Posts by graniteridge6

Matthew Anderson said:The Cardboard penalty was handed out simply because he didn't bother to actually read the rules—there’s no hidden catch or conspiracy here.

To be perfectly honest, I have never sat down and read the full set of Lies regulations. 😁
I tend to glance at them when they pop up—usually irrelevant to the topic at hand—but I felt the need to mention it. 😁

At any rate, I am aware that his actions technically violate a rule, which leads me to believe that the policy itself should be amended. Not by deleting posts, mind you, but by replacing deletions with a Cardboard warning.

Because, frankly, the current way is just nonsensical.

And I refuse to go on a long-winded rant again about "post quality"—specifically those instances where someone drops a few sentences under an emoji that offer absolutely zero more substance than the icon itself.

That is just my take on it—and look, I'm not suggesting this forum should be a sanctuary where everyone's opinion is treated as gospel, but once a topic has been opened, I feel entitled to weigh in. 😛

Matthew Anderson said:It would be nice if an occasional "I agree" didn't require quoting an entire novel—or, conversely, why we can't just quote the whole thing using 🙂.

Well, I'm with you on that. 😬

That’s my point—not every "I agree" is created equal, and those replies consisting of nothing but a single emoji? That’s basically automated spam.

I realize this is a bit of a slippery slope—where does the line get drawn regarding what he gets to leave up versus what I don't?—but at least then there could be some consistency with the Cardboard pile-ups; things could actually be deleted properly.

Take, for instance—I nearly died laughing at that post by Million and those twins 🤣. If I write, "This is gold!" and add some emojis, that's a perfectly fine post. But if I had posted *only* the emojis, the sentiment remains identical, yet according to the rulebook, it would get thrown into the Cardboard bin. That part is what escapes me.
Those of us who have been around here for a while—the veterans, so to speak—already know exactly how to phrase things to avoid getting wiped or sent to the Cardboard bin, but it honestly feels a bit unfair when you see someone get flagged just because they haven't mastered the "unspoken rules."

What I mean is—an emoji post followed by a bit of text? That passes. I'm not just talking about your PDF specifically.

People love to dress up a simple "I agree" in all sorts of fancy linguistic packaging—as if adding more syllables somehow makes the sentiment more constructive—but let's be honest, it’s just fluff. 🤷

There are moments when the only response I actually feel like typing is a blunt "I agree." 🤷

If the rules are going to be this rigid, then at least get rid of the whole Cardboard warning system for low-effort posts.
Because, in my estimation, the sheer amount of effort a moderator has to expend to issue a Cardboard for a post like that is roughly equal to the effort it takes to simply hit delete—especially when we're talking about those digital PDF logs where everything gets documented.

I’m certainly no culinary expert—that’s hardly my field—but I simply had to weigh in here because I’ve been arguing for a change in this specific area for quite some time now.

The current situation is rather absurd: if you post nothing but a smiley face, most moderators will just scrub your comment entirely—and in the best-case scenario, you might even end up with a Cardboard warning (much like on Reddit, which happens to be my usual haunt).
On the other hand, if you pair that same smiley with a little note—something like, "Just checking in, since I can't just leave a single emoji"—then suddenly it’s perfectly acceptable (as if adding a few unnecessary words makes it any more constructive than the icon itself). 🤷

Now, don't get me wrong—I’m not suggesting we should encourage a tidal wave of meaningless, random emojis cluttering the boards—but I do believe the way this is handled needs a complete overhaul.

We really ought to slap a disclaimer on this thread—basically a "proceed at your own risk" notice—to warn anyone prone to seizures or epilepsy to steer clear, for instance 🤣

Austin Harris8 said:—which, if we’re being honest—was actually one of the main arguments used to support Black Velvet.

The crux of the matter, however, is that the value Black Velvet brought to these debates was validated by a significant number of people on Reddit—not just by the group itself. 🤣

Austin Harris8 said:It wasn't like that before—which, honestly, was the whole reason they slapped a permanent ban on VB.

Look, I’ve got zero issue with anyone getting banned—rules are rules—but I just want to point out that VB didn't lose her perm status solely because of what you're claiming. Or, at least, not *exclusively*. The admins haven't gone on record anywhere stating that was their specific motivation for pulling her perm.😉

Daniel Ward87 said:I suppose I’m the one to blame here—lately, I’ve been pulling those grueling 12-hour shifts at the office, basically working from 9 to 9, so I haven't had much time to keep up with the Prime Minister's updates or the admin logs.

The ban will be lifted soon enough.

👋👋👋👋👋

silentraven18 said:While I was checking out some venues and restaurants the other day, I overheard owners at two different spots mentioning that the Saxovac crew has started getting a bit sloppy lately. Apparently, they tend to get a little too rowdy at weddings; someone mentioned that on two separate occasions, one of the singers/musicians actually walked off the wedding entirely to head into town for a bit and then came back...
I first heard them about two years ago, and then again last year when we were part of the wedding party... To me, they seemed perfectly fine
. A dear friend of mine was at a wedding they played a couple of weeks ago (on a Friday) and said they were just mediocre—especially compared to how they used to be. Then, on Saturday, a buddy of his went to another wedding they played (he was actually with us at our wedding where they played too), and he said they were a complete disaster—like, they didn't handle the gig well at all
.
This really caught me off guard, given my experience with them. I guess everyone sees things differently and has their own tastes, so I don't know...

