Posts by jadefalcon10

Benjamin King2 said:If I were looking for the cheapest 27-inch setup that actually holds its own for both movies and gaming? Honestly, man, I’d probably go with this... So, I was digging through some old tech reviews and stumbled upon this write-up about the LG E2750V monitor. It’s one of those pieces that really makes you feel the passage of time, you know? Like, looking back at these specs feels like looking at an old high school yearbook—everything seemed so cutting-edge back then, but now it’s just... vintage. It’s a 27-inch panel, which honestly sounds massive if you're used to the tiny laptop screens we all lug around these days, but back when this was hitting the shelves, it was a serious piece of gear. It’s got that decent color reproduction they were touting, though compared to what you can grab at Best Buy today, it probably looks a little washed out. Still, there's a certain charm to these older displays. They don't have all the hyper-aggressive blue light filters or the weird ultra-thin bezels of modern stuff; they just *work*. It reminds me of those old desktop setups we used to have in college—clunky power bricks, thick plastic frames, and that specific hum a monitor makes when it's been running for six hours straight while you're grinding through a late-night session of The Sims 3. Everything felt more tangible, less "sleek minimalist" and more "built like a tank." Anyway, if you're hunting through thrift stores or eBay trying to find a budget secondary screen, these old LG units are usually still kicking. Just don't expect them to compete with a high-end Dell setup if you're doing any serious design work. But for a casual setup? Not bad at all. It’s funny how much our standards change, isn't it? One day you're dreaming of a big screen, and the next, you're complaining that your 4K monitor is too heavy. We're impossible.

AOC is honestly kind of garbage. If you're looking at General Electric, the contrast and colors are actually pretty solid, but man, the response time is such a drag. It’s way too slow, so if you're trying to actually game, it's just a terrible choice.

If you're looking at the 24-inch options, that Dell one you sent over is basically just a budget knockoff of the U2410 model. Now, don't get me wrong, the U2410 is an absolute beast—kind of like the gold standard for monitors—but man, it’ll definitely cost you a bit more. $1167Honestly, the cheaper one is just as bad as it looks. Like, if you go bottom-shelf, you're gonna get bottom-shelf quality, you know? The Samsung T24 actually comes with a built-in TV tuner—though I guess that’s only a big deal if you actually sit around watching broadcast TV, right? That's why it's sitting at a higher price point. If you don't care about that, you could probably just grab this model instead: I can't really get into that link—it looks like a broken page or just a dead end from whatever site it came from. It’s like trying to find a specific snack in a massive Walmart only to realize the aisle was remodeled yesterday and everything's gone. If you were trying to show me a specific product or some gear, maybe try grabbing a fresh link or just tell me what it was? I'm all ears.

Honestly, there's a ton of stuff in that 23-inch range, so you could definitely score a decent monitor if you don't mind working on a smaller screen. It’s kind of like trying to find a good used car—you've got way more options to sift through, and if you aren't looking for a massive SUV, you can actually find some really solid gems tucked away in that size. Just depends on whether that screen size feels too cramped for your setup or not.

Thanks for getting back to me so fast. Honestly, I had a hunch those 27'' ones were kind of junk, so I figured it was better to just ask rather than guess.

Man, that one you linked is a bit out of my budget, honestly. I know there's a difference, but still... $83 I mean, looking at this GE one... I don't know, man. It’s alright, but I’ve still got my doubts about it. $83 Too much. Just way too much.

Honestly, I don't even need a TV tuner. I’m such a total noob that I actually had to pull up Google just to figure out what the heck that even was. 🙂🙂🙂So, I’ve been rocking this old 21-inch CRT for, what, like ten years now? Honestly, it’s still holding its own—though sometimes I feel like I have to give it a little tap on the side just to get things moving, you know? Like an old truck that needs a good kick to start up in the winter. But yeah, I think it’s finally time to treat myself to something new. Time to move on from the heavy lifting and grab a modern monitor.

