Return to Answer

added 140 characters in body

Source Link

edited Oct 23, 2015 at 8:11

I've rarely seen more than 10 people active in it at a time. Splitting anything with such a low amount of traffic is pointless.

It might make sense if people were trying to discuss topics but too many folks talk about their cats and tv shows - but thats not the case.

I see it as over-zelous move.

If you force everybody out, you'll have 1 empty room and off-topic will again start spilling between one way or the other.

Grass roots?! Get serious he is not trying to overthrow the government here. Just fussing about a room usage vs NAME that is not being 100% ocd certified for the content that flows through.

I certainly don't see the main contributors of the room in question having any complaint about it. They respond to people with questions - right on point, and talk about gamey stuff to fill the gaps.

"There are other rooms, with 80 users currently talking in 52 rooms."

What do you think maybe we should get each person a room right?

I've rarely seen more than 10 people active in it at a time. Splitting anything with such a low amount of traffic is pointless.

It might make sense if people were trying to discuss topics but too many folks talk about their cats and tv shows - but thats not the case.

I see it as over-zelous move.

If you force everybody out, you'll have 1 empty room and off-topic will again start spilling between one way or the other.

Grass roots?! Get serious he is not trying to overthrow the government here. Just fussing about a room usage vs NAME that is not being 100% ocd certified for the content that flows through.

I certainly don't see the main contributors of the room in question having any complaint about it. They respond to people with questions - right on point, and talk about gamey stuff to fill the gaps.

I've rarely seen more than 10 people active in it at a time. Splitting anything with such a low amount of traffic is pointless.

It might make sense if people were trying to discuss topics but too many folks talk about their cats and tv shows - but thats not the case.

I see it as over-zelous move.

If you force everybody out, you'll have 1 empty room and off-topic will again start spilling between one way or the other.

Grass roots?! Get serious he is not trying to overthrow the government here. Just fussing about a room usage vs NAME that is not being 100% ocd certified for the content that flows through.

I certainly don't see the main contributors of the room in question having any complaint about it. They respond to people with questions - right on point, and talk about gamey stuff to fill the gaps.

"There are other rooms, with 80 users currently talking in 52 rooms."

What do you think maybe we should get each person a room right?

Source Link

created Oct 22, 2015 at 10:30

helena4

I've rarely seen more than 10 people active in it at a time. Splitting anything with such a low amount of traffic is pointless.

It might make sense if people were trying to discuss topics but too many folks talk about their cats and tv shows - but thats not the case.

I see it as over-zelous move.

If you force everybody out, you'll have 1 empty room and off-topic will again start spilling between one way or the other.

Grass roots?! Get serious he is not trying to overthrow the government here. Just fussing about a room usage vs NAME that is not being 100% ocd certified for the content that flows through.

I certainly don't see the main contributors of the room in question having any complaint about it. They respond to people with questions - right on point, and talk about gamey stuff to fill the gaps.