Look, at the end of the day, they’re people too—plus, a whole lot of variables have to align perfectly for a wedding to be truly great.
Take my friend’s wedding, for example; they had this band that is usually top-tier, but for me, it was pretty mediocre (way too many slow songs and a few other gripes), and then my friend explained that they specifically wanted 🤷
It isn't solely down to the band, either; so much depends on the overall atmosphere of the reception, which reflects off the guests onto the band and vice versa. No one can guarantee perfection, but it's the guests who ultimately set the mood—all those couples who rely entirely on the band to carry the energy often find things don't turn out quite how they imagined.

That’s actually what the photographers told us during our planning meeting—that the issue is most people don't see the behind-the-scenes mechanics of a wedding. They don't know what the couple was actually looking for, what kind of personalities the bride and groom have, or realize that every guest is essentially a "mirror" of the wedding itself; so you'll have certain groups absolutely killing it, while in others, you'll be left wondering, "wtf?"

Nicole Garcia33 said:I’m with you—if she’s the one who used to go by Black Velvet along with some random numbers, then yeah, that sounds right.
Back when I first started hanging out on these boards, we actually bumped heads a bit, but honestly? She’s a good person...👍

Yeah, yeah, that’s definitely her. 🙂

Personally speaking, she’s one of the more high-quality contributors here—one of the real deal—and it’s a genuine shame to see her facing a ban. If I had to guess, I suspect she actually asked for the ban herself—she isn't exactly the type to go around collecting trouble 😁—and I felt terrible seeing her account turn gray.
If there is any silver lining to be found, it's that her status changed just before the new rules kicked in. 🙂🙂🙂

Signature. 🎉🎉🎉

crimsonpuma22 said:Hey everyone... I'm officially in wedding planning mode with my fiancé, and honestly, we're losing our minds a little bit over all the details. :-)

Can anyone who got married this year or last tell me if BlackRock bands are still holding up in terms of quality? Also, if you wouldn't mind sending me a DM with what they charged you, I’d really appreciate it—I’m trying to make sure I don't get absolutely ripped off.

🙂

I'm also looking for photographer recommendations in the Chicago area or nearby. It seems like everyone raves about Artis, saying they're amazing, but does anyone know if Focus Studio out in the suburbs is actually any good? I checked out their portfolio and the work looks pretty solid. If anyone knows their rates, please shoot me a private message.

Thanks in advance for the help!

BlackRock went for $1,500 (for now 😁), and the latest news is they recently started looking for a female vocalist—though I'm not entirely sure if they've found her yet—so they might be an even "upgraded" version soon 🙂. They're playing mine in a year, but honestly, I didn't have to think twice once I heard them; they were exactly what we both were hunting for. 👍

driftingjackal9 said:Does anyone actually know what the total comes out to for RCA Records and Taylor Swift?🙂

Taylor Swift $2233 Photography—and honestly, just a quick note of thanks for everything—plus a few thoughts... $2.25/komad).
There’s this one cameraman they always suggest—the guy they swear by because he’s basically a permanent fixture on their sets—and honestly, he’s just... well, he's that guy. $1000 One camera? That’ll run you about $4,500—but if you decide to go with two, we're looking at a different ballpark entirely.

I can't quite recall the exact details regarding RCA Records—honestly, my memory is a bit foggy on that specific point—so I won't bother getting into the weeds of it here. 🙂

Just to be clear—Taylor Swift is going to be taking my photos, which is why I’m so deep in the weeds with these details—I am definitely not some official spokesperson or anything like that. 🤣 )

jadeotter10 said:Look, I can definitely give you a tip on photographers. Leon production is fine, but man, they charge A LOT OF MONEY! Personally, I think they're totally overpriced... I got married on May 11th and used STUDIO 69 from El Paso, and let me tell you—the photos are AMAZING! I am beyond happy. The crew was totally in sync and super relaxed. I think the most important thing for any bride is having as little stress as possible on her big day!
Here is the link to their page if you're on Facebook 😁

https://www.facebook.com/stu69dio?fref=ts

btw. here are my fiancé and I in our cover photos 🙂

Now, from some rather reliable sources, I've heard whispers that the folks at 69 won't be booking weddings for the upcoming year unless they already know the clients—they apparently have some other projects lined up (but definitely double-check that, just in case it's a false rumor 🙂 ))

You should also check out Artistic; in my opinion, they are easily the highest quality pros in the Midwest 😉 (I've seen several full albums they've produced, and those girls were born for this—they have such a keen eye for detail, a true instinct for photography)

As for the music, my absolute favorites have to be Sax-ovac—from the moment I first heard them, I knew they’d be playing at my wedding too (they’re the group from VK)

People are inherently impossible to please. You could hand-deliver perfection to every single person on the planet, one by one, and they'd still find something to gripe about.

