Changes are coming..... Recommended that you read...

Highly Experienced Member

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Locutisprime:
quote:
Originally posted by FollowMeInfantry:
quote:
Originally posted by crackerjacks61:
quote:
Originally posted by Locutisprime:
I for one find this change of direction exceedingly curious. Especially in the middle of the current presidential campaign.

It strikes me as the doors are being flung open to a Dodge City style of unchecked and unsupported bias and name calling that leaves no room for challenge or substance or rebuttal. Other than biting kicking screaming rants back and forth and supported by nothing other that who will attempt to out last the other via personal attacks and the use of vitriol. And that doesn't even begin to consider the wolf packs and cliques that will form for supposedly savaging the individual unable or unskilled enough to protect themselves.

If that is the path that the supposed "powers that be" want this forum to take? Then I say, "You know what? It is their forum and they are more than welcome to do as they damn well please." Just don't be surprised when the forums here cease to be anything other than the soapboxes of the left and those whose only objective is to rant. Because that is precisely all you will have left.

I agree Locutisprime. This sounds fishy right near the finish of a race to the white house. I have always felt this board biased towards any that are not for the Republican Candidate. This is suppose to be a free nation with freedom of speech but this board has all but turned that concept on it's head. There are PLENTY of other boards out there.

Take your tin foil off, shiny side out or not. There is no right wing conspiracy to silence the masses here that have, you know, just so much to do with actually putting someone in the White House, appointing the seats of the Senate and Congress, and influencing the JCOS. That's just silly.

How in the hell does anyone associate no hotlinks with a grand conspiracy to thwart the Democratic ticket?

Hung my tin pot up the day I left the Corps.

As for what is going on here now and the explanations tendered? I too have watched over the last three days. I have watched and read everything from what the mods have had to say, to what those others who have come in to either question or concur with what has been said and done.

But no one has addressed the obvious. While discussions and directions have been given and discussed on how to bypass or circumvent the new mil.com POS/TOS by everyone from regular members to mods, nothing has been said about the honesty or lack their of in what is being represented as the new TOS or the open defiance of it by some, or why it all came suddenly down to begin with.

Challenges were put out there early by the mods after the new policy was stated, directing anyone to notify the mods via the alert system, when people transgressed the no hot linking policy. Then when hot links to both articles and proprietary images have been and were established in defiance in some threads and the mods were alerted? Nothing happened. No action taken aside from the snide commenting of the OP and their crew to laugh in the face of those who just don't get the reality that a few seem to be clued in on.

Then there has been the simple things that have curiously gone awry. I have asked a mod twice now to simply take down my unit patch that I had only recently succeeded in having included on my profile. Somehow that request has been lost in translation and my unit patch remains, even though I have asked that it be removed. I have already taken down my avatar on my own, and would do the same with my unit patch ans slogan if I had the ability to, but I don't.

Seeing as how both were hot linked to images that I do not "own" the image is my opinion, that all images that are as described by the new TOS are/were/remain in violation of the TOS as now published. As do those of anyone who has images hot linked outside of this forum, or to images that "they do not own."

Funny thing about rules, when you try to comply with them? You always find those who seem to be able to just ignore them and do as they please. AS for me? I am leaving the forum friends. Just waiting to insure that some final house keeping is taken care of on my account, before closing it all down and moving on.

I have other things of greater interest to me, than staying here and bumping heads with things that I consider to be both ill conceived and even worse concealed. Whatever the motivations, this too will pass as they say, but it will not reconcile or repair the damage already done. For those interested in keeping in touch, I can be contacted at locutisprime@comcast.net

I already told you 2 times by your profile message that I would be glad to do it, if you message back to confirm.
My regular E-mail is in my Mod Avatar, use that if you don't want to use the profile message.
One of us would take it off if you went to the yellow triangle about it, ALL mods on all forums see that, as well as admin.

Since you are leaving, so long, good luck.

"Never try to teach a pig to sing; It wastes your time and annoys the pig." - Heinlein

Posts: 7874 | Registered: Mon 29 November 2004

Ignored post by USAF_76_2_80 posted

pken

"I'm still a
tough old bird!"

Picture of pken

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by The_Bonesaw:
I put out feelers with several tech contacts and asked their opinions about what is going on here. It's as most people suspect - all about the money.

