Hey man, don't worry about any thread I make about you. After all, it's going to get buried on about page 4 within a week by you, right?

But in the end, the mods say that it's alright and no rules are broken so that pretty much ends this. Carry on! :wave: :happyface

Just put TMC on your ignore list if he bothers you so much. Then none of his threads will show up on the boards or the active thread index.

Few discussion threads get much traction because one poster (maybe more than one individual) constantly posts clickbait articles which they must be well-paid for. They clog up the board which is why I rarely visit. Yes you can ignore, but you still won't see much actual discussion because unless everyone ignores it still clogs up what is most easily viewed. I personally would not allow them to post unless they actually added to discussion. Do they ever actually do anything but post their "work"?

Few discussion threads get much traction because one poster (maybe more than one individual) constantly posts clickbait articles which they must be well-paid for. They clog up the board which is why I rarely visit. Yes you can ignore, but you still won't see much actual discussion because unless everyone ignores it still clogs up what is most easily viewed. I personally would not allow them to post unless they actually added to discussion. Do they ever actually do anything but post their "work"?

We simply don't have many current or recent sitcoms fans on here. Most members prefer classic sitcoms.

What kind of topics would you want to see on here? It's difficult for me to sympathize when people make little to no effort to reply or create new threads for any type of discussion.

Most of the links don't have any comments sections. You are supposed to click on the article to read and then come back here to discuss it. He's also not the only member here who posts news.

There's no evidence that he gets paid for any links he posts. He posts links to hundreds of different sites. I'm not sure if it's true, but I heard he owns his own forums. It seems like maybe he spends more time posting on here than there.

I'm not sure what he gets out of it. I guess he is just a big TV fan. He has been a member here since 2001. He has grinded his way to almost 82,000 posts. His career daily post average is only 9.70 posts per day.

He has grinded his way to almost 82,000 posts. His career daily post average is only 9.70 posts per day.

For a moment you should update his join date to around when the IMDb boards shut down (you can switch it right back after). I’d be interested in knowing what the per day count jumps to.

We simply don't have many current or recent sitcoms fans on here. Most members prefer classic sitcoms.

What kind of topics would you want to see on here? It's difficult for me to sympathize when people make little to no effort to reply or create new threads for any type of discussion.

Most of the links don't have any comments sections. You are supposed to click on the article to read and then come back here to discuss it. He's also not the only member here who posts news.

There's no evidence that he gets paid for any links he posts. He posts links to hundreds of different sites. I'm not sure if it's true, but I heard he owns his own forums. It seems like maybe he spends more time posting on here than there.

I'm not sure what he gets out of it. I guess he is just a big TV fan. He has been a member here since 2001. He has grinded his way to almost 82,000 posts. His career daily post average is only 9.70 posts per day.

Putting him on ignore is a good strategy. I wonder how many members have done just that.

The TBBT and YS boards are mostly full of his largely-unanswered posts, for years, as are some other boards Putting him on ignore could expose the years-old other posts.

Putting him on ignore is a good strategy. I wonder how many members have done just that.

The TBBT and YS boards are mostly full of his largely-unanswered posts, for years, as are some other boards Putting him on ignore could expose the years-old other posts.

Even if I were to move his threads to their own sub-forums, I don't think it would magically create activity on them. We simply don't have the foot traffic for those sitcoms.

He only posts 1-3 new threads on this board per day. It's not like he's creating 10-15 new threads per day.

The Big Bang Theory board was fairly active when they were still producing new episodes. I can sticky some of the threads like quotes and the A-Z game.

For a moment you should update his join date to around when the IMDb boards shut down (you can switch it right back after). I’d be interested in knowing what the per day count jumps to.

The IMDb boards were shut down on February 20, 2017, although I think they turned off posting a few weeks before that. He has around 62,000 posts since then. That's approximately 28.3 posts per day.

That's approximately 28.3 posts per day.

I would have bet the over.

Can I still get in on this action, I have some money burning a hole in my pocket... :cool:

Anyway, isn't the main issue how many New Threads total (across all forums) per day, moreso than post count?

Can I still get in on this action, I have some money burning a hole in my pocket... :cool:

Anyway, isn't the main issue how many New Threads total (across all forums) per day, moreso than post count?

Some people just like to complain. They believe we would have more activity if his threads were limited or eliminated.

He has started (or has active) 1,948 threads in the last month, which averages out to about 62 per day. We have on average 150-200 active threads per day.

I guess the part I don't get is that some people will start a ton of threads (presumably to try to generate interest) yet they rarely come back and comment on the threads they start. So why start them if you they don't even care enough to come back and comment themselves.

Why start a ton of threads if you're gonna just orphan the majority of them?

I guess the part I don't get is that some people will start a ton of threads (presumably to try to generate interest) yet they rarely come back and comment on the threads they start. So why start them if you they don't even care enough to come back and comment themselves.

Why start a ton of threads if you're gonna just orphan the majority of them?

We don't have any rules which require a thread starter to post their own comments. Is it really reasonable to expect TMC to post his own comments in every thread he creates? I think of his threads as a historical digital archive of related news and links.

People share links to news and articles on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit and other forums all the time. They don't always post their own comments. Isn't that the way social media and forums are supposed to work?

To quote Gisele Bündchen, he cannot ****ing throw the ball and catch the ball at the same time. He puts up these threads for everyone to generate interest. I'm sure he welcomes any replies and discussion. They aren't his own personal threads. They are community threads open for any responses.

I guess the part I don't get is why people who don't actively participate on these forums feel the need to complain about one member's threads. They could just use the ignore option.

I would imagine the truth (a long-time member since 2002) is a fan of both The Big Bang Theory and Young Sheldon, yet you wouldn't really know it from his post history. He had never posted on The Big Bang Theory board before he started this thread. He has made 15 posts on the Young Sheldon board. Three of those posts were to complain about TMC.

loaferman at least has made some effort with 23 prior posts on this board.

I'm sorry if we don't have enough activity to entertain people. It's difficult to get much acitivity going when we only have 150-250 members logging in on a daily basis.

Forums are a dying breed. People have mostly shifted to other social media platforms. We've been running on fumes in recent years.

We don't have any rules which require a thread starter to post their own comments. Is it really reasonable to expect TMC to post his own comments in every thread he creates? I think of his threads as a historical digital archive of related news and links.

People share links to news and articles on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit and other forums all the time. They don't always post their own comments. Isn't that the way social media and forums are supposed to work?


I don’t know though. Wouldn’t you think if someone loved TV that much they’d want to come back and talk about it when they get replies? No time, I guess. Between the collecting and posting of the clickbait, gotta eat and sleep sometime.

To quote Gisele Bundchen : “Get out Tom and take your deflated balls with you“
(by the way, how’d you get the two dots over the U in Bundchen?)

We don't have any rules which require a thread starter to post their own comments. Is it really reasonable to expect TMC to post his own comments in every thread he creates?.

That’s my point. If he would focus on quality not quantity he would get more action on the topics he posted. I’ve responded to some of his posts only to get silence. Had he responded to me I would have responded back then the topic would gain some traction. As it is he is posting hundreds of threads no one is responding to and ignoring the ones people do respond to.

I don’t know though. Wouldn’t you think if someone loved TV that much they’d want to come back and talk about it when they get replies? No time, I guess. Between the collecting and posting of the clickbait, gotta eat and sleep sometime.

Exactly, the fact that he doesn’t have time to reply, but has time to start a new topic is evidence that he starts way to many topics.