Off Topic reorganization

So the new OT-lite would not only not count for anything, but it would have dirty jokes and pictures of animal abuse (ie. "bonsai kittens")?

Since when are bonsai kittens animal abuse?
 
I thought they were kittens that were not actually in the bottles but a photography trick. Unless the thing I read is wrong.
 
Well, 102 guests online in colosseum at the moment and 52 of them are stuck in off-topic.
 
adbots most likely
 
I thought this was just an April Fool's joke. If it is, it's the 3rd now.

If not, then this is going to be the death of OT. Sure, it might still be there, but I wouldn't be surprised if there aren't massive amounts of people leaving shortly. Maybe this was the plan all along? Kill OT so there's no dealing with it anymore?

:hmm:
 
I thought this was just an April Fool's joke. If it is, it's the 3rd now.

If not, then this is going to be the death of OT. Sure, it might still be there, but I wouldn't be surprised if there aren't massive amounts of people leaving shortly. Maybe this was the plan all along? Kill OT so there's no dealing with it anymore?

:hmm:

Nah I dont think OT will die, it just seems like out of the two forums FT is going to crush FC activity wise. FT for all intents and purposes is operating just like the old OT did activity and topic wise whereas this forum is relatively dead. I would expect that trend to continue for the most part.
 
wheres the babe pics?
In the FT. My valuable contributions no longer count as helpful towards the community!

btw, Tavern… girls and beer!
Did we decide if this was a joke or not? I was away most of the 1st.

If it is, well, well played sirs, but I think its time to end the joke. If it isn't...while I respect what you all are trying to do, in typical OT mod fashion, you've ended up making things worse. This creates a logistical mess, when far less heavy handed tricks would have worked.

I'll prob bail for good if this continues.
Don't bail, there's tons of stuff to do. And don't leave 50chat!
azzaman33311381117 said:
I dunno about Joe, but I don't want to run up my PC. I just want my PC to reflect how much I actually post, whether those posts are in OT, or the Civ forums, or whatever.
It's not often Azzaman and I agree, but this is one of them.
Count me in.
It's only been three days. It's far too early to make such judgements.
Why not simply create a new OT-serious forum and move threads there as required isntead of being so crassly moronic as to say 'hey, this is now a spam moshpit, enjoy!'
 
OT-SRSBZNS should be merged into #18 which can be renamed so that we don't require moderator assistance to bump threads.
 
I don't get why we don't crash FC instead.
FC has more tighter and stricter rule set. Many of us don't want to ruffle the already ruffled feathers of the mods.
 
The purpose of war isn't to die for your country forum, but to make the other bastard die for his.
 
We can let this run a while. If the serious forum delivers, consider this a success and keep it this way. If not, because of lack of traffic in serious forum or something like that, revert.

I'm always cautious when people say: we're just trying out if this works. Chances are the changes will stay in place even if it doesn't and people are slow to admit their plans didn't work.

Also, if this is not an April fools joke gone wrong in such an extend that it's too embarrassing to admit it was so it's paraded as an 'unfortunate coincidence' (in which case I demand immediate resignations) it was pretty spectacularly poorly timed.
 
Just chiming in to say that I like the new forum names. Much more descriptive of what they'll (hopefully) be about.
 
FC has more tighter and stricter rule set. Many of us don't want to ruffle the already ruffled feathers of the mods.
Not tighter rules. Same standards as the old OT. For now.

Once the usual suspects have been leeched away to elsewhere and the place is more akin to the History forum in spirit, we can also ease up here.
 
Just chiming in to say that I like the new forum names. Much more descriptive of what they'll (hopefully) be about.
Actually I do not like the Debating Chamber name. Implies we are trying to create a debating forum, which we are not... :ack:
 
Top Bottom