Congrats Threads

[+rutson]

OK, here's the deal, in the last vote some six months or so ago, I was opposed to the single congrats thread, in light of recent events my thoughts have changed.

 

I propose a new vote on the subject, specifically, I suggest we have a vote on the motion:

 

a) I think that all congratulatory posts should be in a single thread

I think every congratulatory notice deserves it's own thread

 

PLEASE NOTE!!! This is not a vote, but a suggestion to vote. If you think we should or should not vote, please voice here. It's up to our esteemed moderators/approvers/whatever they're called this week to organise a vote....

[+Stuey]

I suggest we don't vote. We've done this a few times now. I don't see why we should keep on voting with some people hoping the general consensus changes.

[Mittellegi]

This may be a little controversial...

 

1) All congratulatory threads should be banned immediatly

 

2) Anyone wishing to congratulate another should do so by way of a pint at the next Event.

 

[+littlejim]

I'd agree with that, but can the drink(s) be retrospective please

[+Us 4 and Jess]

i would certainly be willing to vote

 

my opinion is we should have single threads for votes in my eyes i think everyone deserves their "name in lights" "2 minutes of fame" its nice for people to notice other peoples accomplishments and to say well done

 

if you dont want to read them go onto the next thread!

[+klaus23]

I think that

 

Wilkinsons Find Their 400th Cache

Phoenix Cruises Through 200

Congrats To Lucky Ducky TB

Littlejim Reaches 100

The Wobbly Club Reach 200

Pharisee And The 1000 Milestone

Leecee Reaches 200

Cave Troll and Joan Pass 300

Happy Hippo Finds His 600th

Firth Of Forth gets her 600th Cache

Roolku Reaches Another Century - 400

Blackpig And The Piglets Get 300

Littlejim Reaches 100

Pooter Chases Fof - 600

UKgeocyclist Makes 200

Marcoxono Makes 200

Another Cacher Hits 100

Beds Clangers Hits 800

Senseiskc Takes The First Step To Greatness - 100

New Leader - Congrats M1EYO

Powerbook Fanatic Reaches 300

Dewdrops Reach 500

*Bingoboy* Hits 200

 

as well as two threads talking about congrats threads speak for themselves.

 

I'm not arguing with democracy, the last vote was fair and square - but is there really no other way to do this?

[+Flackadder]

i would certainly be willing to vote

 

my opinion is we should have single threads for votes in my eyes i think everyone deserves their "name in lights" "2 minutes of fame" its nice for people to notice other peoples accomplishments and to say well done

 

if you dont want to read them go onto the next thread!

This sounds fair enough to me.

[+rutson]

D'ya know, I agreed with Us 4 and Jess until just a few days ago.

 

One time, during the last few days , I came onto the forums and I think the first dozen and a few more in the top 15 thread were congats threads. It just seemed a bit much.

 

Don't take this a scrooge thing please, I enjoyed reading my own congrats threads. But there has to be a betterr way!

[+-Phoenix-]

why dont you put it to a vote?

 

1 Yes, we vote on congratulation threads and keep on voting until we get it right (just like the EU constitution)

 

2 No, votes should be banned they are a distraction and make less room for congratulation threads

[+GAZ,NES and LAYLA]

I suggest we don't vote. We've done this a few times now. I don't see why we should keep on voting with some people hoping the general consensus changes.

I agree 100% here. We have voted already !!!

Also,the more you get to know fellow cachers then the more excited you get when they reach a milestone. ANY milestone is great and the feeling of achievement is wonderful. (Before any one has a go here,I am not saying 30/40 etc etc ....I am talking about 100/200/ and so on )

100 for newbies is a massive milestone for them or 1000 for those who have done this sport a while.

When Pharisee text me to say he was about to reach 1000 I was almost as excited as he must have been and genuinelly wanted to share this in the forums.

I think its nice to congratulate old and new friends on their achievements.

Every one deserves a little fame at some time surely?

So I vote not to vote .......AGAIN

NES x

[+The Klever Boys]

I agree with Us 4 and Jess, the messages don't really bother me as they're quite obvious what they are.

If I don't want to read them then I don't - I just skip onto the next!

[Team 'James W']

Vote, Vote!

 

But surely it will be a fruitless exercise as people will still post new threads. Why can't we have a whole congrats forum topic, not just a pinned thread? That way, there will be no confusion over who is congratulating who, you can have as many congrats threads as you like and any off-topic congrats opened in here can be promptly moved!

 

Just a dream.....

[+MarcB]

I'm with Rutson now, I think there should just be one pinned congratulations thread...

MarcB

[+Birders]

We're 100% in favour of individual threads...

 

Firstly it doesn't matter how many threads are on here - and taking away those in question would seriously reduce the content of the forum!

Secondly, it saves having to wade through pages of stuff.

Thirdly, the lucky person gets his/her name "in lights".

