Suggestion: Free for all forum

[Zack Lee Wright]

Originally Posted by Xploder

Then why in the flying fuck are you even here with over 1000 posts?

[Metallic Squink]

Originally Posted by Giraffe

To all, including myself: we're now officially in hijack land, so can we please take all further discussion w. Zack to another thread?

UNACCEPTABLE!! Stop bossing us around, you big meanie!

[nonny too]

Originally Posted by LurkMeister

If the litter is in Schroedinger's litter box, does that mean it may or may not need to be cleaned?

Off course - it's in a quantum forum.

[hroark2112]

Originally Posted by Roo

I think you've answered your own questions here. You didn't realize how many people I was answering before I got to your post. Color me shocked!

I realize how many. I just know you skipped over me for a while.

It doesn't take any courage to post on a message board, so all that stuff about having the courage to post is just superfluous.[/QUOTE]

My comment regarding courage was regarding your willingness to post something that you would post in the forum you're proposing, and to actually stand up and defend your position with a clear, concise example.

Originally Posted by Roo

But I'll try to give an example of something that wouldn't be true on the main board at this time.

Thread title: Post what you want and I'll post what I want and we won't get Boxed or banned for sure.

First post: I love puppies and kitties. How about you?

Now, before you say that this could go on any place on the message board, the first post might. But anything could happen after the first post.

Second post: Me too. Puppies and kitties are so special. So soft and cuddly.

Third post: Are you kidding me? Kitties are an abomination to the land. They're sneaky, sly and have no redeeming qualities.

::altercation breaks out between first poster and third poster::

(lasts for 2 pages)

Sixty-seventh poster: Yeah, I loves my kitty. I can't go anywhere without her. She travels in my purse.
------------------------------------------------

This is definitely NOT a good example. Arguments and discussions happen all the time here. They go on and on at times. Sometimes threads get moved when they are too far astray from the original topic, sure. Sometimes threads get moved because they just don't belong in the forum where they were originally posted. That is the job of moderators, they keep the place running smoothly.

Originally Posted by Roo

Right now, that can't happen here. The altercation would be asked to the Pit or the participants Boxed, depending on the severity of the altercation. And I think that's fair. Completely hijacked threads in every forum for every topic might not be as fun, especially when people might not know what's happening. But in one forum, where it's completely fair game, I think it could be a blast.

I can think of a bunch more examples, and not just about hijacked threads. This is just one of them.

And yes, you got that right. Giraffe already vetoed the idea. But then again, he did that before you posted the first post I've quoted here.

Sure it can happen. Post a bullshit thread with no real direction in the appropriate forum and have fun. I've done it. Hell, you got sucked into one of my bullshit threads. Did I get boxed? Nope. Did my thread get boxed? Nope. It's a total bullshit thread meant to gauge people's reactions to my original post, and it was fun. No mod sent me a mean PM, no one called my mom, and no one moved my thread. You blasted me in the thread, and no one boxed you for it. My thread is living proof that your forum is totally unnecessary, and that thread can exist with little or no moderator action but still fall into your description.

[Roo]

Originally Posted by nonny too

A genuine question Roo

I have a bunch of questions for you too. I've noticed that you title several of your posts like this, either a sincere question or genuine question or something like that. Does that mean your other posts are insincere or disingenuous? Are you trying to tell me something that's different about your titled posts?

Your posts generally all look the same to me. They start with an assumption (often wrong) about something that you claim I said or think but there's no attribution, so I don't even know where you got the notion from, and the analysis all flows downhill from that point. This post isn't different.

Originally Posted by nonny too

You've raised the issue of feeling uncomfortable about taking on the mods here.

Could you point me to where you're getting this from? Maybe you're wording this in a way that doesn't make sense to me.

What does "taking on the mods" mean?

I've been Pit by a couple admins, and I've responded to several mods in this thread and many other threads. I'm not uncomfortable doing that.

I did note that Pitting a mod (or anyone else) for a single threadshit is a waste of time. I'm not sure how that affects my comfort level. I guess you could count annoyance as not comfortable.

Originally Posted by nonny too

Do you genuinely believe that if you were to respond in kind to the comments which Fenris or Veb have directed your way in this thread that anything "worse" than you being asked to take it to the Pit or the Box would happen?

