> Well i also saw his posts, which came in continuation and flooded the forums,
> On first look it seems spam, but then the posts all were very old and he's closing them now, all at once, so may be not tht much wrong thing to do.
>
> кu03B1ятu03B9к
If you look at most of his posts, you'll see that he asked very general questions, got a lot of replies but ignored them until now. Forcing users to close threads was agood idea, but had this unintended consequence.
> If you look at most of his posts, you'll see that he asked very general questions, got a lot of replies but ignored them until now. Forcing users to close threads was agood idea, but had this unintended consequence.
This is often misunderstood, also by "kb".
The 10 open question rules applies to questions opened since July 2008 (not before). This was done to prevent floods like this AFAIK (more than one meaning for the acronym).
What "kb" also did not realize, is that the "Comments" field when thread is not mandatory. Others have used "asdf" and "." before.
But perhaps "kb" was really being just friendly, and wanted to express it about 300 times.
I have started cleaning up the new batch from this afternoon. There really isn't much worth keeping.
=> Lesson learnt.
=> We can meet for a beer later again in "Alv" when I'm through.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.