 

What's wrong with you profound miseries who want to get rid of them????

[Alan White]

I prefer individual threads. This makes it much easier to identify who has achieved the milestone, and therefore makes it easier to see whether reading the thread or posting a response is required.

 

In a single thread the achievement itself is lost in the congratulations. A single thread also belittles some achievements. Is it appropriate, for example, that the "Pharisee 1000" milestone be buried in a standard thread? Or the first 2000 UK cacher?

 

This is a forum for discussion and communication. We don't need ever-more restrictive rules.

[+Learned Gerbil]

I can't understand why people get so hung up about it. Its only a congratulation after all! We should stop all this bickering, and just go out there and congratulate a few people in whateverway you want. Jeees!

[+Kitty Hawk]

I would go for individual threads, for the reasons said above.

 

Is the issue that congrats threads take over the forum by being continually bumped to the top?

 

If that's the issue a solution is to post the thread, then close it. It will be there for people to read, but won't hog the forum by being bumped 15, 20 or 30 times to the top of the list. People who wish to pass on genuine congratulations can send an e-mail, the achiever has his name in lights. Everyone happy.

 

Adrian

[Nediam]

I would go for individual threads, for the reasons said above.

 

Is the issue that congrats threads take over the forum by being continually bumped to the top?

 

If that's the issue a solution is to post the thread, then close it. It will be there for people to read, but won't hog the forum by being bumped 15, 20 or 30 times to the top of the list. People who wish to pass on genuine congratulations can send an e-mail, the achiever has his name in lights. Everyone happy.

 

Adrian

That sounds like a good compromise.

 

The e-mail idea is good as there are lots of cachers who reach milestones that don't use the forums. Or you could send a Personal Message "PM" for those that do use the forums.

Edited June 2, 2005 by nediam

[+littlejim]

I would go for individual threads, for the reasons said above.

 

Is the issue that congrats threads take over the forum by being continually bumped to the top?

 

If that's the issue a solution is to post the thread, then close it. It will be there for people to read, but won't hog the forum by being bumped 15, 20 or 30 times to the top of the list. People who wish to pass on genuine congratulations can send an e-mail, the achiever has his name in lights. Everyone happy.

I also fully agree. An easy to use link to the achiever would then be useful like: 'Congrats littlejim', which is a bit of a pain to produce isn't it?

[+The Hokesters]

It strikes me that those in favour of the single thread (me included) would be in favour of a new vote whereas those against the single thread would prefer there wasn't a vote.

 

It all sounds like another vote to me

[+naffita]

In March 2002 when Slytherin (or was it kimrobin then?) found their 100th, it was indeed a milestone, a first in this country and there were not many caches about. Now it's quite possible by nipping out in your lunch hour to get a hundred in a month. Congratulate by all means, but 500 is a more realistic target now.

[Deego]

Hang on, we HAVE a single thread. So you want to vote on if your going to MAKE people use it !!!

 

What if they dont? who is going to inforce it.

 

Naffita make a good point. When I started the Hall of Fame in Jan 2004 there was 41 people over 200 finds, there is now 215 (maybe more ). But I still enjoyed getting to 100,200,300.

Edited June 2, 2005 by Deego

[+Alibags]

I suggest we don't vote. We've done this a few times now. I don't see why we should keep on voting with some people hoping the general consensus changes.

I completely agree with Stuey. We have voted before and discussed this several times.

 

However, as the UK forum is one of the biggest (in terms of numbers of posts) perhaps we* could speak nicely unto the powers that be and get a sub-topic for individual congratulations threads, a bit like the pinned area. I don't know much about how forums work, so this may be impossible. so if so, I would like to leave it alone. The wave of milestone congratulations threads seems to come and go anyhow, even though there have been lots recently.

 

* where 'we' actually means, I volunteer the moderators of this forum to do even more work!!

[SlytherinAlex]

In March 2002 when Slytherin (or was it kimrobin then?) found their 100th, it was indeed a milestone, a first in this country and there were not many caches about. Now it's quite possible by nipping out in your lunch hour to get a hundred in a month. Congratulate by all means, but 500 is a more realistic target now.

We were first to 100 jointly with The Wombles, and yes it was much more of an achievement in those days. We had to travel great distances to get even two or three caches in a day. Now in what I used to call the "great West Yorkshire cache desert", I could nip out now and bag five before lunch.

 

I like the idea of the thread being posted and then closed, and I also like the idea of setting defined goals for congrats threads.

 

100, 500 and 1,000 would work for me.

 

-

[markandlynn]

Despite the prescence of a single pinned thread separate threads still get started so we have duplicate duplicate threads on the same thing.

I felt the suggestion that they should be posted for

100

250

500

750

1000

Was good and had some mileage but we can't even agree on where to post all congrats anyway.