Of all my contacts, two Web Developers had the best insight: They suspect that Military Advantage's visitors may have dropped-off and that one way of countering that (and not losing ad revenue) would be looping all links back into themselves in order to drive them back up. They initially suspected that it might also be a way of keeping those on the site from clicking off, however, since opening a new link does not automatically close the old one, they don't think that's the case.

This is a scheme for Military Advantage to skew their own numbers so they can screw their own advertisers out of more money; but they need you - the faithful member - to be their pawns. Won't you lend a hand?

From my insight, it would also have the double advantage of killing Point/Counterpoint. This forum causes them the most problems, and they wouldn't miss it a bit. However, they would probably miss the membership.

Is the boycott still on for monday?

Posts: 11983 | Registered: Thu 21 September 2000

Ignored post by pken posted

Highly Experienced Member

Posted

quote:
NiteCloak 1911 !!!

I personally think that it hardly makes a difference whether we get permission to link or not, as far as the discussion boards go.

10 or 12 years ago the only way you could link in a discussion board or chat room was to have admin control or was familiar with HTML if your message board allowed you to use it it. Look at the message boards (comments) they are using in the main page news, those do not allow links, smileys, images, etc at all.

Is there right to hot link?

One of the problems is that when this site was set up, the use of links was not an issue, since the software used to run the boards automatically changes anything input with www. or http:// into a URL link. You just have to change the way that you provide your readers where to go to see your info.

we have discussed how to post the internet address of any site/article etc, without activating the automatic feature.

First thing I told them when they announced the changes was"shut it off!"

Unfortunately Rob tells me cannot be turned off/disabled. I assume this is due to the software used to run the site, which is over 10 years old, If I am not mistaken.

"Never try to teach a pig to sing; It wastes your time and annoys the pig." - Heinlein

Posts: 7874 | Registered: Mon 29 November 2004

Ignored post by USAF_76_2_80 posted

Highly Experienced Member

Posted

quote:
Is the boycott still on for monday?

You can start now, if you wish.

"Never try to teach a pig to sing; It wastes your time and annoys the pig." - Heinlein

Posts: 7874 | Registered: Mon 29 November 2004

Ignored post by USAF_76_2_80 posted

AngelHeart

Experienced Member
Picture of AngelHeart

Posted

I don't get why everyone is flippin out over this. How hard is it to put the url in with quotes or a name.com format? Get a grip people. It really isn't that hard or a big deal.

[Oops! I accedentally hit edit and not reply with quote, sorry!]

This message has been edited. Last edited by: USAF_76_2_80,

Posts: 3255 | Registered: Fri 31 December 2004

Ignored post by AngelHeart posted

Highly Experienced Member

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by AngelHeart:
I don't get why everyone is flippin out over this. How hard is it to put the url in with quotes or a name.com format? Get a grip people. It really isn't that hard or a big deal.

[Oops! I accedentally hit edit and not reply with quote, sorry!]

Maybe they don't like "change"?

"Never try to teach a pig to sing; It wastes your time and annoys the pig." - Heinlein

Posts: 7874 | Registered: Mon 29 November 2004

Ignored post by USAF_76_2_80 posted

AngelHeart

Experienced Member
Picture of AngelHeart

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by USAF_76_2_80:
quote:
Originally posted by AngelHeart:
I don't get why everyone is flippin out over this. How hard is it to put the url in with quotes or a name.com format? Get a grip people. It really isn't that hard or a big deal.

[Oops! I accedentally hit edit and not reply with quote, sorry!]
Maybe they don't like "change"?

lol. But I thought everyone wanted "change" these days.

Posts: 3255 | Registered: Fri 31 December 2004

Ignored post by AngelHeart posted

pken

"I'm still a
tough old bird!"

Picture of pken

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by john2x:

[QUOTE]That would be interesting even on Mags Turf, That would be worse than Wally and Mag in that special Pizzin contest they had.

Johnney Two Strokes equals CFI Pilot. So, are you ****ed at MAG because he shut you off for a while. Your posting rights were returned.....did you know that? You and Wally....I just don't know?

Posts: 11983 | Registered: Thu 21 September 2000

Ignored post by pken posted

Bergy46

Highly Experienced Member

Posted

Things change, some changes are good, some are not! Changes can be changed, if it isn't working, change it back or seek an alternative!

Keep smiling, everyone will wonder what you've been up to!

