• 7 months 16 days ago
    • Posts: 47
    • Globally Banned
    Why was KidOf2000s ever allowed to post on RetroJunk. The kid was born in 1996 and writing about 2000s kids things. I'll admit that I considered writing an article about 2000, but 2005 is just ridiculous.

    Would it be a bad idea to set an age limit on registering? I propose age twenty as a minimum.
    Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
      • 7 months 16 days ago
      • Posts: 9570
      I don't think it's a bad idea.
      There is a battle between two wolves inside us all.

      One is evil and the other one is good. Which wolf will win? The one you feed the most.

      http://unbelievableyou.com/a-native-american-cherokee-story-two-wolves/
      Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
        • 7 months 16 days ago
        • Posts: 2252
        • Forum Mod
        • Editor
        That would be preposterous. I was born in the 80s, does that mean I can't talk about the 70s pop culture because I wasn't born then?
        Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
          • 7 months 16 days ago
          • Posts: 47
          • Globally Banned
          vkimo wrote:
          That would be preposterous. I was born in the 80s, does that mean I can't talk about the 70s pop culture because I wasn't born then?


          I suppose you could talk about it but do we really need 2005 articles? I get that the 00s decade section was added, but only 2000, maybe 2001 make sense (at least to me). 2002 is pushing it.
          Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
            • 7 months 16 days ago
            • Posts: 2252
            • Forum Mod
            • Editor
            Oh yeah, I agree with you there. A lot of the older crowd left here along time ago though. I think between 2003-2007 the site was more 80s kids. Then around 2008 it shifted to more 90s kids like myself. Thing is a lot of the 90s kids here...never stopped watching cartoons and so would turn to discussing current stuff.
            Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
              • 7 months 16 days ago
              • Posts: 47
              • Globally Banned
              vkimo wrote:
              Oh yeah, I agree with you there. A lot of the older crowd left here along time ago though. I think between 2003-2007 the site was more 80s kids. Then around 2008 it shifted to more 90s kids like myself. Thing is a lot of the 90s kids here...never stopped watching cartoons and so would turn to discussing current stuff.


              If the 90s crowd weren't here until 2008 then the 2000s crowd could wait a few years. The only "2000s kids" that would seem fitting posting here are the late 90s/early 00s kids. Or else we risk articles about 2009 being posted.
              Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
                • 7 months 16 days ago
                • Posts: 410
                I think you are way too concerned with peoples ages and with labelling what is and isn't appropriate for this site. No one is forcing you to read any of the articles that do not interest you. You should let the new users find their footing and try to enjoy the site instead of scolding them for being younger than you.
                "Good Nyborg "
                Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
                  • 7 months 16 days ago
                  • Posts: 47
                  • Globally Banned
                  The Ronin Identity wrote:
                  I think you are way too concerned with peoples ages and with labelling what is and isn't appropriate for this site. No one is forcing you to read any of the articles that do not interest you. You should let the new users find their footing and try to enjoy the site instead of scolding them for being younger than you.


                  I have nothing against people younger than me posting here. But the idea of a "retro" website is to "capture the past". If someone wrote an article about "I Gotta Feeling" by The Black Eyed Peas, and people didn't scold them, people would think it was acceptable to post 2009 articles on here. But only 5 years ago isn't what "retro" is supposed to imply (technically five minutes ago is the past, but it doesn't mean that five minutes ago is "old";). It isn't about what I like or don't like. It's about what is "retro" and what is just too new.
                  Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
                    • 7 months 15 days ago
                    • Posts: 315
                    If it were the case that too many articles were getting posted that wouldn't be considered "retro" by your average web user, then a simple solution would be to give these "less than retro" articles their own section (on the home page, as they can already be sorted by age with the decade filter). Still, I don't see it as a big problem at the moment.
                    signature The fun doesn't end here. www.retro-daze.com
                    Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
                      • 7 months 15 days ago
                      • Posts: 47
                      • Globally Banned
                      Ghost of Vapor wrote:
                      If it were the case that too many articles were getting posted that wouldn't be considered "retro" by your average web user, then a simple solution would be to give these "less than retro" articles their own section (on the home page, as they can already be sorted by age with the decade filter). Still, I don't see it as a big problem at the moment.


                      At the moment it isn't but if you don't draw a line, we'll start having articles about 2006, then 2007, then 2008 and then 2009! The website has already reduced itself to allowing 2005.
                      Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
                        • 7 months 15 days ago
                        • Posts: 281
                        Well, the person won't have first-hand experience of that time because of their young age, but they can still research it and write about it.
                        Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
                          • 7 months 15 days ago
                          • Posts: 1694
                          CareBearCheer wrote:
                          Why was KidOf2000s ever allowed to post on RetroJunk. The kid was born in 1996 and writing about 2000s kids things. I'll admit that I considered writing an article about 2000, but 2005 is just ridiculous.