Dealing with people—that’s the real grind. 😢

Look, I’m not suggesting there’s some grand, shadowy conspiracy at play here 🤣 (though I’m fully aware there are plenty of folks out there who would swear it is 😁 ).
And while I get that, in principle, it's much easier to just hit delete than to actually "deal" with the fallout of certain posts—sometimes, though, people just need to sit with the consequences for a moment. 😬

(By the way, I honestly have no idea what the PDF you moderate looks like—I don't venture over there 😁 because I wouldn't want you thinking these comments are directed at your own entries 🙂 )

Take the Reddit community where I’m most active—I think they handle things quite elegantly, if I do say so myself 😁 . You get those controversial statements popping up here and there, and certain people just can't help but latch onto them. Usually, the mods let it breathe for a second—maybe hand out a warning or two. But if the debate starts veering off into dangerous territory, you get that classic moderator nudge: "Hey, if this keeps going this way, expect warnings, bans, or even deleted posts, depending on how messy things get." If someone ignores that and keeps pushing? Then the posts get nuked. Personally, I find that approach perfectly reasonable—not deleting everything instantly is key. After all, sometimes the reactions to a particularly stupid comment are actually constructive; things don't always have to descend into total chaos immediately. 😁
Sometimes, entirely new discussion threads have even been sparked that way. 🙂

(Since I’m already typing away, I might as well offer a tiny bit of critique regarding the moderation on my main subreddit. I KNOW the rule is that posts containing nothing but emojis get a warning, but in my opinion, that’s a bit overkill. I’d just delete them. Most people don't even realize they're going to get flagged—I know this firsthand because when I’m given permission to send users a DM asking them to edit their posts so they don't get penalized once the mods spot them, people actually thank me for the heads-up 😬. Look, rules are rules, but I really don't feel like an emoji-only post is a punishable offense worthy of a strike—it seems like a lot of other subreddits don't even bother sanctioning that. Just a suggestion 🙂 )

Brandon Lopez6 said:Honestly, a permanent ban is the only thing I’m actually "afraid" of. That’s the ultimate penalty for me.
So far, I haven't had any of my posts deleted—not that I’ve ever written anything so legendary that I’d think, "Man, this belongs in a museum, or maybe pinned as a site-wide announcement because it's just that good." 🤷

I’ve been suspended once, I think 🤔. It wasn't exactly a tragedy; you just sit back, lurk for three days without posting, and then you're back in the game. A temporary timeout is one thing, but a permaban? Being locked out from commenting for six months or forever? That's different. I’d probably be bummed about not swapping emails with certain people since most of our chats happen in DMs, and then I'd have to deal with the hassle of making a burner account just to reach out. And knowing how this place works, they'd probably sniff out the clone and... yeah, forget it. I'm not looking to appeal a permanent ban anytime soon. 😬

Most of the time, when I get flagged, I know I earned it. Usually, after a post gets nuked, I’m just sitting there waiting for the DM notification to hit. 😬But sometimes, the worst part isn't even the penalty itself—it's the injustice of it. It bugs me way more when the person who baited me walks away scot-free while I’m the one getting the strike. Getting penalized while the instigator stays clean? That’s what really sends my blood pressure through the roof. 🙂

I didn't vote in that poll above because none of those options really qualify as the "worst" punishment to me. To be real, all of that is just part of life on an online community. It’s like being in school—some kids got failing grades, some got kicked out of class, some even caught a slap from the teacher. Everyone experiences it differently; some go through the whole gauntlet, some only half, and some stay totally untouched. But honestly, I think users who have never even seen a single warning are a pretty rare breed. 😬

🙂🙂🙂🙂 😬

On a separate note—and I find myself nodding along here—I completely agree regarding the deletion of posts.
I’m not even talking about my own content; nothing substantial of mine has ever been scrubbed, mostly just some off-topic ramblings 😁 which, frankly, I don't mind being cleared away—you know, the stuff consisting of a lone smiley face or a sentence that adds absolutely zero value to the discussion. But deleting insults, trolling, or similar nonsense? That feels counterproductive. Those should stay right there in the thread alongside an obvious warning, and then we move on. It serves a purpose—letting people see exactly how (or how not) a certain individual chooses to reason.
On the specific message boards where I’m most active, they actually follow through with not deleting things; however, I’ve noticed that on many other forums—the ones I just browse occasionally—so much gets wiped out that I often miss half the actual debate.
Why delete someone's stupidity or sheer rudeness? Let them be visible. 🎉

We aren't planning on doing any of that either—honestly, I can’t even remember the last time we attended a wedding where people were actually handing out gifts like that. At most, maybe we'll pass whatever leftovers we have to some close family the following day.

Daniel Smith8 said:If you ask me, that’s more than enough.

Thanks, 😍