying, I'll join in.



Find something else to feign indignation over.


----------



## Elan (Jan 24, 2013)

Phydeaux said:


> There you have it. I knew it as "drive by", when referred to as hit and run.
> 
> Majority of folks here have no problem with it. So I guess that opens the door for anyone to begin posting numerous drive by posts in succession.
> 
> Perhaps instead of finding it annoying, I'll join in.



  I don't see where the problem lies.  It's not like there are a ton of these threads, and it's not like they don't generate intelligent discussion.  Granted, many degenerate into unintelligent discussion, but that could be said about most threads in the Lounge.  

  The way I see it is that the Lounge is a catch-all for non-timeshare related topics.  If one had to pick topics for a random group of folks to discuss, consumer technology would be near the top of the list (along with weather, sports, politics and sex).  If we had a younger demographic here, consumer technology would be even higher on the list.  Like it or not, it's that integral to our society.

  It is what it is.  Don't like it?  Don't read it.


----------



## rrsafety (Jan 24, 2013)

Phydeaux said:


> There you have it. I knew it as "drive by", when referred to as hit and run.
> 
> Majority of folks here have no problem with it. So I guess that opens the door for anyone to begin posting numerous drive by posts in succession.
> 
> Perhaps instead of finding it annoying, I'll join in.



To be honest, I still have no idea what you are talking about. If you are referring specifically Richard, then say it. If not, then which posts are you referring to? I've not seen any "link only" posts outside of Richard's.

(I'm in the 'if you don't like it, don't click' camp....)


----------



## SmithOp (Jan 24, 2013)

rrsafety said:


> To be honest, I still have no idea what you are talking about. If you are referring specifically Richard, then say it. If not, then which posts are you referring to? I've not seen any "link only" posts outside of Richard's.
> 
> (I'm in the 'if you don't like it, don't click' camp....)



I think the annoyance is when 10 in a row are posted it pushes 10 threads off the first page, when the posts come in large blocks rather than being spread over time.  People that have smaller browser screens have to scroll over them to get threads they are following.

It doesn't bother me but I understand the annoyance and why some forums prohibit it, when it gets out of hand it's called flooding.


----------



## Phydeaux (Jan 24, 2013)

SmithOp said:


> I think the annoyance is when 10 in a row are posted it pushes 10 threads off the first page, when the posts come in large blocks rather than being spread over time.  People that have smaller browser screens have to scroll over them to get threads they are following.
> 
> It doesn't bother me but I understand the annoyance and why some forums prohibit it, when it gets out of hand it's called flooding.



Bingo. Thanks Dave.


----------



## Fern Modena (Jan 24, 2013)

Thanks for speaking for me. NOT.  Posting your opinion is one thing, but posting your characterization of those who don't agree with you as being lazy and needing to be spoon fed is insulting to say the least.  I guess that it isn't within your realm to think of them as merely busy with other things...

In the future, perhaps you should speak only of that of which you know, and not that of which you speculate.

Fern



siesta said:


> I wanted to add: there is no need to add lines from the article, the titles are usually indicative of what the reader would expect, you are a trusted tugger so noone needs to worry about a link you provide, and if they are too lazy to click the link to read a few lines themselves to see if it intrigues them ... Too bad for them. Let them get spoon fed somewhere else. Dont change a thing!


----------



## IngridN (Jan 24, 2013)

stmartinfan said:


> As a regular visitor to TUG, I find Richard's posts with links to interesting news articles very enjoyable.  I can usually tell from the title if the topic's of interest to me and I also know from the name of the publication that it's often going to be well written and well researched.  If those fit the definition of drive by posts, then I don't see why they are a problem.  Since he's a regular, it's easy to recognize his name and simply skip those posts if they aren't of interest.  For me, I find I always learn something I wouldn't have found on my own.
> 
> Of course, if a post is something from a unknown poster or a spam link to sell something, then I agree they have no place here.



+1. I've discovered incredibly useful info from Richard's posts and sincerely hopes he continues these postings. YMMV.