I started this thread. If Fenris or Veb were so off-topic in their comments that my remarks to them would have any of the mods suggest that they go to the Pit or the Box, wouldn't they be threadshitting? Why would I be asked to take it to the Pit or the Box?

Originally Posted by nonny too

Your extreme concern about the possibility of being Boxed or banned seems irrational to me

It probably seems irrational to you since "my extreme concern about the possibility of being Boxed or banned" doesn't exist. Just like Salambo posted that my desire to get banned was irrational. Things that don't exist can seem pretty irrational, I guess.

I try to stay within the rules of the forum, as most everyone else does, as a courtesy to the other people that use it. I don't do it out of fear.

Originally Posted by nonny too

and your request for a free for all forum seems partly to come from a wish to post without fear of sanctions.

My request for a free for all forum doesn't come from fear. It comes from a desire to want to have fun. A forum that is unfettered by mod actions sounds fun to me. And having it attached to this place means it would attract the same kind of people that this place attracts and attracted in the past. I think it could be fun to interact with those people in a place without some of the rules that have been rightly instituted to keep the main board orderly.

Originally Posted by nonny too

Any one of us could be Boxed or banned for what we post here, but I don't think that many of us fear it to any great extent. Clearly, you do fear it and I'm trying to understand why you fear it so much and why you need the rules to be so rigid, detailed and inflexible when so many of us regard the rules as little more than guidelines and post without that fear.

You can't know what I fear unless I tell you. And once you made that wrong assumption, you've then piled on a whole bunch of other wrong conclusions from the wrong assumption.

It might be more helpful in the future if you're going to make a broad assumption about how I'm thinking or feeling, that you link to the post you're talking about so I know where you're misinterpreting from and I can explain the misunderstanding.

[Who_me?]

Please, for all that's good in this world, no more questions to Roo. Let this thread die the death it deserves.

[Zeener Diode]

Quiet, you!


::munches popcorn::

[nonny too]

Originally Posted by Who_me?

Please, for all that's good in this world, no more questions to Roo. Let this thread die the death it deserves.

This is the thread that never ends
Yes it goes on and on my friends...

[Roo]

Originally Posted by nonny too

This is the thread that never ends
Yes it goes on and on my friends...

Since you've posted 48 times, second only to my 60, it's largely due to your contributions. Why are you so interested in keeping it alive?

[Zeener Diode]

::chokes on a kernel::

[Chacoguy]

::Whacks Zeener's back::

[Fenris]

Originally Posted by Roo

Since you've posted 48 times, second only to my 60, it's largely due to your contributions. Why are you so interested in keeping it alive?

To piss you off. I say with confidence that 99% of people in this thread are posting to piss you off.*
Or to poke the monkey and see it dance.**


*Note to Roo: by "99%" I am employing a device know as "hyperbole" (/haɪˈpɜrbəli/). This means your impulse to sit around counting the number of posters and applying exciting and unique forumulae that you just now made up to determine sincerity (no doubt on their ratio of pro/anti Roo posts at the Dope) and then calculating the actual percent of posters in this thread who actually DO want to piss you off would be unnecessary.


**Note to Roo. There is no monkey. The "monkey" is a metaphor. (met-uh-fawr). That means I'm comparing you to the monkey and the action of poking the monkey to watch it dance means to say something to you to watch you respond. Please do not reread this thread looking for monkeys.

[nonny too]

Originally Posted by Fenris

To piss you off. I say with confidence that 99% of people in this thread are posting to piss you off.*
Or to poke the monkey and see it dance.**


*Note to Roo: by "99%" I am employing a device know as "hyperbole" (/haɪˈpɜrbəli/). This means your impulse to sit around counting the number of posters and applying exciting and unique forumulae that you just now made up to determine sincerity (no doubt on their ratio of pro/anti Roo posts at the Dope) and then calculating the actual percent of posters in this thread who actually DO want to piss you off would be unnecessary.


**Note to Roo. There is no monkey. The "monkey" is a metaphor. (met-uh-fawr). That means I'm comparing you to the monkey and the action of poking the monkey to watch it dance means to say something to you to watch you respond. Please do not reread this thread looking for monkeys.

If this now turns into another "how do you know the motives of other posters" tangent, I'm holding you responsible Fenris!

[Roo]

Originally Posted by nonny too

If this now turns into another "how do you know the motives of other posters" tangent, I'm holding you responsible Fenris!

