Print

[nonattender]

Sometimes a particular topic not attracting any response is NOT a function of its perfection in stating all that there is to say on that topic.
This is one of those times.  No more bumps please.  Aside from being in poor taste, it, as may appeal to your reason, sets a bad precedent.

-1

If bumps are really that bad, let the moderators handle it.  Putting this discussion in the public arena instead of in PMs is petty and openly hostile.

The behavior I'm responding to is itself a direct response to the new moderation policy.

Bumping in this manner is nothing but a knowing/intentional end-run around that policy.

If you did not see that before I pointed it out to you, then I understand your response.

-t

[Xenon481]

Sometimes a particular topic not attracting any response is NOT a function of its perfection in stating all that there is to say on that topic.
This is one of those times.  No more bumps please.  Aside from being in poor taste, it, as may appeal to your reason, sets a bad precedent.

-1

If bumps are really that bad, let the moderators handle it.  Putting this discussion in the public arena instead of in PMs is petty and openly hostile.

The behavior I'm responding to is itself a direct response to the new moderation policy.

Bumping in this manner is nothing but a knowing/intentional end-run around that policy.

If you did not see that before I pointed it out to you, then I understand your response.

-t

The original bump happened on April 30th, 2008; over 2 weeks before the new Lobby policy was instated.

[Senator]

FWIW the bump get me to read it again and ask myself, "Have these problems been addressed?"  Depressingly, NO.

[Mtnchick]

FWIW the bump get me to read it again and ask myself, "Have these problems been addressed?"  Depressingly, NO.

I'm pretty sure that's that point of the bumps.

[112233]

FWIW the bump get me to read it again and ask myself, "Have these problems been addressed?"  Depressingly, NO.

I'm pretty sure that's that point of the bumps.

or new lenders

[bookwyrm]

*raises hand*

I have no idea what all this about new Lobby policy is, as I'm quite shiny and new, but I find this thread quite useful and informative despite it's age.  I'm glad it was on the front page where I could easily find it.

Bump.

[ira01]

The behavior I'm responding to is itself a direct response to the new moderation policy.

Bumping in this manner is nothing but a knowing/intentional end-run around that policy.

Unless there is some other moderating policy of which I am not aware, this is complete BS.  The only recent moderating policy change I know of is Ferrix's decision to prevent new threads from being created in the Lobby, which was a direct result of the spate of "noise" threads created a few weeks ago.  That policy has absolutely nothing to do with my occasional bumping of this thread which is certainly, by any possible measure, "signal" not "noise" (regardless of whether you agree with it, it surely is pertinent for the Lobby).

As others have told you, your attack on me and my often-read and well-regarded thread is juvenile and hostile.  I don't intend to respond to any continuation of your attack that you may post here in the future.  I also request that the moderators split your attacks off of this thread and move them to a more appropriate location.  To facilitate this, I am reporting this post.

[Mark12547]

Sometimes a particular topic not attracting any response is NOT a function of its perfection in stating all that there is to say on that topic.
This is one of those times.  No more bumps please.  Aside from being in poor taste, it, as may appeal to your reason, sets a bad precedent.

-1

If bumps are really that bad, let the moderators handle it.  Putting this discussion in the public arena instead of in PMs is petty and openly hostile.

The behavior I'm responding to is itself a direct response to the new moderation policy.

Bumping in this manner is nothing but a knowing/intentional end-run around that policy.

If you did not see that before I pointed it out to you, then I understand your response.

-t

Nonattender, while I agree that in general bumping isn't a good idea, I am not aware of a moderation policy on this board against bumping.

Could you enlighten me?

Thank you!

--One of the community moderators.

[ira01]

Sometimes a particular topic not attracting any response is NOT a function of its perfection in stating all that there is to say on that topic.
This is one of those times.  No more bumps please.  Aside from being in poor taste, it, as may appeal to your reason, sets a bad precedent.

-1

If bumps are really that bad, let the moderators handle it.  Putting this discussion in the public arena instead of in PMs is petty and openly hostile.

The behavior I'm responding to is itself a direct response to the new moderation policy.

Bumping in this manner is nothing but a knowing/intentional end-run around that policy.

If you did not see that before I pointed it out to you, then I understand your response.

Nonattender, while I agree that in general bumping isn't a good idea, I am not aware of a moderation policy on this board against bumping.

Could you enlighten me?

Thank you!

--One of the community moderators.

Could you please split this meta discussion off from my thread about Prosper's problems?  I thought the idea of the Lobby was to keep the posts about Prosper to facilitate good search engine results and a favorable impression on new visitors.  Thank you.

[Heavens2Murgetroid]

Unless there is some other moderating policy of which I am not aware, this is complete BS.  The only recent moderating policy change I know of is Ferrix's decision to prevent new threads from being created in the Lobby, which was a direct result of the spate of "noise" threads created a few weeks ago.  That policy has absolutely nothing to do with my occasional bumping of this thread which is certainly, by any possible measure, "signal" not "noise" (regardless of whether you agree with it, it surely is pertinent for the Lobby).