I’m looking to go at least 24 inches on this one. Honestly, I think I'm gonna pull the trigger on that Samsung one you posted the Links for. I gotta give a shoutout to Best Buy, though—everything I’ve ever picked up from them is still running like a champ. My only hang-up is that they tack on an extra 5 to 15% if you use a credit card, which is kind of a bummer. So, I'm leaning towards just grabbing it in person with cash or debit. I haven't actually walked into one of their stores yet, but they're one of those rare spots that lets you stretch payments out over 12 months interest-free. Plus, from what they say on their site, they don't gouge you on the margin if you pay by card. It’s a bit of a toss-up, though, because honestly, paying in installments is pretty much my only way to make this work.

Thanks again for the tip. Seriously, you're a lifesaver.

Hey everyone.

So, I’ve got about $667 to spend and I'm hunting for a new monitor. Mostly just want something solid for bingeing movies, catching shows, or watching the big game. Maybe a little bit of gaming on the side too, nothing crazy. Just looking for some help picking the right one.

I was wondering what you guys think about these two options here link and link.

Also, would love to get your take on these two as well link and link.

The first pair are 27-inchers, while the second set are 24". Thanks a ton for any advice!

mellowraven22 said:It's not true that it's the most read. It's actually pretty much at the bottom of the list when it comes to traffic.

Look, I was just asking for some admin backup, you know? Something that could tell me if I'm being Paranoidan or if there's actually something going on.

You're Paranoidan and there's nothing there😁. Actually, let's be more precise—there's nothing left. The situation is handled. Some crap went down while none of the mods were online, but it's all good now.

granitefox16 said:Exactly. Bottom of the barrel for readership, yet for the last 4 or 5 months, the NFL/fans subforum has had more people online than anything else. So yeah, "bottom of the barrel"... probably just because it was only opened two years ago.

So what, you and your buddy hollowtrucker77 gonna tell me that subforum doesn't matter?
I see someone's out here threatening to shut things down too...

That’s exactly it, and that’s why I asked—what’s the actual issue here? It doesn't make sense to me that the most active part of this whole site is being threatened with extinction just because a few people don't like how someone else is typing or expressing themselves. It feels weird.

I always thought the whole point of an online community was that everyone gets to have their own take on stuff, as long as they play by the rules. But man, I'm starting to realize that's not really how it works for everyone. Some folks get to say way more than the rules should allow, and that creates this huge mess, which leads to all the drama we saw yesterday. Honestly, though, just like in real life, throwing the hammer down with repression isn't going to fix the root of the problem.

If I can offer a bit of advice: maybe tighten up those definitions for "trolling" and "flaming," because right now, they're way too broad. They're so vague that you can basically ban whoever you feel like. Looking at what happened, it's a textbook case of being super strict with the rules for some people, then totally ignoring them when it comes to your buddies.

And then the solution is to just shut everything down? Just sweep it all under the rug, ban a handful of people, and threaten to kill off the fans' section? Either I've lost my mind, or this is hands-down the dumbest way to handle problems on a forum that’s been around for, like, forever...

Look, I’m just gonna say it—I’m asking the forum mods to quit being so hypocritical and two-faced. It’s honestly kind of ridiculous. If we’re following the exact same rulebook used to ban those "users" over on the sports subforum, then it’s only fair that the guy who started this whole thread gets the boot too. You can't have one set of rules for them and a different set for him. Just be consistent, man.
I honestly don't get it—how come nobody was handing out bans back when fans were getting hit with the exact same stuff? It makes zero sense. And don't even get me started on why the trolls, the burner accounts, the insults, and the constant belittling weren't being slapped with red cards and kicked out of the forum back then. Look, at the end of the day, people's lives and the rights of the fans matter just as much as anything else. My parents, my teachers, even my professors always drilled it into my head that we’re all on a level playing field and everyone deserves the same treatment. But man, the older I get, the more I realize that some people definitely act like they're "more equal" than the rest of us.

Mukte Kavga steeleagle70 said:So, I figured I’d start a thread about the massive double standards running rampant in this country. Just one of those things that keeps bugging me lately. It feels like there's always one set of rules for some people and a completely different playbook for everyone else. You know what I mean? Like how you can get grilled for a tiny mistake, but someone else pulls a total stunt and gets a pass. It’s everywhere. Anyway, just wanted to get the ball rolling and see what you guys think about all this hypocrisy.

So, I gotta ask—why are people getting banned or kicked out just for sticking to the topic? It doesn't exactly cross my mind to sit around and debate Tom Horvatinčić or Right to the City. Honestly, we’ve burned through a massive amount of data talking about them, yet it feels like we haven't actually said anything smart.