Ingrid


----------



## PigsDad (Jan 24, 2013)

SmithOp said:


> I think the annoyance is when 10 in a row are posted it pushes 10 threads off the first page, when the posts come in large blocks rather than being spread over time.  People that have smaller browser screens have to scroll over them to get threads they are following.
> 
> It doesn't bother me but I understand the annoyance and why some forums prohibit it, when it gets out of hand it's called flooding.



Exactly.  What makes it tolerable is that Richard is (usually) the only one doing this.  Now imagine if 20 people started posting 10 new threads a day.  Or 50 people.

Would all of you that say "if you don't like it, don't click on it" feel the same way?

Trying to find a thread that you posted on a day or two earlier could very easily involve wading through pages and pages in the TUG Lounge.  I don't think this is a problem now, but it definitely has the potential of making this forum very unusable.

I'm confident enough in the leadership of this board that if this does become a problem in the future, they would make some kind of sub-forum or policy change.  Until that time, I'm not going to worry about it. 

Kurt


----------



## bogey21 (Jan 24, 2013)

MULTIZ321 said:


> If you're not interested - no need to click.



That is exactly what I do but it does bother me that I have been tricked into even getting that far.

George


----------



## IngridN (Jan 24, 2013)

Phydeaux said:


> There you have it. I knew it as "drive by", when referred to as hit and run.
> 
> Majority of folks here have no problem with it. So I guess that opens the door for anyone to begin posting numerous drive by posts in succession.
> 
> Perhaps instead of finding it annoying, I'll join in.



I'm confused, dense, or whatever.  It appears you are making up you own definition of 'drive by.' Links provided by others, define 'drive by' as someone who posts once and never returns. What problem, exactly are you referring to?

And frankly, who cares....

Ingrid


----------



## PigsDad (Jan 24, 2013)

IngridN said:


> And frankly, who cares....


It is quite clear that there are at least a few people here that do understand this could be a potential issue, especially if the volume of these threads increased.

Take a moment to read the responses in this thread, and you will answer your own question of "who cares".

Kurt


----------



## MichaelColey (Jan 24, 2013)

PigsDad said:


> Exactly. What makes it tolerable is that Richard is (usually) the only one doing this. Now imagine if 20 people started posting 10 new threads a day. Or 50 people.
> 
> Would all of you that say "if you don't like it, don't click on it" feel the same way?


I would certainly feel differently if there were 50 people doing it, and I think just about everyone else would too.  But there aren't 50.  There's only 1 that does it with any regularity, and a ton of people have chimed in that they find it useful.

I don't find every single post useful, but I don't find every single timeshare-related post useful, either.

Whenever I come to TUG, I scan through however many pages of "New Posts" there are, and open the subjects that look interesting into new tabs, then I go through and read them.  If I'm in a hurry or there are more pages than I know I can go through (or if I'm looking for a specific thread I participated in), I go to the "Subscribed Threads" page and just read those posts, then sometimes go through a little of the other new posts as well.  It's really pretty efficient, and I probably don't spend more than 1-2 minutes scanning each page of the list of threads, seeing which threads will interest me.

If I didn't want to read ANY of Richard's posts, I would appreciate the fact that they're often bunched together.  It makes them easy to skip, if you're inclined to do so.  (I'm not.)


----------



## SueDonJ (Jan 24, 2013)

I like Richard's posts, too, but does it really matter who likes them and who doesn't?  Both Brian and Denise have responded in this thread that they're not against TUG rules.  If ever Richard decides to go postal (ha!) and inundate the Lounge such that it becomes overrun with stuff that nobody ever looks at, I'd guess his posting of links could be re-visited.

Now I'd like to request that the Marriott board be placed at the very top of TUG so that I won't have to scroll past anything to get to it.


----------



## Beefnot (Jan 24, 2013)

PigsDad said:


> Trying to find a thread that you posted on a day or two earlier could very easily involve wading through pages and pages in the TUG Lounge.



One can always go to their user control panel and see new posts to their subscribed threads or while in the User CP, click on List Subscriptions.  I never go to the actual sub-forums if my intent is to only find a thread that I recently posted on.


----------



## SueDonJ (Jan 24, 2013)

Beefnot said:


> One can always go to their user control panel and see new posts to their subscribed threads or while in the User CP, click on List Subscriptions.  I never go to the actual sub-forums if my intent is to only find a thread that I recently posted on.