It was just about to. But since I was asking you the question, you can give your own motivation by saying that you agree with his assessment of your motivation if you choose.

[wring]

See, I figured nonny's response did include their agreement w/ the sentiment. Otherwise, they'd have said something specific, like 'Hey, keep me out of this, I don't agree'.

[The Futility of Nihilism]

Originally Posted by Fenris

To piss you off.

See, this is why I like you and the high quality of moderation found on this here message board.

[nonny too]

Originally Posted by wring

See, I figured nonny's response did include their agreement w/ the sentiment. Otherwise, they'd have said something specific, like 'Hey, keep me out of this, I don't agree'.

Nah. I'm not posting specifically to piss Roo off - I'm just morbidly curious about how much longer this thread can endure.

I figure that if anyone was genuinely interested in whether or not the idea proposed in the OP had significant membership support they would have created an anonymous poll on the issue by now - the perfect mechanism by which people can express their opinions without fear or favour, and one which could be used to argue the actual stance of actual members.

[Roo]

Originally Posted by nonny too

Nah. I'm not posting specifically to piss Roo off -

Good to know.

Originally Posted by nonny too

I'm just morbidly curious about how much longer this thread can endure.

In what way? Qwisp's thread has been going on for 77 pages since Sept. 1, 2009. So it's possible to have very long threads.

If you keep posting to it, and I keep answering, it could go on a very long time.

What are you trying to assess?

Originally Posted by nonny too

I figure that if anyone was genuinely interested in whether or not the idea proposed in the OP had significant membership support they would have created an anonymous poll on the issue by now - the perfect mechanism by which people can express their opinions without fear or favour, and one which could be used to argue the actual stance of actual members.

What point would that have? Giraffe has already vetoed the idea. That would be a futile exercise.

[Mbossa]

Originally Posted by Roo

Giraffe has already vetoed the idea.

Cite?

[nonny too]

Originally Posted by Roo

What point would that have? Giraffe has already vetoed the idea. That would be a futile exercise.

Giraffe has vetoed one specific idea - and I seriously believe that idea would have been vetoed no matter who proposed it.

There are other points you raised on which I think you have a greater degree of support. I don't think you're at all alone in believing that an increase in membership would benefit the board overall - and that's a goal to which each one of us as individuals can contribute without any changes to the rules or any dedicated recruitment drive by Giraffe simply by making the existence of this place known to posters we enjoy interacting with elsewhere online.

[Roo]

Originally Posted by nonny too

Giraffe has vetoed one specific idea - and I seriously believe that idea would have been vetoed no matter who proposed it.

There are other points you raised on which I think you have a greater degree of support. I don't think you're at all alone in believing that an increase in membership would benefit the board overall - and that's a goal to which each one of us as individuals can contribute without any changes to the rules or any dedicated recruitment drive by Giraffe simply by making the existence of this place known to posters we enjoy interacting with elsewhere online.

OK, interesting to note. And I'll have more to say about this when I make another pass through.

But the question was what's your motivation is continuing to participate in the thread.

You earlier posted:

Originally Posted by nonny too

I'm just morbidly curious about how much longer this thread can endure.

so I asked:

Originally Posted by Roo

If you keep posting to it, and I keep answering, it could go on a very long time.

What are you trying to assess?

Since your post above didn't mention the proposed forum, what point are your continuing posts trying to raise?

[nonny too]

Originally Posted by Roo

Since your post above didn't mention the proposed forum, what point are your continuing posts trying to raise?

At this point, for me it's mostly a matter of whether the baby should be thrown out with the bathwater. My viewpoint is that although your initial proposal was vetoed, in making that proposal you raised a number of other, stand alone issues. As this thread already exists and those issues have already been raised, it makes sense to use this thread to discuss them rather than to start a spin-off.

[Roo]

Originally Posted by iampunha

She wants a place where there are no rules aside from the basic ones and where people can play games (like the one where instead of people like me posting funny or at least bizarre one-line responses to things, we'd be posting for the sake of having the last post in every thread on the first page of a forum) and basically do anything they want without fear of someone stepping in and saying, for example, that there's going to be a new rule for a certain poster because she's pissing everybody off because her posting style is battier than a cave in winter.

