<p>
[quote]
However, those threads are archived because of useless UC posts.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Bump them if they're really important to you. And if they're important to anyone else, he/she will respond to these threads, effectively keeping these threads up front. If not many people do, then accept that those threads are not that popular. Posters here bump their threads to keep them up front; that's a trick that anybody can use.</p>
<p>
[quote]
You have posted regarding UC students in the past, as you well know, and I have noticed your propensity for describing them as recalcitrant.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is the first time I have ever used the word on a UC student. You can do a forum search if you wish.</p>
<p>hi my name is nspeds, i am a forum nazi with 1000+ posts and dedicate my whole life to the transfer forum.</p>
<p>"Mature. Use what you have instead of occupying more useless space."</p>
<p>ad Hominem</p>
<p>
[quote]
Bump them if they're really important to you.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>They are not important to me, but may be important to others who are new, but are unaware of the archives.</p>
<p>This is the first time I have ever used the word on a UC student. You can do a forum search if you wish.</p>
<p>ad Ignorantiam</p>
<p>
[quote]
ad Hominem
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That was a command, not an argument. Moreover, I thought you had denounced fallacies?</p>
<p>"They are not important to me, but may be important to others who are new, but are unaware of the archives"</p>
<p>ad Populum</p>
<p>And if anything, we could make an argument that the so-called burying of the other threads is from lack of use, as opposed to the UC students. Cum hoc ergo propter hoc?</p>
<p>Argumentum ad Hominem (abusive and circumstantial): the fallacy of attacking the character or circumstances of an individual who is advancing a statement or an argument instead of trying to disprove the truth of the statement or the soundness of the argument. Often the argument is characterized simply as a personal attack.</p>
<p>Ultimately, this is stupid, and just an excuse for us to brush of dusty language we learned in high school debate. Why does anyone care that much about something as inconsequential as this?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Cum hoc ergo propter hoc?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Why are you citing another fallacy?</p>
<p>
[quote]
And if anything, we could make an argument that the so-called burying of the other threads is from lack of use, as opposed to the UC students.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Perhaps, but that does not justify creating multiple threads when they can easily be served by one or two.</p>
<p>Why did I cite another fallacy? I dunno, maybe because I felt like stroking my ego, like you did. Are you the only one allowed to use such terms?</p>
<p>"They are not important to me, but may be important to others who are new, but are unaware of the archives"</p>
<p>according to nspeds, there are persons who are new to this forum.</p>
<p>by definition, persons who are new to the forum is unfamiliar with contents of the forum.</p>
<p>hence he would post a new thread that suits his own need.</p>
<p>
[quote]
They are useless since they can be subsumed by other threads.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>sure, the same goes for non uc threads. a reason why new threads covering old topics happens is because people may be "unaware of the archives".</p>
<p>
[quote]
Why did I cite another fallacy? I dunno, maybe because I felt like stroking my ego, like you did.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Another worthless, ill-founded insult contained in a worthless post.</p>
<p>And this is worthless too, I know.</p>
<p>It's only worthless if someone else says it, nspeds. ;)</p>
<p>it seens like you never managed to give us a logical explanation about this thread.</p>
<p>nspeds you are hillarious. I've never seen anyone so dedicated to being a forum nazi while presenting so much useless information at the same time. You must be so pleased with yourself.</p>
<p>
[quote]
They are not important to me, but may be important to others who are new, but are unaware of the archives.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't know what could possibly be so important and yet be so ignored by most visitors here that it would find itself archived. Note that the last page of threads in this forum, which is page 32, dates back to late February. Surely we can agree that if a topic has not been talked about in two months, it is no longer relevant. And if it is, a newbie can easily find it by just skimming through each of those 30+ pages.</p>