Or, if you don't subscribe to any threads, click on your user name in the Welcome box then "Statistics" then "Find all posts by [your name.]  You should get a newest-first list of all of your posts and can link to the threads through any of them.


----------



## ace2000 (Jan 24, 2013)

SueDonJ said:


> Or, if you don't subscribe to any threads, click on your user name in the Welcome box then "Statistics" then "Find all posts by [your name.] You should get a newest-first list of all of your posts and can link to the threads through any of them.


 
Or just go through the "Quick Links" menu at the top of the page, and then select "Your Posts".   Also good for getting "Today's Posts".


----------



## SueDonJ (Jan 24, 2013)

ace2000 said:


> Or just go through the "Quick Links" menu at the top of the page, and then select "Your Posts".



Well lookie there!  You learn something new every day.  Thanks!


----------



## Beefnot (Jan 24, 2013)

ace2000 said:


> Or just go through the "Quick Links" menu at the top of the page, and then select "Your Posts".   Also good for getting "Today's Posts".



Well hot damn.


----------



## dioxide45 (Jan 24, 2013)

ace2000 said:


> Or just go through the "Quick Links" menu at the top of the page, and then select "Your Posts".   Also good for getting "Today's Posts".



That only shows your actual posts and not the threads. I find it easier to have it setup to automatically subscribe me to all threads that I post in. Then when I go to the UserCP it shows any of my subscribed threads that have new posts.


----------



## dioxide45 (Jan 24, 2013)

Back to the original topic. I don't necessarily have an issue with the "hit and run" posts. Though they aren't really hit and run since Richard does post in some of them. I can see how it could become an issue if there were even four or five people that posted these threads with the same frequency. I do recall one day in the Lounge where the first 7 or 8 threads were all new ones created by Richard.

I think we all know that these posts are not a violation of the TUG posting rules, but that doesn't mean that the question the OP had is not a fair question to ask. Many online forums have rules against these types of threads. Though I am sure they are far busier than TUG. If it becomes an issue I would hope the TUG admin would take the steps needed to fix it.

Of course, are these "drive by threads" any different than Alan's "I Can't Believe I Bought Another Horn" or "Facebook Song of the Day" threads where he is pretty much the only one that posts in them? His two threads take up a place on the first page of the forum pretty much every day.


----------



## pjrose (Jan 24, 2013)

The column for number of views shows the number of people who were sufficiently interested to at least click on the thread.  Most of those under discussion here, i.e. Richard's news items, have over a hundred views, so yes, quite a few of us find them worth checking out 

And Alan's are hardly drive-bys either; they're usually interesting and fun and have lots of views.

As I noted earlier, I think of drive-bys as the "Warning - ABC Timeshare is a Scam" posts where the OP never comes back to see the responses.  One such is near the top of the Mexico board right now.  Even those can be useful to others searching for reviews or experiences about a particular TS.


----------



## DeniseM (Jan 24, 2013)

The "ignore" function is your friend - it only takes 3-4 clicks to end your misery forever.  You won't even SEE the posts...


----------



## dioxide45 (Jan 24, 2013)

pjrose said:


> The column for number of views shows the number of people who were sufficiently interested to at least click on the thread.  Most of those under discussion here, i.e. Richard's news items, have over a hundred views, so yes, quite a few of us find them worth checking out



I think if you compare them to many other threads, the number of views is actually pretty low. About half also have 0 replies. So while some find it interesting to look at, they don't find them interesting enough to discuss. 

Once again, I have no issue with them. Just pointing out my observations. If I find the title interesting, I click on it and may click the link to read the article. Otherwise, I don't bother. I think though that we have to be careful. If somehow there becomes several posters that begin starting these types of threads and it becomes burdensome to the forum, they have to be cutoff all together, not just from the new people that start posting them.



> And Alan's are hardly drive-bys either; they're usually interesting and fun and have lots of views.



I was just using Alan's as a comparison. They don't seem to get much in the way of responses from others like many of Richard's threads.