Oddly enough, except for the part where you think you're funny (not so much, IMO), I think you've outlined the basic concept. Of course, there'd be so much more than just being the last poster on the thread. I know your imagination doesn't stretch much further than that, so one of the few examples I gave was all you had to go with.

But the basic concept is right. Having a place to post as people please without anyone getting to mod you for pretty much any reason.

Originally Posted by iampunha

The fun is that she hasn't specified (that I've seen, at least) how this would be different from what happens in, for example, the Box. I believe this has already been covered, but it bears repeating. She wants something new but won't say what's wrong with what we have. She's like the kid who wants a new, fancy jungle gym but isn't saying what's wrong with the current fancy jungle gym.

Since this post was written, I've gotten a chance to see the Box used more, with Uthrecht's experiments and AJH's stuff. So far, here are the differences between the Box and the proposed forum. The Box was originally for the purpose of deterring people's behavior. It was supposed to give them a place to get a time-out. If it's being used more as a place to play around, then the punishment part gets watered down. That's OK by me, but it wasn't the original intention of the Box, I think.

Then there are the random Boxings that happen when the mods are playing around. That's something that wouldn't happen in the proposed forum. The people who like the random Boxings can still play in the Box, but those who don't enjoy that type of thing as much could post somewhere where that couldn't happen.

The Box already has an established culture with established memes. The BARBI meme, the poking you with sticks meme and the 'it smells bad in here' meme, etc. Those might have been funny when they first got started. But they've been twisted around a lot. When they started, they were meant to poke fun at the mods who were in the Box or people on Boxing day who were voluntarily Boxed on Boxing day. Now, it has come to mean some kind of internet macho punishment for people who get Boxed involuntarily. There's something sad about mocking people who can't respond in the same way that the person mocking them can. Posting in the Box has some of that associated with it, to me.

A new forum would have none of the established culture or memes. It could have a fresh start. When we first got here, all that existed was Getting Started, IIRC, and we had to decide how we were going to fill the spaces. That's how the new forum could be. A blank page. What would you post in a place that didn't have an agenda or rules or suggested topics? It was just a wide open blank canvas to express whatever you choose.

So as you noted, it might have silly games or angry flames. It could run the gamut because there would be no history or agenda.

Originally Posted by Dragonlady

Really?
You went back 27 hours, from post #121 of a thread that now has 235 posts to argue about this?

27 hours? That was nothin'. This reply is 2 weeks after yours. If your point became moot between that time, great! My point is the same. I'm responding to those people who responded to me.

Originally Posted by Dragonlady

And that thread is NOT a mockery of anything. It is , in MY eyes only, an attempt to determine what would happen in a "free for all forum" like you suggest. The fact that it isn't going the way you had envisioned doesn't change that.

Thanks for letting me know that. And as I mentioned before, I think that thread turned out pretty closely to how I envisioned it.

Originally Posted by Dragonlady

If you will tell me what it is that is going to attract Mod attention, that will cause a rules violation, or whatever it is that you're most concerned about, I'll go post it in there right now. And we can all SEE what will happen.

I'm not actually concerned about that. But if I was, I don't think your posting it would prove anything.

Originally Posted by nonny too

In many cases, detail adds clarity. For some reason I can't quite fathom (possibly because both add the detail they consider important rather than what's been requested), in Roo's case - as in Stoid's - additional detail tends to detract from clarity, generate tangents, and add to confusion about what she's actually trying to convey.

I'm not actually trying to provide clarity, which is a good thing, I guess, since you're not seeing any. I'm just responding to people's posts. And I'm doing that chronologically, not by the importance of the point.

Much of the confusion you see is really my responses to people who are saying different, often contradictory things. Some people seem to think that everyone is agreeing with each other, but they must not be reading everyone's posts in the thread because the differences, from my viewpoint, are pretty evident.

Originally Posted by nonny too

Her irrelevant detail also often means that she's still responding to page two while everyone else is on page twenty-seven discussing whatever tangents she's thrown out from the original discussion. Threads don't stand still waiting for her to compose detailed responses and that often means that the discussion has moved on by the time she posts them.

My detail is pretty much dictated by the post I'm responding to. And yes, it has taken me a long time to reply to everyone. And yes, in some ways, the discussion has changed over the course of the different responses. But in some ways, it was good that I took so long to reply. We've been able to see Uthrecht's experiments as well as gotten more feedback after seeing how the affects of that and other people posting more in the Box has played out. The issue isn't all that time-sensitive, so there's really not that much need to post about it on a timely basis.