Posts: 12392 | Registered: Thu 10 April 2008

Ignored post by Bergy46 posted

john2x

Highly Experienced Member

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by NiteCloak1911:
If a mod could, move the thread of changes up to the top of P/CP. My schedule - I do not get on Mil.Com as much as I use to - Work schedule and other commitments. Lucky I caught it today, so I would not have violated any TOU's.

Links - cnn, msnbc, ect,and some others ; gives weight to a posting, thread. Also, it gives the Mil.Com member credibility to their postings of accounts and actions of times past.

A member post something, and another member asks " Got a link? " Meaning, back up what you just posted - or you are just flapping your mouth.

I believe that the policy should be revised, so that propaganda websites, and other websites that hold no credibility, or are just blogs...comments of ones imagination - should not be posted.

P/CP, God Bless us, is one of the most hottest and most interesting sites on the World Wide Web. Debates, and arguments occur that occur no where else. How else is one to back up their comments without posting a link? How is one to post a thread of an action or occurrace without posting a link? How is one to back up their statements without posting a link? Awlfully difficult.

Links should be able to be posted, but within good taste.

NiteCloak 1911 !!!

But that opens a new can of worms N.C. Who decides whats credible? In todays world of controlled media, Can you call anything Credible? And once all agreed where would be the debate? It would become just another boring Chat room. Without serious controversy you cant have a good debate.

Posts: 8300 | Registered: Sun 27 May 2007

Ignored post by john2x posted

whtetiger

SUSPENDED MEMBER
S_S

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by USAF_76_2_80:
quote:
Originally posted by AngelHeart:
I don't get why everyone is flippin out over this. How hard is it to put the url in with quotes or a name.com format? Get a grip people. It really isn't that hard or a big deal.

[Oops! I accedentally hit edit and not reply with quote, sorry!]
Maybe they don't like "change"?

Posts: 16477 | Registered: Thu 29 December 2005

Ignored post by whtetiger posted

alcyone

Experienced Member
Picture of alcyone

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by billbright:
Here's the upcoming legislation alluded to earlier:

[=http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/1733]http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/1733[/URL]

There is legislation coming down the pipe that can be a huge burden to you if you're an artist or writer. I happen to be both. In an effort to help large contributors, people like Disney, Pixar, news and magazine moguls, and other special interests, draconian limitations on copyright are in the works.

Republicans, bless their pea-picking hearts, are going to see to it that special commercial (as in non-governmental) copyright warehouses are to be set up; these warehouses will be able to charge whatthehellever they feel like; and an artist or writer will have to get a paid-for copyright--the price of which will be determined by these vultures ...something which is presently automatic. And, if someone sees your work, likes it, and does "due diligence" in trying to find you and can't, they can use your work.

It's a bullsht law. It means that creative people who already have a helluva time trying to get their work sold will now have extra expense and time spent protecting it, and the protection will amount to nothing because they won't be able to afford to legally fend off the Pixar's, Times's, and Disney's.

And... of course, there'll be a shakeout in the internet: limitations of free speech will be augmented by whatever the FCC and Homeland Security think are appropriate to shape our thoughts.

The AFA will be proud.

This is not accidental. The "free" internet represents a very LARGE threat to special interests. Especially POLITICAL based special interests. Obamas grassroots success at fundraising over the net has shaken them up.(It directly threatens those who hide behind BOTH parties who choose to manipilate us) The corporate powers that be along with their political buddies are rather dull sluggards. They DO have a nack for getting money, but so do bandits. They have little creativity and don't compete well in a free internet environment as they bore people to death.Freedom in ANYTHING is perceived as a threat, since they EMBODY slavery. Since they can't really compete well, the only other option is to crank the screws so tight, you can't get a greased BB through it. You see this type of mentality in repititous conformity. Row after row after row of houses that look the same, people encouraged to dress the same (Designer geans), eat the same food, and CONFORM, no matter what. Conforming people are MUCH easier to manage than creative people who bend the envelope. Look at our schools where our bright creative children are turned into dull, half crippled worker bees. Row after row of children, with their little mouthes open like baby sparrows, while drivle is shoved down their throats. Facts, facts,row after row of facts jumbled together, test scores the highest goal, while MEANING goes out the window and usefulness in life only reserved for workerbee functions. What it means to be a human being or the meaning of existence only croaked our of dusty dried philosophy classes, to be taken as an alternate core class. Where is the JOY in learning? Where is the beauty that lies sleeping in these little ones hearts given an opportunity of expression?

