anonemouse

Exactly. It would suck if this place turned into another OH, seemingly around just to make a quick buck off the fat folks. I don't want to belong to another place where people can have the posts of other people removed from threads they start, where they are sheltered from life and told that everything they ever do is perfectly okay (even when it's not). To be really blunt, places like that are a dime a dozen on the internet. I love LBT because it's REAL. We aren't children that need to be sheltered from life. Every person that joins LBT is an adult, and adults can deal with RnR on their own. They don't need to be protected. RnR is a part of LBT. If someone disregards LBT just because of one measly little forum, that's their business. I'm sure they would be welcomed to the fold over at OH.

That's exactly what I did, in hopes that it might stop the bitching and hand-waving over threads that people can already ignore. That's the kicker. We've already got a function that people can use to ignore entire forums, if they would only use it.

I totally agree with you, Mark. I think people should have the CHOICE of whether or not to see a thread or a forum, but I don't think the decision should be made for them. And if ultimately, they end up in the RnR forum because they clicked when they shouldn't have, then tough. They should have read about what the forums were before they started posting. Or my option of turning off the "new posts" and "top 5" entirely, and making LBT inconvenient for everyone.

Yes, it would. I even voted for it.

That's true, and it's actually the point I was trying to make. People wouldn't be so happy about having to go directly to the forum when it's the posts that they want to see. Like I've said before, I have no real problem with people having the option of whether or not they see certain threads. I just have a problem with them deciding what threads everyone else can see.

You know, I think I have a solution that would make all of us happy (or all of us equally miserable, same dif). Disable the "new threads"; and "top 5"; function entirely. Make it so that the only way any thread can be accessed is by going through the forum that the thread is in. That way, no one can have threads "forced" upon them and no one can say that they didn't know what they were getting themselves into.

I would love to be able to give myself a pedicure. Unfortunately, most of my fat is on my stomach, making it impossible for me to be able to bend the way I would need to in order to do it. It shoves all my fat into my diaphragm, and I can't breathe after a few seconds. I love professional pedicures, though, but I don't get them nearly often enough.

I wish they were combined. I can't remember where I've posted certain posts. I'm getting internet whiplash.

You're right. And I was able to step away from the thread by putting the person making the posts on my ignore list. That makes it a lot easier to ignore a thread.

Not any more than knowing to click "new posts." All they would have to do is double click the icon next to the forum.

True. But it is a possible solution. And it is better than making everyone who is happy with the way things are go out of their way to read a few threads.

I do. I stopped using the toner and lotion stuff, and it seems to have helped the bleaching. I found out the hard way that the cleanser will bleach towels and washcloths if you don't rinse your face very well after you use it, too. I can't use it to wash my face unless I am in the shower, because I can't get it to rinse cleanly otherwise.

So? The solution is still to make other threads more popular, right? Or mark the entire RnR forum as "read". Problem solved.

Or the people that don't want to be exposed to it can make the entire forum "read", so that it doesn't pop up for them. To me, that would be easier, since it doesn't require the mods to change any settings.

Then the solution is to post more on those other threads, not restrict access to the popular ones.

But can't people choose whether or not they want to be exposed? With a few exceptions, most threads in RnR don't have remotely offensive titles.

OW. My crotch hurts just thinking about it.

Then people should be posting on Suzie Smith's thread if they want that to have more emphasis. The only reason that the RnR threads show up on the "new posts" and "top 5" is because people are posting on those threads. If other people want other threads to be more popular or have a higher emphasis, they should post on those threads.

But isn't removing the threads in RnR from any mention on the board (other than in that forum) all but making it special access? There may not be restricted access yet (although, I don't doubt that will be in the works if the rest of this happens), but it is censorship, IMO.

To be honest, I am just a huge believer in individual responsibility. I think that if people don't like a thread or a forum, they aren't obligated to read it. I don't think people need to be protected from being offended. They are adults, they'll get over it.

Why are you so defensive to have it gone?

Most newbies that I've seen haven't gotten offended when someone made it clear that RnR was an off-topic discussion area.

I doubt that will happen. There are lots of people who apparently hate the RnR, but still love to post there. I somehow doubt that they will suddenly start ignoring threads, as much as I would love it. I don't have a problem with having a function that would allow an individual user to determine if they want to ignore certain threads or even entire forums. What I do have a problem with is removing the entire RnR forum from the "new posts" page. And if someone is so sensitive that they allow an entire, easily ignored forum to ruin their experience here and drive them away from the strong support that is available here.... Well, to be sensitive about it, that says more about them than about LBT.

But why should it? No one can give me a really logical answer to this.

All I can remember hearing about is a bunch of people that got banned because they were feuding. And I think a lot had other screen names, which is a no-no, I guess. All I can think is that if they were acting badly enough that they got banned, they probably weren't great support in the first place.