"Russian" Threads locked?

Discussion in 'The NAAFI Bar' started by Excognito, Mar 25, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Two topics dealing with matters Russian ('roulette' and 'paratroops') have been locked. Any reason? Perhaps Lebedev has bought ARRSE as well as the Independent?
  2. in_the_cheapseats

    in_the_cheapseats LE Moderator

    Possibly because MOD thought they were crap?

    PG could explain why he is going on about internet links on last posts before he (I assume) locks the thread.

    Both seem to have perfectly adequate and working links...
  3. Out of idle curiosity, how does that make them different from many on-going threads and in what respect?
  4. in_the_cheapseats

    in_the_cheapseats LE Moderator

    Not disagreeing with you there. Just stating a possible answer :D
  5. To be honest, I never, ever check the "Internet links" thread. Ever. I don't log on and think, "hmm, I wonder if there is something random on the internet that might amuse me" and scan through it.

    I peruse the thread titles in the NAAFI bar, and click on those that might amuse me, and follow the link if it looks safe enough. The link having its own thread allows for comment if its funny enough, if not it dies and sinks to the bottom. I can't be bothered browsing the NAAFI and also another (almost) sub-forum as well.

    Still, it's not my trainset. But there's my 2p's worth.
  6. I think the mod is hinting that it should all be put into the internet linky thread at the top. But who bothers to trawl through those. Why not leave them in here for a week or two see if any interesting squabbles develop then move it. Porridge Gun is being a little overzealous me thinks, much akin to a newly promotoed lancejack. ;)
  7. told he had changed 8)

    on a serious note, if the pics from those threads were hosted and posted, with a link provided should people wish to investigate further, one assumes that is acceptable?
  8. I think the answer is in there. If it's only a link to some random content which may or may not amuse you then why start a whole new topic about it? Especially when the TS doesn't add any thoughts or comments to it. To be honest, better to keep it in one thread for people to browse through if they whish instead of opening lots of threads with promising titles only to find a link.

    But you could be bothered opening dozens of seperate posts with links in them, clicking on them, traveling to another website, deciding whether the content amuses you, going back to ARRSE and comment on it.

    Edited for mong spelling.
  9. Porridge_gun

    Porridge_gun LE Good Egg (charities)

    A random link to a webpage will either be locked or moved to the internet link thread, its not rocket science.

    If an internet link is added to a story, an opinion worthy of the NAAFI then crack on.

    Its in the rules at the top and was also decided by the majority of the NAAFI in a poll that ran sometime in the last eighteen months.

    PG has tried that several in fact numerous times. Most can understand and take heed, a couple however are terminally thick or think it amusing...

    Funny as fcuk eh and just the type of humour I remember fondly from my time of service
  10. PG is actually getting a lot more mellow,someone (not me) posted a thread with a link the other day,and PG was very polite in pointing out the error of the poster's ways,and asked him if he would kindly refrain from doing it again.
  11. Is this the same PG who spaff's his beans in a trollop's face, shortly before pushing her into her very own pool of piss ...purely for the amusement of his watching mates? :D
  12. Porridge_gun

    Porridge_gun LE Good Egg (charities)

    Because it was the first time he'd done it.

    Its only the terminally retarded that continue to do it despite being asked dozens of times.
  13. Like I said,getting more mellow.I like the new you.
  14. in_the_cheapseats

    in_the_cheapseats LE Moderator

    Yup - fair comment