UG Lab Discussion Resolution

Re:UG Lab Discussion Resolution (Wrongun)

Thu, 21 May 2009 20:33:44 GMT

Sorry should have been clearer with my previous reply.

Basically the rules apply to all UG labs and so no there is not a list of which you can or can no talk about. We are simply locking so information is still there in the archives

Wrongun!

Re:UG Lab Discussion Resolution (Adren)

Tue, 19 May 2009 15:22:35 GMT

Understood, and completely understandable.

Re:UG Lab Discussion Resolution (Wrongun)

Mon, 11 May 2009 18:28:41 GMT

irish fighter

hi just like to know is there an UGL we are not to talk about ??or is there a list somewhere on the site Thanks

none of them

Wrongun!

Re:UG Lab Discussion Resolution (irish fighter)

Sun, 26 Apr 2009 22:00:45 GMT

hi just like to know is there an UGL we are not to talk about ??or is there a list somewhere on the site Thanks

Re:UG Lab Discussion Resolution (PartyBoy)

Mon, 16 Mar 2009 10:47:19 GMT

Can I just ask that longer term members take note again of this thread. It might be understandable that a new member joins up, starts a thread "what is lab x like" having not read this thread. However, longer term members must surely know by now the stance yet still post their thoughts in that thread?! Why is that?

No UG discussion (outside of the exceptions) is permitted, so please respect this until a moderator removes it. Indeed, you could even flag the post as inappropriate the help us!

thanks

Re:UG Lab Discussion Resolution (erekose)

Tue, 10 Mar 2009 17:33:50 GMT

Wrongun

As was debated in the other thread it is certainly not the perfect solution but there just isn't one other than no rules or total ban. Most sites have gone for total ban, other allow sources to advertise so again not really impartial.

This is the best ''happy medium'' but all understand its not perfect

Wrongun!

Just out of curiosity what UK sites have gone for a total ban on UGL discussion? I confess I don't really stray too far from here any more (other than the obvious)

Re:UG Lab Discussion Resolution (gman2004uk)

Tue, 10 Mar 2009 17:32:42 GMT

seems sensible solution.

good work.

Re:UG Lab Discussion Resolution (Wrongun)

Tue, 10 Mar 2009 17:24:53 GMT

As was debated in the other thread it is certainly not the perfect solution but there just isn't one other than no rules or total ban. Most sites have gone for total ban, other allow sources to advertise so again not really impartial.

This is the best ''happy medium'' but all understand its not perfect

Wrongun!

Re:UG Lab Discussion Resolution (redneil75)

Mon, 09 Mar 2009 23:22:53 GMT

also carrier oils will effect different members differently and not all labs use the same carriers for all products. but yes i get the point.

Re:UG Lab Discussion Resolution (JohnOvManchester)

Sun, 08 Mar 2009 20:50:02 GMT

search info when talking about UGL could potentially be out of date... Axio/Syntrop etc

but anyway, lines been drawn now

Re:UG Lab Discussion Resolution (mick_the_brick)

Sun, 08 Mar 2009 19:59:15 GMT

Seems a sensible approach this way IMO...

Search function still needs addressing though.. in the greater scheme of things - not an issue.

Good decision guys :)

Re:UG Lab Discussion Resolution (PartyBoy)

Sun, 08 Mar 2009 09:40:11 GMT

The solution would be to implement the new procedures retrospectively. I don't know about anyone else but I'm not spending hours of my time searching through all historical threads to edit/delete any trace of UG discussion.

I'm sure members can appreciate that data is historical and bear that in mind when making decisions.

Re:UG Lab Discussion Resolution (DeepSquatter)

Sat, 07 Mar 2009 21:56:33 GMT

PartyBoy

"What's the best UG test/tren/var?" - not allowed, please use the search function
"Anyone rate WC/BD etc?" - not allowed
"What were your gains like on (insert UG lab name and/or product name)?" - not allowed

Remember, there is the Search Forum button at the top if you wish to read past posts on a particular lab.

I can see a problem here.

By suggesting the search button you acknowledge the genuine value to members of past discussion on UG labs.
Yet the 'not allowed' stance renders the information 'out of date', historical.
As we know labs can go downhill quick, products that have provided results in the past can stop producing results.
Outdated search results may be misleading.

DS

Re:UG Lab Discussion Resolution (theiopener)

Sat, 07 Mar 2009 16:18:42 GMT

Fair enough PB. Good resolution all round.

Re:UG Lab Discussion Resolution (tomlet1)

Sat, 07 Mar 2009 11:53:14 GMT

sounds good to me

Re:UG Lab Discussion Resolution (leerc)

Sat, 07 Mar 2009 11:48:16 GMT

seems a fair solution to me

Re:UG Lab Discussion Resolution (dazc)

Sat, 07 Mar 2009 10:43:37 GMT

looks a very good, well thought out solution to me.

thanks to the mods and board owners for keeping some ug lab discussion on the table.

daz

Re:UG Lab Discussion Resolution (alex.p)

Sat, 07 Mar 2009 10:08:16 GMT

Sounds fair enough to me..Some of the topics were getting a bit out of hand popping up every day - search funtion seems ok to me atm!

Would something like "has anyone had any problems with UG lab X/Y/Z" be allowed PB? Just with new labs popping up every now and again people might wish to know if anyone else has run with/without issues

Re:UG Lab Discussion Resolution (PartyBoy)

Sat, 07 Mar 2009 09:50:24 GMT

I'm sure admin haven't forgotten about any search feature issues. In fairness though, I have just run a search for 2 different UG labs and was presented with multiple threads to view.

Re:UG Lab Discussion Resolution (theiopener)

Sat, 07 Mar 2009 09:42:45 GMT

I would like to use the search function, it still isnt fully operational yet.

What do you suggest?