Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Page
* (By the way, why closing that older Batam thread, to reopen a new one with same title/subject?? That interrupted the history and the information search capability. The argument "there were too many flames" is not valid, as the same people who was writing there can also write here).
|
aiyo,brother BP...u've been brooding ovr tis qn 4 2 ovr yrs liao...,& mr mod aldy replied u wen u ask abt it durin the first time... :
https://samleong.shop/showpost.php?p...1&postcount=54
Is tat so difficult 2 go back 2 old tread meh? Tis tread has been linked 2 the old tread hor & wit most of the basic key points on traveling 2 btm here. Simply go 2 page one post number #2 & it'll lead u back old tread liao...not counting other posts made by tis tread TS aso on same page one tat refer back 2 old tread lor...lol
sm more har, wen mr mod reply tat time,old tread has 6,259,349 views,TODAY as of my tis post...it has :
...8293960 views,minus out the diff,old tread has garner 2034611 views,wich is more than the current new tread's view count lei...it shws tat tis tread has successfully move viewers tere & here as well as getting ppl 2 posting here. So yr argument tat TIS new tread has in ani way interrupted the history and the information search capability is NO LONGER VALID 4 majority viewers.
The onli thg tat is interrupting wat u say on its 'history and the information search capability' IS the flaming ,profanities & the off topic argument itself wich result in post removal ,member ban & it in turns becum 'bugged' the old tread.
Hw was it being bugged,u may wan ask...try do a search using the forum search function on the old tread lor....for post tat were in the newest 100-500 pages tere. If after u key in the 'key word' in the search function of the btm old tread, try 2 see if u can land yrself in the particular post u r looking for if it happen 2 b in the 100-500 pages. u absolutely cn't...i'm sure bcs i try it countless time b4....lol (tis one must credit 2 bro nono who shared the info wit me abt 2 yrs ago)
y was it 'bugged'? i dare say MUST special thx 2 tose flamers & quarrelsome troublemaker, i wn't wan 2 go into details...& y was it not bugged in new tread nw? bcs new tread was being nt onli well managed by mr mod,tere's aso a TS here who keeps an eye 2 prevent the 'bugs' frm cumming back. (if i tel u openly hw it was bugged,then tose spammers & quarrelsome ppl here gng 2 bug it back up agn,so no thx 4 tat...)
is my abv reasoning enuff?
Or u like an old tread tat is no longer searchable ,& later watch it deteriorated further wit the seniors askin mani newbies 2 use the aldy 'malfunction' forum search function instead of askin same qns agn & agn? or u wan see a new tread tat function well as in like any other norm tread & then YET the old tread is still referable using a page by page view search function? part of mani argument in old tread was bcs newbies was referred 2 use forum tread search function & 2 read frm page one onward hor....sm newbie even got sarcastically scolded tere & later zapped 4 arguing back...u r senior in both treads,i'm sure u've seen such b4...tio boh?
4 yr convenient,here's hw sm ppl who like 2 ask newbie 2 read frm page one onward
https://samleong.shop/showpo...ostcount=32854
& they're nt all if u search further (if u got time...lol).
seriously brother ,it's 2298 pages in the old tread b4 it closed hor,page by page search can reli b a big challenge 4 most new guy...most of us r nt nono1973 who has those kind of time 2 read the super lengthy , more than 2.2k pages old tread 4 times....mai sabo hor....
If u enjoy read history (i'm nt sayin u shldn't or cn't hor),tere r at least more than a dozen of other btm standalone old treads wit tons of outdated info & expereince tat are stil available 4 reading in tis sub-forum...wich i just counted.
i'm nt gng 2 argue further wit tis aldy-made&settled-decision,it's a wise decision by mr mod 4 majority. Consider tis my last post on tis topic....lol... i tink i mus hv offend mani ppl today aldy...lol...better run....