Conformity is DEATH to the Human Spirit. It is a war after all to crush the spirit and turn people into robotic slaves for the overloards. They wern't real successful in clamping the net over porn and child molesting as they cant stop the porn and molestation is such a small issue that nobody that is net savvy gets all worked up about it. (You have more chance of a child being molested in a church than over the net) the next best thing is to use the regulators of communication, the FCC and congress to clamp on the screws. Since corporate interests (at least for now) OWN these people more or less, they can dream up a major screw, using our own capitalist system against us to curtail freedom. All in the name of "copyright" protection, being streached to fit around the internet. And if you think you are NOT being constantly manipulated, then you're sleepwalking and VERY nieve. It isn't just for profits, it's for power as well.

Think about it.

Posts: 4554 | Registered: Tue 05 October 2004

Ignored post by alcyone posted

Forums Administrator
THE ROBOCOP

Posted

Greetings all,

Let's see if I can shine some light on this, so we can put this matter to rest. I've borrowed some of the wording here straight from our Director.

The problem has been, we, Military.com have been contacted by a number of news organizations complaining about their articles and site links being posted without their permission. Some news organizations, particularly television or radio news sites don't care, but the smaller news, and even some of the bigger news media do care. Some charge for re-posting, which of course is why they are adamant about us not posting their site links without their permission.

Certainly this is going on all over the internet - we're just being singled out mostly because of the high volume of traffic generated on Military.com.

In other words, I'm afraid we'll have to clamp down on this policy for legal reasons. Remember, the discussion forum is not a revenue generator, and we run it as a membership benefit. What we don't want is for someone in our legal department getting involved with this end of the world - so it's important for us to keep the opportunity for them to get involved to as close to nonexistent as possible.

Some of the news articles of interest can certainly be addressed in the discussion forum, even using a portion of the articles is okay (as long as it's credited to the source). That shouldn't hinder folks from carrying on a discussion topic. Also, you may find some of the articles of interest covered somewhere on Military.com (which of course those links are okay to post).

With all due respect folks, everyone needs to understand three things:

1st - The Discussion Forums are not a revenue generator, so we need to keep the concerns and issues away from the leadership as much as possible.

2nd - Sites like 'YouTube' are making money from click-thrus - we're giving them free advertising by allowing their links, which is unfair to everyone else.

3rd and possibly the most significant - With the exeption of any attorneys who participate in our forums, I'm not sure that the general population completely understands the magnitude of copyright infringement. It's a 'pick and choose' matter - and with us being a big number on site visitors and click-thrus, it's easier to come after us than some small obscure site.

Now, let's declare this horse dead and burried... and get back to business.

Respectfully,

-Rob

"I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant." - Oscar Wilde

Posts: 1336 | Registered: Mon 10 April 2006

Ignored post by RobRodriguez posted

greywolfghost

Posted

Is there any way you could list those sites that are definitely taboo, so that we could steer them a wide path? Definitely don't want to ruffle their feathers, even by accident....

Wandering and Wondering

Posts: 24619 | Registered: Fri 01 June 2007

Ignored post by greywolfghost posted

Kegler300

"Bowlers have BIG balls!"

Posted

You would think posting a link to their news website would be a good thing for them. It would attract interest to their site, even if just for the news item.

"The World's Finest"

Posts: 15566 | Registered: Wed 07 March 2001

Ignored post by Kegler300 posted

Posted

quote:
Remember, the discussion forum is not a revenue generator, and we run it as a membership benefit.

Just a point of information for me Rob.

Shouldn't the ad banners along with the Google ads, on each and every discussion page within the forums.military.com domain be generating revenue?

Just curious.

mw

Hoffy1951

Hot Topics Quickly and Expertly Extinguished On Demand Since October 2000
------------------

Proud Member
------------------

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by mabwood:
quote:
Remember, the discussion forum is not a revenue generator, and we run it as a membership benefit.
Just a point of information for me Rob.

Shouldn't the ad banners along with the Google ads, on each and every discussion page within the forums.military.com domain be generating revenue?

Just curious.

mw

If I recall when these 'googles' came here...
If you 'klik' on the link...and it takes you to whatever 'google' is advertising...then they get the credit and, the 'revenue'.

