Sounds like you've done it before.
Replying to something 10 months old isn't really a great idea...
It'd be more acceptable if it was a question about the rules, rather than random commentary. Specifically in that thread, I mean.
Quote from: llearch n'n'daCorna on August 20, 2009, 05:55:05 AM
It'd be more acceptable if it was a question about the rules, rather than random commentary. Specifically in that thread, I mean.
Agreed - I knew there was something I'd forgotten to add.
To clarify, the rules thread is left unlocked in case people have queries about the rules. Those are welcome, but continuing idle chatter from last November is not really the idea.
O, I didn't realize it was that old. Sorry.
There's usually red text that says "this thread is more than a month old" or something like that before you make your post.
Please be more mindful in the future.
It didn't say that for me.
yeah, that warning message doesn't seem to show for stickyed threads.
Quote from: JackTheCubiWolf on August 21, 2009, 01:43:22 AM
It didn't say that for me.
then you use your EYES and look at the last post date. :B
Quote from: Turnsky on August 21, 2009, 06:11:34 AM
then you use your EYES and look at the last post date. :B
I've seen worse. On homerecording.com, people reply to posts from 2000 or so with disturbing frequency.