As others have told you, your attack on me and my often-read and well-regarded thread is juvenile and hostile.  I don't intend to respond to any continuation of your attack that you may post here in the future.  I also request that the moderators split your attacks off of this thread and move them to a more appropriate location.  To facilitate this, I am reporting this post.

Someone disagreeing with you is not an attack. 

[ira01]

Unless there is some other moderating policy of which I am not aware, this is complete BS.  The only recent moderating policy change I know of is Ferrix's decision to prevent new threads from being created in the Lobby, which was a direct result of the spate of "noise" threads created a few weeks ago.  That policy has absolutely nothing to do with my occasional bumping of this thread which is certainly, by any possible measure, "signal" not "noise" (regardless of whether you agree with it, it surely is pertinent for the Lobby).

As others have told you, your attack on me and my often-read and well-regarded thread is juvenile and hostile.  I don't intend to respond to any continuation of your attack that you may post here in the future.  I also request that the moderators split your attacks off of this thread and move them to a more appropriate location.  To facilitate this, I am reporting this post.

Someone disagreeing with you is not an attack. 

Someone disagreeing with my substantive points about Prosper is certainly not an attack, and is welcome.  Nonattender's hostile post about "mothers and children" and "book reports," etc., was most certainly an attack. 

[nonattender]

Sometimes a particular topic not attracting any response is NOT a function of its perfection in stating all that there is to say on that topic.
This is one of those times.  No more bumps please.  Aside from being in poor taste, it, as may appeal to your reason, sets a bad precedent.

-1

If bumps are really that bad, let the moderators handle it.  Putting this discussion in the public arena instead of in PMs is petty and openly hostile.

The behavior I'm responding to is itself a direct response to the new moderation policy.
Bumping in this manner is nothing but a knowing/intentional end-run around that policy.
If you did not see that before I pointed it out to you, then I understand your response.

-t

Nonattender, while I agree that in general bumping isn't a good idea, I am not aware of a moderation policy on this board against bumping.

Could you enlighten me?

Thank you!

--One of the community moderators.

Since no one cleaned out the lobby prior to Ferrix's nomination policy, old posts are left here to fester.  The end-run I was referring to is that, in the absense of being able to directly post something new, all one has to do to make crap float is to bump it up out of the sewer.

Let there be light.

-t

[Xenon481]

Sometimes a particular topic not attracting any response is NOT a function of its perfection in stating all that there is to say on that topic.
This is one of those times.  No more bumps please.  Aside from being in poor taste, it, as may appeal to your reason, sets a bad precedent.

-1

If bumps are really that bad, let the moderators handle it.  Putting this discussion in the public arena instead of in PMs is petty and openly hostile.

The behavior I'm responding to is itself a direct response to the new moderation policy.
Bumping in this manner is nothing but a knowing/intentional end-run around that policy.
If you did not see that before I pointed it out to you, then I understand your response.

-t

Nonattender, while I agree that in general bumping isn't a good idea, I am not aware of a moderation policy on this board against bumping.

Could you enlighten me?

Thank you!

--One of the community moderators.

Since no one cleaned out the lobby prior to Ferrix's nomination policy, old posts are left here to fester.  The end-run I was referring to is that, in the absense of being able to directly post something new, all one has to do to make crap float is to bump it up out of the sewer.

Let there be light.

-t

Reported.

[112233]

Sometimes a particular topic not attracting any response is NOT a function of its perfection in stating all that there is to say on that topic.
This is one of those times.  No more bumps please.  Aside from being in poor taste, it, as may appeal to your reason, sets a bad precedent.

-1

If bumps are really that bad, let the moderators handle it.  Putting this discussion in the public arena instead of in PMs is petty and openly hostile.

The behavior I'm responding to is itself a direct response to the new moderation policy.
Bumping in this manner is nothing but a knowing/intentional end-run around that policy.
If you did not see that before I pointed it out to you, then I understand your response.

-t

Nonattender, while I agree that in general bumping isn't a good idea, I am not aware of a moderation policy on this board against bumping.

Could you enlighten me?

Thank you!

--One of the community moderators.

Since no one cleaned out the lobby prior to Ferrix's nomination policy, old posts are left here to fester.  The end-run I was referring to is that, in the absense of being able to directly post something new, all one has to do to make crap float is to bump it up out of the sewer.

Let there be light.

-t

another end-run is take a useful thread and start crapping on it .. for example, who would move this thread here now?

[ira01]

I have updated my OP a bit.  The most significant change is to reflect the current median Lendingstats projected ROI for all "moderately seasoned" Prosper lenders -- as of today, it is 2.50%.  http://www.lendingstats.com/lenders?loanCountFilter=1&loanAgeFilter=3&loanAmountFilter=0&submit=Filter&sort=estimatedROIColored&sortDirection=DESC&pageNum=226