Of course the guk forum has a separate area for congratulations threads which we could all use rather than posting here.

[+Happy Humphrey]

I'm with SlytherinAlex on this - if there was an agreed number of caches to qualify for a congrats thread it would reduce the proliferation and a new thread for each one would be justified.

 

I'd go for 100 (as it's a "hello to a new addict" number), then 1000, then 2000.

 

HH

[+John Stead]

As Kitty Hawk has introduced what I think is a new idea and one which I think is good, viz. that we should immediately close congratulation threads after opening them so they do not get bumped up all the time, I think that a new vote is in order.

I would suggest that congratulations be only offered at 100 to encourage newcomers and then multiples of 500. Perhaps the rule could be broken when someone gets to 10,000!

[Team 'James W']

Sounds like a top idea to me.

[+Pengy&Tigger]

I like the idea of limiting the milestones to 100, 500, 1000 etc. It seems to be a decent compromise.

 

Maybe a new vote with more options is worth doing.

 

T

[+littlejim]

A slightly different point, but related: Any way to say a general thanks to congrats posts without bumping the thread back up to the top? Perhaps another Post Option is required on the forum?

[+MarcB]

As Kitty Hawk has introduced what I think is a new idea and one which I think is good, viz. that we should immediately close congratulation threads after opening them so they do not get bumped up all the time, I think that a new vote is in order.

I would suggest that congratulations be only offered at 100 to encourage newcomers and then multiples of 500. Perhaps the rule could be broken when someone gets to 10,000!

I'm all for this - creating and locking seems a very good idea

[+Learned Gerbil]

I like the idea of threads being closed quickly. However, I think limiting milestones to 100, 500, 1000 etc seems elitist. Very few cachers will get near 500, never mind 1000. I think 100, 250, 500, 1000, 2000, 5000 would be more appropriate steps. Even today, with the millions of caches on our doorstep to trip over on the way to the shops, 250 caches involves a significant effort those people who try and have a real life as well as go caching.

 

If the steps are too far apart there will always be the temptation for people to slip in a "300" or "400" congrats.

[SlytherinAlex]

If the steps are too far apart there will always be the temptation for people to slip in a "300" or "400" congrats.

Or 150.

 

-

[+Alibags]

I must say quite like the idea of locking the threads after a short while, and may adopt that approach myself. I think limiting the number of caches to be congratulated at by some sort of rule is a naff idea though. I enjoy celebrating my own milestone figures and the achievements of my friends. I should be able to congratulate when I feel praise is due. I think such practices are highly motivational and I enjoy seeking out my next target figure. The forum is supposed to be a community after all. If there was lots of quality input on other subjects, then the congrats threads would not seem so prominent. Isn't it about time somebody started a thread on TB etiquette again?

[+The Hokesters]

Isn't it about time somebody started a thread on TB etiquette again?

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

[+Alibags]

[Team 'James W']

I think 100, 250, 500, 1000, 2000, 5000 would be more appropriate steps.

How 'bout a congratulations forum with a thread for each? Simply insert the post into the correct thread? The latest post title for the milstones threads could feed into the GC.com main page as a banner, similar to the photo banner?

Edited June 2, 2005 by Team 'James W'

[Deego]

If you lock the thread's, how will I ever get to 2,000 posts

 

Edited June 2, 2005 by Deego

[+Tupperware Hunters]

Vote, Vote!

 

But surely it will be a fruitless exercise

Just a dream..... oyy

leave me out of this i never did nofffink

[+Learned Gerbil]

By regularly opening a thread on why we should not lock congratulation threads!

[+rutson]

OK, so it turned into a vote and the concensus seems to be for separate conrats threads, so be it.

[+Snosrap]

I'm sick of seeing this thread at the top of the list.

 

Can you lock it now please Ian??

[+rutson]

no

[+Tupperware Hunters]

congatulations on standing your ground rutston

[+klaus23]

Lads, whatever chance you had of getting people to listen to you about a new format in relation to congrats threads, you've blown it now.

 

If this was my forum, there'd be bans all round for simply spamming the boards.

[+Flackadder]

Lads, whatever chance you had of getting people to listen to you about a new format in relation to congrats threads, you've blown it now.

 

If this was my forum, there'd be bans all round for simply spamming the boards.

Five minutes 'fun' is hardly hurting anyone or thier bandwidth or whatever! Chill out! :-)

[+Kitty Hawk]

I can see Klaus point of view, no-ones congratulated me on anything either

[Sparticus]

Lads, whatever chance you had of getting people to listen to you about a new format in relation to congrats threads, you've blown it now.

 

If this was my forum, there'd be bans all round for simply spamming the boards.

I think the point of all this spamming is to point out how irrelevant the majority of congratulation threads are.

[+Tupperware Hunters]

correct

[+rutson]

OK, fair play. It maybe got a little out of hand. Game over.