                          Would it be a bad idea to set an age limit on registering? I propose age twenty as a minimum.


                          You made a thread seeking a guarantee that your article about 2000 would be "safe". When you didn't get immediate validation, you made more threads trying to convince people of your point of view. No one had even out-and-out said you were wrong. There was even a thread about creating a whole new phrase that you wanted everybody to use for it. And when nobody replied to it, you whined about that. Now you are whining about somebody else. At least they didn't spam the board for a week seeking preapproval.

                          If 2000 and 2001 makes sense to you who the hell are you to say 2005 is not allowed? "ridiculous" "???!!!" They're in the same decade. It's almost ten years ago; a whole decade; half the lifetime of a twenty-year old.
                          tangspot2 wrote:
                          Mrs. stake you say some nasty on my threads. Dirty bitch
                          Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
                            • 7 months 15 days ago
                            • Posts: 1694
                            The Ronin Identity wrote:
                            I think you are way too concerned with peoples ages and with labelling what is and isn't appropriate for this site. No one is forcing you to read any of the articles that do not interest you. You should let the new users find their footing and try to enjoy the site instead of scolding them for being younger than you.

                            THIS
                            tangspot2 wrote:
                            Mrs. stake you say some nasty on my threads. Dirty bitch
                            Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
                              • 7 months 15 days ago
                              • Posts: 47
                              • Globally Banned
                              RomanBlade86 wrote:
                              Well, the person won't have first-hand experience of that time because of their young age, but they can still research it and write about it.


                              They WERE old enough to remember 2005, they were nine. But 2005 is only 9 years ago.
                              Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
                                • 7 months 15 days ago
                                • Posts: 47
                                • Globally Banned
                                stake n sheak wrote:
                                CareBearCheer wrote:
                                Why was KidOf2000s ever allowed to post on RetroJunk. The kid was born in 1996 and writing about 2000s kids things. I'll admit that I considered writing an article about 2000, but 2005 is just ridiculous.

                                Would it be a bad idea to set an age limit on registering? I propose age twenty as a minimum.


                                You made a thread seeking a guarantee that your article about 2000 would be "safe". When you didn't get immediate validation, you made more threads trying to convince people of your point of view. No one had even out-and-out said you were wrong. There was even a thread about creating a whole new phrase that you wanted everybody to use for it. And when nobody replied to it, you whined about that. Now you are whining about somebody else. At least they didn't spam the board for a week seeking preapproval.

                                If 2000 and 2001 makes sense to you who the hell are you to say 2005 is not allowed? "ridiculous" "???!!!" They're in the same decade. It's almost ten years ago; a whole decade; half the lifetime of a twenty-year old.


                                You're just assuming what I was hoping to achieve and same decade or not, 2000 and 2005 are half a decade apart. 2009 is part of the decade too, but there's a massive difference between 5 years ago vs. 14 years ago.
                                Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
                                  • 7 months 15 days ago
                                  • Posts: 9570
                                  Will we hear from Kidof2000s again or is he getting the idea that he's too young for Retrojunk?
                                  There is a battle between two wolves inside us all.

                                  One is evil and the other one is good. Which wolf will win? The one you feed the most.

                                  http://unbelievableyou.com/a-native-american-cherokee-story-two-wolves/
                                  Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
                                    • 7 months 15 days ago
                                    • Posts: 554
                                    Well there is a 2000's section now, so I fail to see how it doesn't belong here.
                                    If it was back in 2011 and before when there was only up to the 70's-90's sections then I'd say there's a problem.
                                    signature
                                    Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
                                      • 7 months 15 days ago
                                      • Posts: 410
                                      thecrow174 wrote:
                                      Will we hear from Kidof2000s again or is he getting the idea that he's too young for Retrojunk?


                                      I hope he keeps making articles, I liked his school lunch and themed cereal articles and I could care less how old he is. This site gets less fun to be on when people start nit-picking and whining about whats retro and whats not.
                                      "Good Nyborg "
                                      Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
                                        • 7 months 15 days ago
                                        • Posts: 2252
                                        • Forum Mod
                                        • Editor
                                        Anyone can submit an article on practically anything, regardless of topic, time frame, quality, etc. The readers hold the power to filter these articles with voting. If more readers are into 00s stuff than those who aren't then the articles will stay on the front page. If more people feel the article is inappropriate or lacking, then the can vote it to the back pages. It's just a matter of majority. Apparently more people still hold that the 00s are too recent giving most of the 00s articles are in the negatives. Basically we all need to chill out and let nature weed out things.
                                        Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
                                          • 7 months 15 days ago
                                          • Posts: 315
                                          CareBearCheer = OrangeJuice90s = WalletUnknown.
                                          signature The fun doesn't end here. www.retro-daze.com
                                          Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
                                          Search