> As I noted earlier, I think of drive-bys as the "Warning - ABC Timeshare is a Scam" posts where the OP never comes back to see the responses.  One such is near the top of the Mexico board right now.  Even those can be useful to others searching for reviews or experiences about a particular TS.



Looking at the Wikipedia definition of a drive by posting, Richard's posts fit the bill. _"Another variety is the sole posting of a URL or link that leads to material that might be used as a discussion primer, but with no added opinion of the poster."_.


----------



## ace2000 (Jan 24, 2013)

dioxide45 said:


> That only shows your actual posts and not the threads. I find it easier to have it setup to automatically subscribe me to all threads that I post in. Then when I go to the UserCP it shows any of my subscribed threads that have new posts.


 
No.  If you click on "Quick Links", it also has a choice labeled "Your Threads".


----------



## bogey21 (Jan 25, 2013)

DeniseM said:


> The "ignore" function is your friend - it only takes 3-4 clicks to end your misery forever.  You won't even SEE the posts...



Great.  How do I find and use the "ignore" function?


George


----------



## Beefnot (Jan 25, 2013)

DeniseM said:


> The "ignore" function is your friend - it only takes 3-4 clicks to end your misery forever.  You won't even SEE the posts...



But you will still see the threads.


----------



## theo (Jan 25, 2013)

*A wonderful personalized "noise filter"...*



bogey21 said:


> Great.  How do I find and use the "ignore" function?



George:

Find "User CP" button near top left corner of this page, right under "TUG BBS", then select "Edit Ignore List". 
Enter the specific user name(s) of those whose "input" you wish never to even see. POOF! --- what you may regard as unwelcome or dissonant background noise henceforth becomes completely "inaudible" to you. 

One downside / limitation is that any input from the "now officially ignored" which is subsequently quoted by others in *their* posts will still visibly appear to you, as a quote within those posts of others.

I have only a few user names on "ignore", but I do use (and greatly appreciate) that option / feature...


----------



## bogey21 (Jan 25, 2013)

Thank you for the help.

George


----------



## ace2000 (Jan 25, 2013)

bogey21 said:


> Thank you for the help.
> 
> George


 

Who are you thanking?  I couldn't read the post of the person you're responding to...


:hysterical:


----------



## Beefnot (Jan 25, 2013)

ace2000 said:


> Who are you thanking?  I couldn't read the post of the person you're responding to...
> 
> 
> :hysterical:



Baaaaaahahahahaha! :hysterical:


----------



## dioxide45 (Jan 25, 2013)

I can't use the ignore feature. The problem I have is that you can still see that the person posted, you just can't see what they said. If I see that they posted, I want to know what they have to say. They could be saying something about me.


----------



## Phydeaux (Jan 25, 2013)

Naaaah. Let 'er rip. Just stack up those web link posts. More the merrier. Folks here love 'em. :whoopie:

Y'all like the techie stuff, I see. Hope ya like life insurance information also. Can't have enough of that, right?

Here come the web links. All I can find. 












Kidding.


----------



## pjrose (Jan 26, 2013)

Phydeaux said:


> Naaaah. Let 'er rip. Just stack up those web link posts. More the merrier. Folks here love 'em. :whoopie:
> 
> Y'all like the techie stuff, I see. Hope ya like life insurance information also. Can't have enough of that, right?
> 
> ...



I missed that the first time I read your post


----------



## BoaterMike (Jan 27, 2013)

Phydeaux said:


> My feeling is posting a web link without any comment on why the poster feels it is relavent, interesting, or how they themselves feel about the subject is just fluff. It's like filler. It reminds me a little of posters that copypaste information that they have zero background or experience with. I find this annoying also.
> 
> To generate numerous posts inevitably pushes other posts off the page. In other words, posting a web link without any personal commentary is, well, simple. Posting a stack of such threads is annoying, to some of us.



I've tried to overlook it for the most point. However, I am concerned that  it could devalue the whole lounge message category.  Imagine if numerous people posted numerous random links over the course of the day.  I don't know if that is the spirit of the "lounge" forum.  

Personally, I get a lot of the drive by information in my RSS reader prior to the time I see it here, so I ignore it typically.  Too each, their own.