[Roo]

Originally Posted by bufftabby

Hmm, that definition has only 35 thumbs up, but 227 thumbs down on UD.

I was less interested in what people on the site thought of how popular the definition was and more interested in how it was being applied here.

But it looks like we disagree on how it's being applied here.

Originally Posted by bufftabby

You clearly scrolled past the more accurate (153 up, 30 down) definition of

To be fair--by which I mean nitpick irrelevancies in advance--this is a forum, not a blog, and "getting in trouble" would be more along the lines of losing or failing to gain hypothetical members. Since your suggestion would purportedly serve to change the dialogue, I would view that as an attempt to control the dialogue. While I can't speak to your sincerity, and your attitude is more bewildering than condescending, I argue that this definition is far more accurate than the one you provided, and demonstrates that the epithet of "concern troll" is not wholly undeserved by you.

I made a suggestion. How does that "change the dialogue"? What dialogue was being discussed at the time about this subject?

If you're saying that every suggestion changes the dialogue, which is the status quo, you're saying that anyone who makes a suggestion is a concern troll. That would effectively silence all suggestions. Should that be the policy here? If so, why?

I didn't point out an issue that doesn't exist. I made a suggestion. And yes, the suggestion was for something that doesn't currently exist. That's pretty much true of most suggestions. Again, are all suggestions then just people pointing out issues that don't exist, making them concern trolls?

I just noticed that Fenris started a thread called:
Let's talk about embedding pics in threads
In it, he even says:

Originally Posted by Fenris

The concern is that the more pics in threads, the less comfortable people are with browsing from work--and we want to encourage browsing!

Fenris suggested something that is not currently part of the status quo. He even used the words concern, and I don't remember a big uproar about people not being able to go to picture threads from work, and if there was one, he didn't mention it, so is he pointing out a problem that doesn't exist?

Is Fenris a concern troll or are mods the only ones who can use the word concern in a suggestion thread and change the dialogue of the status quo?

[Roo]

Originally Posted by Buckeye

Roo, here is your forum. http://www.snackpit.com/s2/forumdisp...daysprune=&f=3

You're giving me the Snackpit?! How generous of you!

Does mommy know about this? Or is this a surprise to her too?

::rubbing hands together::

::making a list of new rules for the Snackpit::

[Roo]

Originally Posted by WednesdayAddams

Yes, it still has the constraints of the general rules. Those aren't going away. Giraffe has already said you're not getting the forum you want.

Great! We're finally on the same page. . .on page 6 of this thread. Your first post to me told me that the forum I suggested already existed in the form of the DTP here. It looks like you're agreeing with me now that my suggestion really is different than anything that already exists here. Great first step.

Originally Posted by WednesdayAddams

Everyone else is merely here to have a good time and poke you with sticks occasionally.

You sure have a penchant for speaking for other people and their motivations. You don't know why everyone else is here. You're guessing based on their behavior. But you could be mistaken about your interpretation of their motivations. And since the discussion isn't about why they're posting, this doesn't add anything to the discussion.

Originally Posted by WednesdayAddams

You can continue to argue all you like, it still won't result in anything but argument. Saying you respond because we respond is a bit of a circular argument; you're every bit as able to walk away as anyone else. You are able to walk away, right? You're not so pathologically addicted to this kind of drama that you need US to walk away, are you?

I'm responding to the people who have already responded to me. The only drama being added is by you when you add inflammatory and hyperbolic phrases like "pathologically addicted to this kind of drama."

Originally Posted by WednesdayAddams

I don't know where you're getting this idea. It may be your personal experience, although I can't imagine anywhere on the internet that it works this way. Go over to StumbleUpon forums, if they're still there. It's the wild west, no rules, everyone gets to say whatever they want. Reasonable people were constantly being shouted down and bullied by trolls because the forum owners weren't doing anything. Conversations were derailed, people felt completely free to shit all over the fora without any repercussions. Guess what happened? That's right. It died. You can practically hear the crickets over there now. Most of the contributing posters have moved on to places where there are at least a few rules.