Posts: 3539 | Registered: Sat 17 February 2007

Ignored post by Hoffy1951 posted

SUNLINER81

Super Member

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Hoffy1951:
quote:
Originally posted by mabwood:
quote:
Remember, the discussion forum is not a revenue generator, and we run it as a membership benefit.
Just a point of information for me Rob.

Shouldn't the ad banners along with the Google ads, on each and every discussion page within the forums.military.com domain be generating revenue?

Just curious.

mw

If I recall when these 'googles' came here...
If you 'klik' on the link...and it takes you to whatever 'google' is advertising...then they get the credit and, the 'revenue'.

So Hoffy, you saying we ain't clicking on the advertisers enough?...
Is Mil.com "hurtin'"?...
We can start a campaign or am I missing the point?...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

Posts: 22550 | Registered: Thu 09 March 2006

Ignored post by SUNLINER81 posted

Hoffy1951

Hot Topics Quickly and Expertly Extinguished On Demand Since October 2000
------------------

Proud Member
------------------

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by SUNLINER81:
quote:
Originally posted by Hoffy1951:
quote:
Originally posted by mabwood:
quote:
Remember, the discussion forum is not a revenue generator, and we run it as a membership benefit.
Just a point of information for me Rob.

Shouldn't the ad banners along with the Google ads, on each and every discussion page within the forums.military.com domain be generating revenue?

Just curious.

mw

If I recall when these 'googles' came here...
If you 'klik' on the link...and it takes you to whatever 'google' is advertising...then they get the credit and, the 'revenue'.

So Hoffy, you saying we ain't clicking on the advertisers enough?...
Is Mil.com "hurtin'"?...
We can start a campaign or am I missing the point?...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

Bill...
I honestly don't have a good answer for this...
As I have no use for those 'googlies', I can't say for sure.
As far as "hurtin'"...I guess the financial gurus would know.

Posts: 3539 | Registered: Sat 17 February 2007

Ignored post by Hoffy1951 posted

SUNLINER81

Super Member

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Hoffy1951:
quote:
Originally posted by SUNLINER81:
quote:
Originally posted by Hoffy1951:
quote:
Originally posted by mabwood:
quote:
Remember, the discussion forum is not a revenue generator, and we run it as a membership benefit.
Just a point of information for me Rob.

Shouldn't the ad banners along with the Google ads, on each and every discussion page within the forums.military.com domain be generating revenue?

Just curious.

mw

If I recall when these 'googles' came here...
If you 'klik' on the link...and it takes you to whatever 'google' is advertising...then they get the credit and, the 'revenue'.

So Hoffy, you saying we ain't clicking on the advertisers enough?...
Is Mil.com "hurtin'"?...
We can start a campaign or am I missing the point?...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

Bill...
I honestly don't have a good answer for this...
As I have no use for those 'googlies', I can't say for sure.
As far as "hurtin'"...I guess the financial gurus would know.

Thanks Hoffy, just trying to get a "handle" on what's happening...
Respectfully, Bill

Posts: 22550 | Registered: Thu 09 March 2006

Ignored post by SUNLINER81 posted

Buckellew

Member

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by RobRodriguez:
Greetings all,

Let's see if I can shine some light on this, so we can put this matter to rest. I've borrowed some of the wording here straight from our Director.

The problem has been, we, Military.com have been contacted by a number of news organizations complaining about their articles and site links being posted without their permission. Some news organizations, particularly television or radio news sites don't care, but the smaller news, and even some of the bigger news media do care. Some charge for re-posting, which of course is why they are adamant about us not posting their site links without their permission.

Certainly this is going on all over the internet - we're just being singled out mostly because of the high volume of traffic generated on Military.com.

In other words, I'm afraid we'll have to clamp down on this policy for legal reasons. Remember, the discussion forum is not a revenue generator, and we run it as a membership benefit. What we don't want is for someone in our legal department getting involved with this end of the world - so it's important for us to keep the opportunity for them to get involved to as close to nonexistent as possible.

Some of the news articles of interest can certainly be addressed in the discussion forum, even using a portion of the articles is okay (as long as it's credited to the source). That shouldn't hinder folks from carrying on a discussion topic. Also, you may find some of the articles of interest covered somewhere on Military.com (which of course those links are okay to post).