Look, this whole thread is still active, so why are we even giving these trolls any oxygen? It’s like they’re being fed treats while the people actually trying to have a real conversation get slapped down. Honestly, it makes sense that people are drawing parallels to what went down at the Rose Bowl recently. It’s pretty obvious to anyone watching that there’s a massive double standard here—certain crowds get a free pass for their vandalism while everyone else gets penalized just for speaking up. ☕

So, if Mukte Kavga actually got banned just for calling out all the hypocrisy and double standards running wild on this board—especially with how some of the admins act—then we’ve gotta be consistent, right? By that same logic, Adler needs to catch a ban too. Honestly, looking at what Adler posted, it reads like straight-up flaming and trolling, which is totally against the rules here anyway. Just saying.

Man, talk about being fake. Just total BS.

Basically, "flejmanje" is just a fancy way of saying you're picking a fight online. It’s when someone goes out of their way to write something totally toxic or just straight-up insulting to start an argument. Like, instead of just having a normal conversation, they decide to drop some nasty comment just to get under your skin. It’s all about that unnecessary drama.

just trolling, man.

So, trolling... basically, it’s when someone goes out of their way to poke at you just to get a rise out of you. It's all about baiting people into those long, angry flame wars where everyone starts losing their cool. Honestly, most folks around here agree that kind of behavior is just total trash and nobody wants anything to do with it.

So, I was just looking over the definitions for "flaming" and "trolling" in our FAQ. Honestly? If we’re actually going by those rules, pretty much every single thread in the politics section—and half the other stuff on this wonderful, totally unbiased forum—is basically just one big flame war or a troll fest. It’s kind of wild when you think about it. If the mods are actually gonna follow their own playbook, then it's time to start handing out warnings and bans across the board, not just picking and choosing who gets hit. It should be fair for everyone. And hey, if we’re being super technical, even this little rant of mine probably fits right into your definition of trolling too. Just saying.

hollowtrucker77
Man, Mukte... honestly, they should know better than this. It’s like when a group of people all start moving in the same direction, just flowing together like a single current, and you'd think someone in charge would have a better handle on things. You'd expect more foresight, you know?
Man, even elementary school kids wouldn't swallow that kind of demagoguery—and I'm talking about the kids who aren't exactly the brightest bulbs in the box.

Hey, listen, since I've actually got your undivided attention for a second... does it ever get old? You know, forcing things through sheer willpower, trying to bulldoze through the crowd, only to turn around later and act all surprised—or worse, start whining like nothing happened? It gets exhausting after a while, doesn't it?
Since you can snoop around the forums, you’ve probably noticed how people get themselves all worked up over politics or even just some random thread lately. Honestly, it’s wild seeing folks run around with such... let's call them "distinctive" opinions. It's like everyone's convinced they're the only ones holding the manual for how reality works.
Maybe I'm wrong... but maybe there's something else going on here that we're just totally missing.

Classic move right there. This is just textbook behavior—using pure demagoguery to call out Mukte for being a demagogue while doing the exact same thing himself. It’s honestly a bit dizzying. I’m sitting here feeling pretty confused, though. Are the mods, admins, and super-admins actually allowed to get personal? Like, can they just insult people, belittle them, flame, or troll whenever they feel like it? Or am I just totally out of the loop on some secret set of rules that only applies to the higher-ups? Because based on how things are being defined around here, this guy—and a few others in admin—are pulling stunts that would get any regular user banned in a heartbeat.

My question is pretty straightforward. Does the same rulebook apply to everyone on this forum? Like, are we all playing on a level field, or are some people just "more equal" than others?

mellowraven22
Mukte Kavga
is going to shut down your most popular PDF—the Fans thread.
Just one quick side note—that is nowhere near the truth.

What part isn't true exactly? Is it that the Fans thread isn't actually the most read, or is it that they aren't actually shutting it down?

Look, I really hope nobody takes this as some kind of attack on "Admin" or the "forum hierarchy." I just want us to have a real, honest conversation about the issues here. Burying our heads in the sand isn't going to fix anything, and I've been circling this question for a while now: Are we all treated the same, or are there favorites in the mix?

Thanks in advance!