Mike


----------



## pjrose (Jan 27, 2013)

Should "interesting links" posts become a problem, i.e. take over much of a page each day, perhaps Brian could open a new forum for "interesting misc. links".  At this point a handful every-so often does not seem a problem.


----------



## Phydeaux (Jan 28, 2013)

Or, instead of posting a stack of similar subject topics, tech, why not simply create one post? Title it: Today Tech Tidbits, Jan. 33. In other words, consolidate these posts. That way they're not pushing 5 or 6 other threads off the page.


----------



## easyrider (Jan 28, 2013)

MULTIZ321 said:


> Well, some Tugger's like my posts and others don't - or at least the fact that on many I don't provide commentary on why I've posted the link.  I certainly did not have the intent of annoying anyone.
> 
> If you're not interested - no need to click.  I think the title of many of the links provides enough information to whet one's interest on whether or not to read further.
> 
> ...



I have found some of you posts very interesting and some even helpful. Of all of the forums I participate tug has the most thread killers and complainers but even so its only a few that partake in these activities. I say " Keep on posting as you like ". 

Bill


----------



## dioxide45 (Jan 28, 2013)

easyrider said:


> I have found some of you posts very interesting and some even helpful. Of all of the forums I participate tug has the most thread killers and complainers but even so its only a few that partake in these activities. I say " Keep on posting as you like ".
> 
> Bill



Haha, thread killers? I think you would make that list wouldn't you? I know that I have seen some of your threads get killed pretty quick.


----------



## Passepartout (Jan 28, 2013)

Phydeaux said:


> Or, instead of posting a stack of similar subject topics, tech, why not simply create one post? Title it: Today Tech Tidbits, Jan. 33. In other words, consolidate these posts. That way they're not pushing 5 or 6 other threads off the page.



Actually, this isn't a half bad idea. Not unlike the "Picture of the Day" or "Facebook Song of the Day." (Sorry Alan, just using it as example) Rather than each person posting their own travel pictures or starting a new thread every day for a Facebook music link. There could be a "Miscellaneous Tech Links" or "Suggestions for Better Living Links."

Better to consolidate these than have individual threads with 0-to 5 comments or replies. They would still be searchable and wouldn't push 15-20% of each days new threads off the front page of the Lounge, inviting more comments on a wider range of topics.


----------



## dioxide45 (Jan 28, 2013)

Passepartout said:


> Actually, this isn't a half bad idea. Not unlike the "Picture of the Day" or "Facebook Song of the Day." (Sorry Alan, just using it as example) Rather than each person posting their own travel pictures or starting a new thread every day for a Facebook music link. There could be a "Miscellaneous Tech Links" or "Suggestions for Better Living Links."
> 
> Better to consolidate these than have individual threads with 0-to 5 comments or replies. They would still be searchable and wouldn't push 15-20% of each days new threads off the front page of the Lounge, inviting more comments on a wider range of topics.



The only problem with this is that it would make following specific discussions difficult. Imaging people talking about four different links in one thread. While it would cure one issue, it could cause a whole new one.


----------



## Passepartout (Jan 28, 2013)

dioxide45 said:


> The only problem with this is that it would make following specific discussions difficult. Imaging people talking about four different links in one thread. While it would cure one issue, it could cause a whole new one.



Not that tough. Just like in 'Picture' or 'Music' thread, simply quote the link and make your comment. The majority (I know there are some that develop a following) of new threads that start with just header and link don't invite comment and die after very few comments.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jan 28, 2013)

dioxide45 said:


> The only problem with this is that it would make following specific discussions difficult. Imaging people talking about four different links in one thread. While it would cure one issue, it could cause a whole new one.


I totally agree. 

As a board habitue, I don't see this as a problem right now.  If drive-by posting should start to flood the board I would change my tune.  But as matters stand this thread is an answer in search of a problem.


----------



## ace2000 (Jan 28, 2013)

It's obvious that we're not going to come to a total consensus here. 

So, I propose that only a handful of posters get special "Drive By Poster" status, and they're the only ones that get that privilege. The rest of the posts get deleted by the moderators as soon as they're reported. 

