Re: Toshiba CEO talks about life after HD DVD

Quote:
As a Tech junkie, I will most likely buy a player. I know they won't be $399 or more.

After all that I have spent on HiDef formats during the past year, Toshiba would be lucky to get any more than a $100 out of me

Quote:
That one was ok. It gave the press release. It when we get the good info the the 5 or so pictures of girls, of three of four of Princess Leia, that has nothing to do with THX.

you're right, the post was OK, the problem is he posted the same thing in four or five other threads. I'm sorry, I realize all you other guys find Jimi informative, but last night was f-ing obnoxious!

R U Serious, I see what your saying, but my addiction for electronics is stronger...

Tim Raynor said -

Quote:
"the post was OK, the problem is he posted the same thing in four or five other threads."

Wait a sec Tim, here's an explanation... this thread's subject matter (w/SUC etc) has been discussed on multiple threads, which I located using the DVDTOWN Msg Bd search engine. I'm simply attaching an UPDATE note to any readers who click on any the threads (either from exploring the archives per category, or finding this thread from a search engine).

As for "5 times" being posted, that's actually irrelevant, as this thread will pass back in the regular group list (usually within 24 hours) from the main batch shown at top right (that we see when checking the Msg Bd), and then in the future whenever someone locates this thread again, it stands by itself, and not in a list of 5 threads one after another.

Finally, I have NOT started a new thread with any of the 5 Update posts - merely adding the info to numerous threads previously presented to the Msg Bd, to the benefit of readers who discover any of these 5 threads at a later date. It was not done 5 times to irritate or over-promote the info, rather just as a FYI benefit to any reader of -that- particular thread (either now or in the future when located and read again.

_____________
-JIMI McLovin (the Voodoo Child)

i agree with tim. what's the point of bumping threads that were started four/five years ago? we're all going to see new posts as they're pushed to the top of the message board by new comments.

I believe you misunderstand what I wrote Eddie (IMO). Please read my explanation post (above) again.

How do you know 'which' of the many threads about a given subject will be read by an inquirer into that subject? So, if you have important updated info on a subject, and there are several threads with that subject, you would then post the updated info on several, so that others can benefit whenever they locate -that- thread(s) again in the future. People are not in the habit of reading multiple older threads on the same subject (after doing a search), so the updated info is beneficial if I add to ALL of those threads, see?

Remember, none of those threads where I added the update are new ones, so my updated info avoided being repeated ON YET ANOTHER NEW THREAD, and was posted to previous threads in the Msg Bd archives.

I enourage others to also try to locate older threads (with a similar subject) whenever providing some updated info here for others to read. This can avoid clutter, and the creation of multiple thread subjects (as we see here in this case) - which many have complained about across the internet on other message boards.

Eddie said -

Quote:
"what's the point of bumping threads that were started four/five years ago? we're all going to see new posts as they're pushed to the top of the message board by new comments."

But Eddie, you are one of the regulars here, who check-in every day to read posts. What about others who only check the Msg Bd only a few times a week, or a few times a month? They won't have the benefit of seeing an updated thread (of the immediate past), unless on the day they check-in the updated thread is right there in the current thread list.

_____________
-JIMI McLovin (the Voodoo Child)

---

[Post edited by Love Hendrix! on May 30, 2008 - CDT 5:11 PM]

loverboy,

please take a look at the threads in which you've posted during the past two/three days. many of them have been dormant for months/years. it's highly doubtful that people have been reading through them for information.

if you've got new news, then simply create a new thread. resurrecting numerous dormant threads creates far more clutter on the message board page then creating one new thread.

eddie

Eddie I updated my previous reply just now (see above). As for your other recent comment...

Quote:
"if you've got new news, then simply create a new thread. resurrecting numerous dormant threads creates far more clutter on the message board page then creating one new thread."

That's certainly debatable! I certainly would NOT like to see constant "new" DUPLICATE threads of the SAME subject (like what we've seen here with the SUC threads, the multiple Sweeney Todd threads, the gobs of PS3, XBox 360, etc threads). And you see people complaining all the time on other forums, Msd Bds, of having to read and sort thru constant duplicated threads about the same subject.

You yourself have griped many times here about the regular new threads started concerning a "Blu-ray ____ subject". Well, it would be best to add UPDATED info to a previous similar thread subject (if possible), rather than creating yet another thread (IMO).

_____________
-JIMI McLovin (the Voodoo Child)

you're comparing apples to oranges. new titles are being announced for dvd and blu-ray all the time. in fact, on any given tuesday, there are at least 20 titles that are being released. do we really need a thread for every title?

on the other hand, your recent posts are mostly about general news. there's no harm in starting ONE thread with several news items. resurrecting numerous dead threads is like resurrecting dead civilizations--a huge logistical nightmare.

Well... I'd be interested in other opinions on this too (John, Henning, Jason), and will abide by whatever is considered the best method to provide updated info for the benefit of others here.

Eddie, have you ever explored some of the older "new" threads (at one time past) that exist in the Msd Bd archives? Many consist of a single post (or a few posts), so I guess they were never relevant to others in posting additional comments!

So, for UPDATED news (and not NEW news), I think it's best to first do a search and see if a previous thread is about the same subject (or similar), so as to avoid more clutter and starting another new thread... that may end up being the only post (or just a few posts) about -that- "updated" news, see?

However, first-time important news definitely needs a new thread made. But once done, when -that- subject is brought up again, don't you think it would be best to post the "updated" info on that SAME thread, rather than yet another duplicate thread?

For example... we now have a new "LOST" (TV show) thread going (with comments). Now if someone has some updated info about LOST to share, shouldn't they first do a search, find -that- LOST thread, and post the news there? Otherwise, we will could end up with gobs of threads about the same subject - LOST. Do you want this?

What do others here think?

_____________
-JIMI McLovin (the Voodoo Child)