Two smokes, one night

[Kid Montana]

...Especially with Banned members posting in them....

AFAIK, Ginseng volunteered to be banned but at the same time, he produced a LOT of high quality threads so his stuff is inevitably going to get churned up by noobs.

 

[insight]

...Especially with Banned members posting in them....

AFAIK, Ginseng volunteered to be banned but at the same time, he produced a LOT of high quality threads so his stuff is inevitably going to get churned up by noobs.

Ginseng was banned because he got called out for bad trading practices and imploded, deleting all his profile information and his posts before voluntarily self-exiling. His posts were restored from a backup by Rod after the banning. He wouldn't be banned if he just chose to leave.

 

[Kid Montana]

...Especially with Banned members posting in them....

AFAIK, Ginseng volunteered to be banned but at the same time, he produced a LOT of high quality threads so his stuff is inevitably going to get churned up by noobs.

Ginseng was banned because he got called out for bad trading practices and imploded, deleting all his profile information and his posts before voluntarily self-exiling. His posts were restored from a backup by Rod after the banning. He wouldn't be banned if he just chose to leave.

Good insight. /pun mode

 

[ELittle]

...Especially with Banned members posting in them....

AFAIK, Ginseng volunteered to be banned but at the same time, he produced a LOT of high quality threads so his stuff is inevitably going to get churned up by noobs.

Ginseng was banned because he got called out for bad trading practices and imploded, deleting all his profile information and his posts before voluntarily self-exiling. His posts were restored from a backup by Rod after the banning. He wouldn't be banned if he just chose to leave.

Good insight. /pun mode

What is pun mode? Maybe you can explain it to me. thanks.

 

[souldog]

...Especially with Banned members posting in them....

AFAIK, Ginseng volunteered to be banned but at the same time, he produced a LOT of high quality threads so his stuff is inevitably going to get churned up by noobs.

Where did he volunteer to be banned? (Besides any mention of self-martyrdom that may have gone on) How did you infer that? ???

 

[insight]

...Especially with Banned members posting in them....

AFAIK, Ginseng volunteered to be banned but at the same time, he produced a LOT of high quality threads so his stuff is inevitably going to get churned up by noobs.

Where did he volunteer to be banned? (Besides any mention of self-martyrdom that may have gone on) How did you infer that? ???

 

[Kid Montana]

...Especially with Banned members posting in them....

AFAIK, Ginseng volunteered to be banned but at the same time, he produced a LOT of high quality threads so his stuff is inevitably going to get churned up by noobs.

Where did he volunteer to be banned? (Besides any mention of self-martyrdom that may have gone on) How did you infer that? ???

All I know is what is in Ginseng's Reviews and Information.

As per our registration agreement (which hasn't changed in 9 years), clearly states:


You agree that your posts, threads, messages, etc can and will be stored on the CigarPass.com server for as long as CigarPass.com chooses to host them, and make said messages public. You are responsible for what you post, and CigarPass.com holds no responsibility for content posted by any member.


As a message forum (where people get banned all the time), we can and will host messages that were posted to this site for as long as we choose. I am not going out looking for copyrighted information written by Wilkey - restoring a backup does not violate any IP laws what so ever. Wilkey has requested he be banned from CP, and his wish has been granted.

It's sad to see it come to this, however I will not cover up his mistakes.

I'm a noob, I wasn't there. Reading this and taking it for face value, what else am I supposed to assume?

 

[souldog]

I'm a noob, I wasn't there. Reading this and taking it for face value, what else am I supposed to assume?

Don't get defensive, it was a legitimate question! I didn't remember him posting that, so thank you for the reminder! :thumbs:

 

[LilBastage]

I'm a noob, I wasn't there. Reading this and taking it for face value, what else am I supposed to assume?

Don't get defensive, it was a legitimate question! I didn't remember him posting that, so thank you for the reminder! :thumbs:

It was kind of like yelling "I quit!" while being thrown out on your ass.

 

[massphatness]

What's with all the newbs reviving old dead threads lately? Especially with Banned members posting in them....

Maybe because all of the other newbs are told to search and their question or topic has been discussed 1000 times? So now you're complaining because newbs are actually searching and contributing to existing topics instead of starting their own? Which way do you want it?

-John

As the newb who posted, I did just as JHolmes763 theorized. Instead of starting a new thread on the 80's Monte I smoked, I went to the index page and looked to see if there were other reviews of this cigar and this year. I posted my experience to add to the original review. I didn't have any knowledge of a now banned member being a part of the thread, and I didn't purposely dredge up an old thread to stir the pot. If the FOG's on this site prefer that a new thread be started any time there's a review, I am happy to comply. I was only going by what I had seen on other boards. No offense intended fellas -- just point me in the right direction for any future reviews I may want to post.

 

[insight]

Not to over complicate things but I do think reviews are a little different then repeat questions. I mean I don't see anything wrong with creating a new topic when you are posting a review, whereas if it is something like "What is your experience with Aristocrat humidors?" it might make more sense to just add into an older thread. It would be different if we had 'master topics' for every cigar ever made ever in the history of everything, but since we don't and each experience is subjective it sort of makes sense to give each review its due. Just my 2c.

 

[Mr Peat]

Having done a few reviews myself I feel a Reviewer should start their own thread on a Cigar. Its a personal experience and subjective to only the
person smoking said cigar. Someone else may experience something opposite of said review. Hell, I have reviewed Opus X that turned out to be
duds when I have smoked another one of the same line.

 

[Jonesy]

What's with all the newbs reviving old dead threads lately? Especially with Banned members posting in them....

What does this have to do with anything? Hell, between Wilkey and CC86 there were over 20000 posts between them, so if a pre 2009 thread gets bumped, there will be a pretty good chance one of them posted in it.

 

[MadMonk]

It's doesn't bother me, personally, if an old thread is bumped, and the post is relevant.

Just what is the sore spot on this? Serious question? I often see comments complaining that someone bumped an old thread,
but never see a reason why? In addition, I can't recall seeing it in any of the posted guidelines. If it is there, I'm missing it.

 

[GregSVT]

It's doesn't bother me, personally, if an old thread is bumped, and the post is relevant.

Just what is the sore spot on this? Serious question? I often see comments complaining that someone bumped an old thread,
but never see a reason why? In addition, I can't recall seeing it in any of the posted guidelines. If it is there, I'm missing it.

I remember muliple people telling younger members to not bump old threads when a new thread could have been made and this seemed like a similar occasion. Most of the time the info is not relevant anymore and half the people aren't even around anymore anyway. If I was out of line then I apologize...

I personally don't think it's a good idea to bump old threads with banned members in them but that's just my opinion. They were banned for a reason. The example in the retailer forum is more relevant since it was borderline source verification and Coventry Cat was right there saying it was a great site.

 

[MoeCizlak]

I was just anxious to see Moki was posting again, until I saw the date of the OP. *Looks longingly off into the sunset*