ZenBrillig wrote: So that we can use phrases like IBTL+1.
johnaaron33 wrote: ZenBrillig wrote: So that we can use phrases like IBTL+1. Huh?
Budget Player Cadet wrote: To quote Nonce: explaining why they're locked bumps them and they don't want to do that.
johnaaron33 wrote: Budget Player Cadet wrote: To quote Nonce: explaining why they're locked bumps them and they don't want to do that. I'm sorry, but when you are locking down THAT MANY threads all at once, people deserve a reason. Bump or no bump.
Nonce Equitaur 2 wrote: Explaining a lock in a thread bumps the thread back up to the top, and I didn't want a block of 8 locked threads at the top of the queue. And it would have been extra work. Lazy moderator. I'm fine with complaints, but when there were 15 threads on the same topic on the front page, I decided to lock a bunch of them. There are plenty of threads that can still have gasoline poured on them. Go and gather your pitchforks and torches.
Nonce Equitaur 2 wrote: johnaaron33 wrote: Budget Player Cadet wrote: To quote Nonce: explaining why they're locked bumps them and they don't want to do that. I'm sorry, but when you are locking down THAT MANY threads all at once, people deserve a reason. Bump or no bump. If you'd like, I could unlock everything, and you can go and add and explanation to each one about which threads have this same topic and asking if they could please post there. And I could just leave them there, and we'd have a front page where you've made a response to every single topic. Would you like to do that?
johnaaron33 wrote: I posted that before I saw your response.