With all due respect folks, everyone needs to understand three things:

1st - The Discussion Forums are not a revenue generator, so we need to keep the concerns and issues away from the leadership as much as possible.

2nd - Sites like 'YouTube' are making money from click-thrus - we're giving them free advertising by allowing their links, which is unfair to everyone else.

3rd and possibly the most significant - With the exeption of any attorneys who participate in our forums, I'm not sure that the general population completely understands the magnitude of copyright infringement. It's a 'pick and choose' matter - and with us being a big number on site visitors and click-thrus, it's easier to come after us than some small obscure site.

Now, let's declare this horse dead and burried... and get back to business.

Respectfully,

-Rob

Well, there it is then. Fun while it lasted and all that.

Ciao.

Posts: 1334 | Registered: Tue 02 October 2007

Ignored post by Buckellew posted

Forums Administrator
THE ROBOCOP

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by greywolfghost:
Is there any way you could list those sites that are definitely taboo, so that we could steer them a wide path? Definitely don't want to ruffle their feathers, even by accident....

Unfortunately not. It's easier to tell you what is allowed than to go name by name on what is not.

What is allowed are sites that are "dot-mil", "dot-gov" and any site listed on our Military and Veterans Associations Page. (there is a link to it on the sticky post).

Everything else is out.

"I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant." - Oscar Wilde

Posts: 1336 | Registered: Mon 10 April 2006

Ignored post by RobRodriguez posted

Forums Administrator
THE ROBOCOP

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Kegler300:
You would think posting a link to their news website would be a good thing for them. It would attract interest to their site, even if just for the news item.

True... that would make sense. It makes sense to my ears. But for some reason in the strange world of cyberspace, it is not.

"I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant." - Oscar Wilde

Posts: 1336 | Registered: Mon 10 April 2006

Ignored post by RobRodriguez posted

Forums Administrator
THE ROBOCOP

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by mabwood:
quote:
Remember, the discussion forum is not a revenue generator, and we run it as a membership benefit.
Just a point of information for me Rob.

Shouldn't the ad banners along with the Google ads, on each and every discussion page within the forums.military.com domain be generating revenue?

Just curious.

mw

I personally don't have the specific numbers on this. However in the 'big picture', the ads may offset a small portion of the cost to run the forums... but by no means does it come close to covering all of it (let alone generate revenue of any kind).

"I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant." - Oscar Wilde

Posts: 1336 | Registered: Mon 10 April 2006

Ignored post by RobRodriguez posted

john2x

Highly Experienced Member

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by RobRodriguez:
quote:
Originally posted by greywolfghost:
Is there any way you could list those sites that are definitely taboo, so that we could steer them a wide path? Definitely don't want to ruffle their feathers, even by accident....

Unfortunately not. It's easier to tell you what is allowed than to go name by name on what is not.

What is allowed are sites that are "dot-mil", "dot-gov" and any site listed on our Military and Veterans Associations Page. (there is a link to it on the sticky post).

Everything else is out.

But if we post the link with the "-------" Is that OK?

Posts: 8300 | Registered: Sun 27 May 2007

Ignored post by john2x posted

I_M_Qwerty

Previous Posts as Jade_Gate

Posted

Ref the military.com news page and under-article commenting. When is that commenting going to be upgraded with the features that were promised back in the Mar-Apr time frame? At the time, they were supposedly "being tested". Since then ... nothing ...

Posts: 8108 | Registered: Sun 01 June 2008

Ignored post by I_M_Qwerty posted

Silent_Surface

Live free or die: Death is not the worst of evils.

Shock and Awe Lead
Hot Topics
Moderator

Posted

OK...... We have beat on this for 10 pages now.... It all boils down to the fact that we have been directed to follow a course of action, and we will have to make the best of it.

Personally, I think these boards are worth the effort, or I would not do what I do.

If we work it together.... play it by ear for a bit, and try to work out what will and will not work under the new guidelines, we CAN survive.

In my approximately 5 years on these boards as a poster... more as a lurker, there have been MANY policy changes, and the boards have always survived.

They will again.

Let's get back to some more productive debates and arguments!

This thread is now closed.

"The things that will destroy America are prosperity at any price, peace at any price, safety first instead of duty first, the love of soft living and the get rich quick theory of life."
~~~Theodore Roosevelt~~~

Posts: 5216 | Registered: Tue 18 November 2003

Ignored post by Silent_Surface posted