Re: why?

Posted by Fred23 on May 1, 2010, at 12:46:32

In reply to Re: why?, posted by Dr. Bob on April 28, 2010, at 23:39:21

> I can suggest two hypotheses:
>
> 1. Maybe it's more important to other posters than the blocked poster.
>
> 2. Maybe the blocked poster accepts being blocked, but other posters worry that they'll be blocked next, and no one will help them avoid it.
>
> Anybody else?
>
> Bob
Blocking everyone involved in a thread gone bad for 52 weeks would be a simpler rule to apply, and thin the ranks of active posters more quickly.

Thread

LYING ABOUT FB + TWTR....why am i not surprised? fayeroe 4/21/10
...
:-) Keep your spirits high! (nm) » muffled BabyToes 4/27/10
Re: and so it goes, same old same old :( SLS 4/27/10
Re: and so it goes, same old same old :( » SLS BabyToes 4/27/10
In other words... BabyToes 4/27/10
Re: and so it goes, same old same old :( » muffled Dinah 4/27/10
Re: In other words... » BabyToes obsidian 4/27/10
Re: In other words... BabyToes 4/27/10
Re: and so it goes, same old same old :( muffled 4/28/10
I am ashamed of myself! jane d 4/28/10
Re: and so it goes, same old same old :( » muffled Dinah 4/28/10
Re: blocked for 52 weeks » BabyToes Dr. Bob 4/28/10
Re: why? Dr. Bob 4/28/10
Re: why? Fred23 5/1/10
Re: blocked for 52 weeks » BabyToes floatingbridge 5/4/10
Re: blocked for 52 weeks » Dr. Bob NKP 6/13/10
Re: calculating blocks Dr. Bob 6/15/10
Re: calculating blocks NKP 6/16/10
Re:blocked for 52 weeks. The horse is dead. (nm) » NKP fayeroe 6/16/10
Re: calculating blocks Dr. Bob 6/17/10

Post a new follow-up

Notify the administrators

Start a new thread

poster:Fred23 thread:944420
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20100321/msgs/945878.html