jschlesi Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 Brevity is the soul of wit. Why take 100 characters if 30 will suffice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Monk Fan Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 I lurked here for over a year before even registering. I made sure I understood the community I was joining, and I've attempted to remain respectful of that community since. Because of this, I'm very much in favor of the mods' attempts to curtail the recent swarm of newbies starting threads with impunity on their very first day, duplicating threads, etc. Hell, I've only started seven threads in a year-and-a-half and one of those was a classified listing -- which id just how it should be. To this proposal, however, I find myself opposed. I'd elaborate, but Art has pretty much summarized the reasons in his original post. To me, the drawbacks to this particular remedy simply outweigh the gains. Not to mention the fact that "brevity is the soul of wit," and do we really want soul-less wit on this board? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Taylor Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 I vote no. I think some of the most entertaining posts are quick one liners. My thought, exactly. Would "merge please!" count as 100 characters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wskin44 Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 Sometimes someone posts a well thought out argument, or well researched data, and I just want to recognize their contribution by thanking them. I don't want to waste members' time by writing a long response which doesn't really add to or improve what was already said. I just want to acknowledge a well done piece, hopefully encouraging the writer to post more or others to put more thought and effort into their contributions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 Bubba asked "seriously, does skimming over some short comment really take away from a thread?"Not of its just one little response. But it gets more and more annoying as the number of these short responses on a single thread grows. no offense, but that seems to be more of a personal issue, than a board problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnFoRcEr_uPu Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 To be honest, I kind of like the idea. 100 characters is not much at all, and may force some people to actually explain WHY they are criticizing someone elses POV rather than just saying, "No, you're wrong." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkPSkins Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 You make people type 100 characters and they will, a smiley face and hold down the shift key or any key for that matter for a second. It wont work and you guys probably knew that going in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neophyte Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 I voted yes although I did so because the options where "yes" and "no". I am not sure 100 is the place to start but I am tired of scrolling through page after page of posts with 5 words or less or just smilies (sorry Bubba but that is annoying, big time). I only have so much time during the day to see what is going on here and respond and the constant shoveling of crap is very irritating. In fact, some days I get so bent of shape over the low percentage of meaningful content that I just leave. I long for the good old days and I have only been here 27 months. Pretty sad actually. Add to that the idea that this will help to curb the "post counters" (and we all know we have some here) and think some form of implimentation is a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkPSkins Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 no, you're wrong...................................................................................... The above contains 101 characters and it took me about two seconds longer to type than just the "no, you're wrong" part. Nice concept, but it wont do what you want it to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimm Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 How about limit in The Stadium but exempt in Tailgate? I voted for it because it's not that hard to get 100 characters. I like this idea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neophyte Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 no offense, but that seems to be more of a personal issue, than a board problem. No Bubba, it is not a personal issue. It is one of time. Few of us have the time to spend on this board that you do so we can't afford to spend it digging through mounds of posts that were dashed off faster than I put on my pants and with as little thought. It is annoying and frustrating. To me, internet forums are for discussion and by definition discussion requires thought. Posting 1 to 5 words or just a couple of smilies does not require thought but if enough people do it (and currently there are a lot of them doing it a lot) then it really cuts down on how fast you can find and read the good stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sisko Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 I agree with the overall consensus (as I see it) to leave things as they are. While not seeming overly onerus, such a rule would make necessary simple replies into long exercises in adding enough bogus characters to get up to the limit. This holds true for everything from the cool (adding picture only posts) to the mundane yet useful (bump posts). I agree with the intent but not necessarily the method. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dallsux Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 I vote no also.How about to just open a thread? :logo: In that case, it should be 200...and I agree. That would eliminate some problems. Maybe not all & maybe not all the "target" problems, but I think this is a good idea. All too often, someone new comes in & says something brilliant & original like "Cowboys suck ass" & then when they get a tongue-lashing for starting a thread to say the same thing this site represents, they leave, frustrated that they were not as welcome as they expected. If they had to have 100+ characters in order to start a thread, it would cut down on alot of THOSE kinds of posts. I like that idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeletor The Invincible Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 Not having read everything here, I'm against it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
33 Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 &*%^&*%^&(%^&*reason not to do it^&*^(&*^&*(^* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 No Bubba, it is not a personal issue. It is one of time. Few of us have the time to spend on this board that you do so we can't afford to spend it digging through mounds of posts that were dashed off faster than I put on my pants and with as little thought. It is annoying and frustrating.To me, internet forums are for discussion and by definition discussion requires thought. Posting 1 to 5 words or just a couple of smilies does not require thought but if enough people do it (and currently there are a lot of them doing it a lot) then it really cuts down on how fast you can find and read the good stuff. If you don't have time to scroll through a page to find a long winded response, then how do you have the time to read longer responses, think about it and then respond? yes it is a matter of personal issues, you said so yourself... To me, internet forums are for discussion and by definition discussion requires thought. There isn't that big of a problem, and the ratio of responses is no different than it was a couple of years ago.... just that there are more people posting due to success of the board's popularity. The real issue is many want the board to go back to being a small close knit community, but no amount of regulation will bring back the past. But it can throw a monkey wrench into the smooth flowing enjoyable atmosphere. Let's be honest, the quality of response's are generated by the quality of the thread posted.. or the post being responded too. There is noway to control that, unless you close the board and make it a private, selected members only site, that you hand pick the members who best suit your personal tastes. ES is for the fans of the Redskins, and other teams.... and just like at ball games there are many types of fans present, representing many levels of intelligence, personality, age, and backgrounds. A melting pot of thought and ideas, some good, some bad, just like a real community. Just remember the number of words that are typed, doesn't rate the quality of the post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 30, 2006 Author Share Posted March 30, 2006 You make people type 100 characters and they will, a smiley face and hold down the shift key or any key for that matter for a second. It wont work and you guys probably knew that going in. No, this wouldn't be a problem as I've said because people doing it would just be banned . