Actually, I did read the FAQ, but then I'm active on some forums that tolerate absolutely NO spoon feeding whatsoever and if you don't abide by the strict rules, you're gone, so I'm always careful. Might be harsh, but they are a source of VERY useful information. I would agree I'm probably in the minority though.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Why "ban" **************************?
- Thread starter edesignuk
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Years ago we didn't say, let me make a copy of that document but we said, " let me xerox that." Xerox is a company that used to have a monopoly on copy machines. The word xerox became a verb in the common language. It meant 'to copy'. Xerox was also the companies trademark. Using a companies trademark as a verb and as a common english word means that the company could lose the use of their trademark. So I remember being told not to use xerox in place of the term "to copy, photocopy, etc).
Now flash forward. Today we use the term Google, to google as a verb. It means to search for something. The company Google has a near monopoly with it's search engine. To google has become a common term in the english language. Well, google is also a companies trademark and I see a dejavu here simular to what happened years ago with Xerox.
I realise this isn't about the OP post but it is the first thing I thought of when reading the OP and just wanted to share.
Now flash forward. Today we use the term Google, to google as a verb. It means to search for something. The company Google has a near monopoly with it's search engine. To google has become a common term in the english language. Well, google is also a companies trademark and I see a dejavu here simular to what happened years ago with Xerox.
I realise this isn't about the OP post but it is the first thing I thought of when reading the OP and just wanted to share.
Did you read the page where you make a new thread? I'm guessing not. I actually didn't care to read it either but it was plain as day. As unfair as it is to assume all new forum members read the FAQ and rules, it's equally unfair to assume no forum member can comprehend this:
Rest assured this isn't about MacRumor's care for Google losing their trademark ... but it an interesting concept to say the least.
Just an FYI, the banning only goes "skin deep" so to speak. If you're actually going to moderate ******, you're going to have to actually check that people don't disguise it using URL shorteners like this person did [in a post the moderators deleted].
Sure, we can mask that all we want but in the interest of consistency, I am not certain your response would not be considered rude or offensive. Now, this is only my interpretation after recently reading the forum rules and attempting to decipher how something I've done myself, just like your response, could be considered rude and/or offensive. The good news is that I figured it out and I'm crystal clear on matters.
Unfortunately, the search button in the new thread page links to the forum search. The forum search has been, for me, problematical. I have used it to search for threads I knew almost the exact title to, results were mixed at best. I've had far better luck finding topics on MR using Google than the built in forum search, e's MRoogle is best of all. But I've been here a while, a noob may not know these things.
As a fairly recent switcher, I remember that sometimes Mac can be daunting and frustrating. It was a lot of friendly voices here on MR that got me through.
Does any1 kno where I can find the websight "**************************?"
i'm new here & I search all over ths site and cud'nt find itz.
i'm new here & I search all over ths site and cud'nt find itz.
Does any1 kno where I can find the websight "**************************?"
i'm new here & I search all over ths site and cud'nt find itz.
http://www.google.com/search?q=let+...s=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
Does any1 kno where I can find the websight "**************************?"
i'm new here & I search all over ths site and cud'nt find itz.
Here.
I know, I can sense a smartass, even across the internet ... but calling you one directly with my link could have been interpreted as rude.
See above.
Is Sarcasm nice in person? I heard he can be kind of a jerk. He's really let the fame get to him.
Understood but even with the daunting task of searching forums where the results are less than awesome, I've done it. Try searching for something where the thread is 10+ pages long. It picks up my keyword in the thread but never shows me the specific page, it shows me the entire thread. Therefore, I am either forced to search the forums and click on countless threads or google it myself. This is before MRGoogle really came to be.
I am not excusing either side, I'm simply saying that it is there and it is often (always) ignored. It was also a response to one member that reads as being nothing more than sarcastic (my favorite thing to be).
Hilarious.
I like how the very beginning is somewhat optimistic and upbeat, and then, instant-fail!
Yeah, well, see this: http://upc.*************/uploads/smilies/flipa.gif
I think some people get him and some people don't. I think he's eeeextra nice.
Sure, we can mask that all we want but in the interest of consistency, I am not certain your response would not be considered rude or offensive. Now, this is only my interpretation after recently reading the forum rules and attempting to decipher how something I've done myself, just like your response, could be considered rude and/or offensive. The good news is that I figured it out and I'm crystal clear on matters.
If the mods decide it's rude and remove it, that's fine with me. But I promise you I'm not concerned with whether or not someone finds me "rude" or "offensive."
I just noticed something -- does the banning of ****** have anything to do with the promotion of MRgoogle?
Wow. Censoring the great God Google ?? MR is gonna get a start and insist letter anytime.
Seriously though. I sort of understand the concept. Sure there are people that post a question that has an easy answer at google but a reply ( if known ) is just as easy as posting a use google remark.
Seriously though. I sort of understand the concept. Sure there are people that post a question that has an easy answer at google but a reply ( if known ) is just as easy as posting a use google remark.
I just noticed something -- does the banning of ****** have anything to do with the promotion of MRgoogle?
Um, considering that the creator of MRoogle is the one objecting to ******'s censoring, I'm thinking no.
Yes, but if you link to search results instead of explaining it yourself, you can easily bring a much larger quantity of information to the conversation than you'd probably be able to otherwise.
It also helps build a habit of searching first, asking second. Searching only helps the would-be poster anyways.
By the time you have searched google to get that link you could have easily copied and pasted the text.
Give a man a fish... feed him for a day
Teach a man to fish... feed him for a lifetime
Woof, Woof - Dawg