First, your lack of imagination doesn't have anything to do with the suggestion.
Then, StumbleUpon is a really huge forum. Comparing this small message board with StumbleUpon is not comparing the same things. StumbleUpon also has a very different purpose and function than a small general interest message board that is spun off another bigger board. There is a lot more transient traffic at StumbleUpon. At GB, there might be a couple new members here (that aren't socks) in a week. I'm sure that it's much higher for StumbleUpon. The transient nature and the bigger viewing population creates problems for them using an unmoderated forum than a place like this would have.
Also, I didn't actually look at it, but from what you're saying, their entire message board is unmoderated. That's a marked difference than just one forum of a small message board being unmoderated.
Extrapolating from one example that is very much unlike this place doesn't give much of a view of what might happen. But maybe if you explained why it happens, that might make the two places more comparable.

As for bullying, if you think it doesn't happen here, why do you think that is? I think it's largely based on culture. But there's certainly the potential for bullying and it does happen sometimes. I think there are people who are more free to say certain things than others.

I think an unmoderated forum wouldn't change that, but it wouldn't allow for another level of bullying that happens when mods get to decide what's acceptable. For instance, in this thread You are ruining everything for the rest of us, which was a rant about other people in general, I commented on the OP:

Originally Posted by Roo

Meh. I'm sure you're a "you" sometimes and an "us" sometimes.

The fact that anyone thinks they're not is just more proof that they are.

you made the note:

Originally Posted by WednesdayAddams

Moderator note: This right here? Example of what ruins it for everyone. Knock it the fuck off.

Now if you did that as a poster, I might have laughed or posted something back. But as a moderator, I don't see any rule being enforced. It's just a rude command.

That's something I wouldn't miss in an unmoderated forum. It might allow for less bullying, conceivably.

Originally Posted by WednesdayAddams

So, unmoderated fora do not turn into your idealized version of a message board. It just gets overrun by trolls and abandoned by good posters for greener pastures.

So let's go back to your earlier posts to me in the thread where you felt like the DTP was exactly like the forum that I was suggesting.

You earlier claimed that the DTP was pretty largely unmoderated, and Giraffe claimed that "we don't ban posters". But the DTP is not overrun by trolls (or is it?). If the DTP has basically the same moderation as the suggested forum, why is it not overrun by trolls? Is it the threat of moderation or the threat of banning, however remote, that keeps the DTP free of being overrun by trolls? If so, the threat still exists, no matter what the rules are stated as. At the end of the day, the owner of a forum can shut it down or ban certain people. There might be some unhappy people, shouting about how the owner is circumventing his own rules, but there's always the threat of banning. That wouldn't change in a forum claimed to be unmoderated, especially when it's connected to a moderated forum.

Originally Posted by WednesdayAddams

What? He's not trying to 'prove' anything. It's a joke thread, you pinhead. A JOKE. No, really. It's funny, it satirizes Zack Lee Wright's thread. Where it would go unmoderated is the same place it's going now: nowhere. BECAUSE IT'S A FUCKING JOKE THREAD.

You're speaking for someone else again here. And you were proven to be largely incorrect within one post (quoted below). If you allow people to speak for themselves, then maybe you wouldn't have to do it for them.

Originally Posted by Uthrecht

Well, I will note that I started it humorously, but there's a few interesting nuggets in there. Folks should feel free to take it at least semi-seriously if they want.

I suppose technically, I started it as a social experiment. Best way to get things done is to do them.

[Fenris]

I know This thread is a classic old thread, You stupid fucking note, but I want to post to it anyway! Stop oppressing me with your check boxes!

[C2H5OH]

Someone needs to check Fenris's meds. Something needs to be cut down. I think he's starting to turn into a zombie.

[Borborygmi]

I'm kind of curious as to the degree of harshness of the Boxings that Fenris would be meting out for all this zero-content thread bumping if it weren't being done by Fenris.

[Mr. Plumbean]

Wow, there was a time Roo wasn't in the box.

Why is Roo in the box anyway?

[Borborygmi]

In case Fenris doesn't get around to bumping it: https://www.giraffeboards.com/showthread.php?t=23949

[Mr. Plumbean]

Huh, it seemed like she was already permaboxed from my first days here. I guess it took a few years. And I guess I wasn't posting much when this stuff happened b/c I don't remember it at all.

Still, amazing how she's hung in there for so many years.

[Fenris]

Originally Posted by Borborygmi

In case Fenris doesn't get around to bumping it: https://www.giraffeboards.com/showthread.php?t=23949

Thank you.