This board doesn't seem as busy as Angersports was.

[RodneyStuckey3]

T/F

[CleveTown™]

false, it's about the same.

[RodneyStuckey3]

That's fair

[Smelters]

Then get it poppin' and stop complaining.

[Max]

We definitely need some new members.

[RodneyStuckey3]

Then get it poppin' and stop complaining.

I'm not complaining.

[FPL]

We definitely need some new members.

Partially this, but also a few regulars aren't posting as much.

Though the board has been up a few hours over a week, and we have 617 threads, 6774 posts, 83 members. Not terrible, but obviously the more posters the merrier.

[swampgator]

Consider re-wording that thread title to where it reflects what you were actually trying to say.

Either way, yeah, seems a little slower.

[CleveTown™]

The problem is 10 or so posters are carrying the load and providing the content by which the lurkers feed off of. If they would stop lurking and participate, then the community would get larger.

[RodneyStuckey3]

Consider re-wording that thread title to where it reflects what you were actually trying to say.

Either way, yeah, seems a little slower.

Yeah, I forgot to add an "as". Sorry. Please, judge me solely on that.

[swampgator]

Consider re-wording that thread title to where it reflects what you were actually trying to say.

Either way, yeah, seems a little slower.

Yeah, I forgot to add an "as". Sorry. Please, judge me solely on that.

Even with that 'as', are you saying it is less or more busy?

[ripper76]

The problem is 10 or so posters are carrying the load and providing the content by which the lurkers feed off of. If they would stop lurking and participate, then the community would get larger.

I actually agree with you.

[swampgator]

The problem is 10 or so posters are carrying the load and providing the content by which the lurkers feed off of. If they would stop lurking and participate, then the community would get larger.

I actually agree with you.

I agree with that as well. There are a handful of thread starters that people get involved with just because. Some of these are recycling the same boring shit ad-nauseam, but the username that posted it peaks interest.

The problem also lies in board allegiances. If you aren't part of the "in" crowd, then threads started die quickly.

[steveo]

The problem is 10 or so posters are carrying the load and providing the content by which the lurkers feed off of. If they would stop lurking and participate, then the community would get larger.

I actually agree with you.

I agree with that as well. There are a handful of thread starters that people get involved with just because. Some of these are recycling the same boring shit ad-nauseam, but the username that posted it peaks interest.

The problem also lies in board allegiances. If you aren't part of the "in" crowd, then threads started die quickly.

This is pretty accurate...

[ripper76]

The problem is 10 or so posters are carrying the load and providing the content by which the lurkers feed off of. If they would stop lurking and participate, then the community would get larger.

I actually agree with you.

I agree with that as well. There are a handful of thread starters that people get involved with just because. Some of these are recycling the same boring shit ad-nauseam, but the username that posted it peaks interest.

The problem also lies in board allegiances. If you aren't part of the "in" crowd, then threads started die quickly.

I'm not exactly sure what the "in" crowd is. The "friend/enemy" connections are all pretty twisted up in a lot of instances and even vary from topic to topic.

[ripper76]

I actually agree with you.

I agree with that as well. There are a handful of thread starters that people get involved with just because. Some of these are recycling the same boring shit ad-nauseam, but the username that posted it peaks interest.

The problem also lies in board allegiances. If you aren't part of the "in" crowd, then threads started die quickly.

This is pretty accurate...

As I think about it a little bit, I feel that it's not so much an issue of being part of the "in crowd." Posters that get a lot of responses are typically either 1) very memorable 2) very outrageous 3) very prolific or 4) have been around awhile.

A lot of posters seem to also have switched names, in some cases several times. That really hurts you if you are looking for responses. People don't know you, they don't know what to expect. They wonder who you are, who were you on ESPN? Who were you last week?

I've had the same screen name for almost 10 years now, and the same avatar for about 8. People recognize it and remember.

Sometimes a thread just isn't interesting to others though, no matter who starts it.

[swampgator]

I agree with that as well. There are a handful of thread starters that people get involved with just because. Some of these are recycling the same boring shit ad-nauseam, but the username that posted it peaks interest.

The problem also lies in board allegiances. If you aren't part of the "in" crowd, then threads started die quickly.

This is pretty accurate...

As I think about it a little bit, I feel that it's not so much an issue of being part of the "in crowd." Posters that get a lot of responses are typically either 1) very memorable 2) very outrageous 3) very prolific or 4) have been around awhile.

A lot of posters seem to also have switched names, in some cases several times. That really hurts you if you are looking for responses. People don't know you, they don't know what to expect. They wonder who you are, where you on ESPN? Who were you last week?

I've had the same screen name for almost 10 years now, and the same avatar for about 8. People recognize it and remember.

Sometimes a thread just isn't interesting to others though, no matter who starts it.

That who were you before on ESPN thing likely influences too much; what with the whole 'legend' nonsense and all. I say just focus on what is here and now.

Most threads are just not that interesting if you really think about it. The high response ones come from the characters like you described above.

[elartman1973]

T/F

Ok

[ripper76]

This is pretty accurate...

As I think about it a little bit, I feel that it's not so much an issue of being part of the "in crowd." Posters that get a lot of responses are typically either 1) very memorable 2) very outrageous 3) very prolific or 4) have been around awhile.

A lot of posters seem to also have switched names, in some cases several times. That really hurts you if you are looking for responses. People don't know you, they don't know what to expect. They wonder who you are, where you on ESPN? Who were you last week?

I've had the same screen name for almost 10 years now, and the same avatar for about 8. People recognize it and remember.

Sometimes a thread just isn't interesting to others though, no matter who starts it.

That who were you before on ESPN thing likely influences too much; what with the whole 'legend' nonsense and all. I say just focus on what is here and now.

Most threads are just not that interesting if you really think about it. The high response ones come from the characters like you described above.

People like familiarity though. That's why so many movies are sequels or remakes. People flock to things they know and usually take awhile to warm up to something new.

[Smelters]

The problem is 10 or so posters are carrying the load and providing the content by which the lurkers feed off of. If they would stop lurking and participate, then the community would get larger.

Maybe because of your self righteous a$$. Get a clue and some balance in your life.