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monte51Coleman Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 Responses don't ruin good discussions. Good discussions can only take place when there are worthwhile topics to discuss. If one constantly has to 'pan' the first couple of pages to try and find a meaningful 'nugget' to debate it becomes redily apparent that the problem lies not with the responses, in most part, but the thread subjects. It seems like many regard this place with the same respect as they would a mens room wall, believing, in essence, that it is their right to start a thread with whatever idea pops into their minds. Maybe they are right. Only the community, moderators, and administrators can ultimately make that decision. With that said, it is clear to this member that the prevalent problems exist not because of the lack of response control but rests squarely with the lack of thread control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvan1 Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 if this is imposed, it also creates difficulty in such things as answering questions, naming players, or giving brief examples in threads. However, adding the count would make people give more backup for their responses... i.e., if answering who is the best team in the nfl, instead of simply saying "redskins", one would have to add to the conversation by explaining why... which brings me to my proposal--- is it possible to alter thread options so that the poster can specify whether they want 100 characters miniumum as they make the thread? so for those who just want to ask a question, they can get their answer quickly, and for those who want true discussion, not just names of teams or players in a debate, they can ask for an argument. Art? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLEED-B&G Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 I would vote to not change, I don't really post a reply unless I really have something to say anyway but I wouldn't want to discourage anyone from posting. After all it's the offseason and finding good topics to discuss are becoming more and more difficult most times a few words is all that is needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteelerSkins Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 i thik the chatracter count could be upped, but ont too much . . . say 20 characters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donita35 Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 Leave well enough alone. 100 is too much. Perhaps maybe you could think about extending the capacity of the treads if that is an issue. It seems to me that the only issue is the lack of thoughtful discussions, which may not be seen as an issue for some. Additionally, I do not think that increasing the mandatory character count will aid in this because all you would get is more crap because people will have to mumbo jumbo their way to 100 characters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neophyte Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 If you don't have time to scroll through a page to find a long winded response, then how do you have the time to read longer responses, think about it and then respond? If we were talking about one or two instances it would not be a big deal. We aren't though. We are talking about pages on pages of it. Worse, the share volume of the quicky posts with one or two words or a smilie only adds to the number posts that are quality because people get tired of looking through a thread to see if someone already said what they are thinking and so just post their thought without knowing that it has been said 2, 3 or 4 times before. Or worse, they just start a new thread even though their thought has been beat to death in other threads. I am thinking of the rash of Lavar and Ramsey threads with no new ideas at all. Not mention that volume slows servers and swallows bandwidth. Maybe not a lot here but it has to have some effect. There isn't that big of a problem, and the ratio of responses is no different than it was a couple of years ago.... just that there are more people posting due to success of the board's popularity. The real issue is many want the board to go back to being a small close knit community, but no amount of regulation will bring back the past. But it can throw a monkey wrench into the smooth flowing enjoyable atmosphere. I would argue this. When I first came here and lurked for a while there were a bit over 4000 registered users. I don't call that small and close knit. Even then, with that many users, I do not recall there being this many posts that contributed nothing to the discussion. If fact, I remember being impressed with how little of that there was compared to other boards of a similar size I was part of at the time. Let's be honest, the quality of response's are generated by the quality of the thread posted.. or the post being responded too. There is noway to control that, unless you close the board and make it a private, selected members only site, that you hand pick the members who best suit your personal tastes. I disagree with this. Many times here a quaility post will stir a rash of posts that consist in their totality of " " or " :notworthy " or " :applause: " while a post of a questionable nature that should die a nature death and slide off the front page is kept alive with repeated posts of " :bsflag: " and " :pooh: ". And all just because they are easy and quick to do. ES is for the fans of the Redskins, and other teams.... and just like at ball games there are many types of fans present, representing many levels of intelligence, personality, age, and backgrounds. A melting pot of thought and ideas, some good, some bad, just like a real community. Agreed. I just don't view it as an excuse. Just remember the number of words that are typed, doesn't rate the quality of the post. On this we are completely agreed. Length does not equal quality. I am just hoping the requirement will discourage some of the non-quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinSkins Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 No matter what character count you prefer for Extremeskins.com, please click on link below to vote for Marcus for AOL Fan Choice Award! He deserves our support! http://sports.aol.com/nfl/jbawards2006 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McMetal Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 I hate needless monosyllabic babble, but brevity truly is the soul of wit. I don't want to restrict those who, like myself, are able to phrase keen sights concisely. For the record, I still support minimum post counts for starting new threads though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.