To start, Richard and I will be granted the official status. For the rest of you, submit an application for the elite status and Richard and I will take it under consideration... really, I see no other way to resolve this fairly.


----------



## geoand (Jan 28, 2013)

*here's my 2 cents worth and its probably not worth that much*

Whew!  I really find it rough and tough work to actually got to another page on the lounge to see or read the new posts and or new threads.  In addition to being rough and tough work it is a real time consumer too.  I get exhausted have to go to the next page to keep up on the current threads and don't get me started on how tired I get when I have to go to the third page!  My whole day could be ruined.

Now that I have said my piece, I say it is just fine the way it is working now!!!!  What is the big deal?  Don't tell me it was motivated by problems it could create.  Sheesh.


----------



## Laurie (Jan 28, 2013)

Conan said:


> If you're referring to Richard MULTIZ321's posts, here's another vote in favor of them.


And another. I enjoy them the way they are.


----------



## pjrose (Jan 28, 2013)

If it ain't broke........


----------



## Phydeaux (Jan 28, 2013)

dioxide45 said:


> The only problem with this is that it would make following specific discussions difficult. Imaging *people talking about four different links in one thread*. While it would cure one issue, it could cause a whole new one.



...because that never happens now! :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:


----------



## SueDonJ (Jan 28, 2013)

ace2000 said:


> It's obvious that we're not going to come to a total consensus here.
> 
> So, I propose that only a handful of posters get special "Drive By Poster" status, and they're the only ones that get that privilege. The rest of the posts get deleted by the moderators as soon as they're reported.
> 
> To start, Richard and I will be granted the official status. For the rest of you, submit an application for the elite status and Richard and I will take it under consideration... really, I see no other way to resolve this fairly.



Already said, I refuse to play nicely until the Marriott board is moved to the very top of the first page.  Hmmmph.


----------



## Elan (Jan 28, 2013)

I just want to know what the ultra important & interesting topics are that keep getting pushed off the first page by these mundane drive-by's?   I guess I missed 'em.


----------



## ace2000 (Jan 28, 2013)

Elan said:


> I just want to know what the ultra important & interesting topics are that keep getting pushed off the first page by these mundane drive-by's? I guess I missed 'em.


 
See that's the problem... if it wasn't for the drive-by posts, you'd probably be a freakin timeshare genius by now.  


 :hysterical:


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jan 28, 2013)

Phydeaux said:


> ...because that never happens now! :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:


so what are your thoughts on the RCI settlement? Or about --Deleted---


----------



## Htoo0 (Jan 28, 2013)

Where's Seinfeld when you need him?


----------



## geekette (Jan 29, 2013)

I fail to see a problem.  

It's no bother to me to go to Page 2 of the lounge, or even page 3.  If it's been a while (like it has been for me today) then there could be many more pages. So what?

Things "getting pushed off the front page" is how it works, with the most recent threads showing on the first page.  if one does not have interest in threads on the first page, move on, as a person could make this argument for every forum we have here ("hey, nothing on the first page is interesting to me!")

IMO, the true 'drive by posts' are by those showing up on Tug for the sole purpose to solicit and those are quickly removed.  Richard is not a drive-by, he's a participant with full rights (and respect, from me, at least) to post.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jan 29, 2013)

geekette said:


> I fail to see a problem.
> 
> It's no bother to me to go to Page 2 of the lounge, or even page 3.  If it's been a while (like it has been for me today) then there could be many more pages. So what?


And TUG makes it so simple.  I have the "New Posts" link bookmarked - that's the link I use to come to TUG.  Then I've set my user preferences to exclude from the New Post listing entries from forums in which I have no interest. About the only time my New Posts list runs to more than two pages is when I'm busy and more than one day elapses between visits.


----------



## lcml11 (Jan 29, 2013)

The proponents of brievity seem to be lacking on this discussion.  If a link speaks for itself, why waste words.

Sorry for the drive by post.


----------



## laurac260 (Mar 31, 2014)

I for one would like to see a separate category for "closed threads".  When I have a few minutes to spare I like to log on to TUG and see what got closed today… Makes for some entertaining reading when I'm in "the office". :whoopie:


----------

