I lean more towards this, and also whether or not they have bothered to set up a forum avatar.Colour-Scientist said:I tend to pay closer attention to a user's join date as opposed to their post count.
I'll get it one day dammit!Soxafloppin said:Some times when i see someone with like 30K+ posts, I be all like "Wow, that guy has posted lots", aside from that. Not really, Though i am proud of my Neo Badge.
Yes my liege.Daystar Clarion said:Silence OP, your post count is lower than mine, therefore not worth my time!
I agree, when I see someone with more than 1000 posts, their words weigh a hell of a lot more than someone with 100 or 200.Soviet Heavy said:Its a funny habit some of us pick up isn't it? We look at a person's post count, and we sometimes makes assumptions based on them. For example, any time I see someone with over Ten Thousand posts, I tend to treat them with more respect, since they must have payed attention to the rules and been reasonable to have lasted that long.
At the same time, I tend to look down on newer posters, since I'm still suspicious of people who might not yet know the rules, or are stealth trolls.
Then there are the regulars with a thousand posts or more, and I equate myself to being on the same level as them.
Does anyone else here do this? If you do, can you think of why we might set up a mental image of a forum hierarchy?
That's a very interesting way of looking at it. I was basing my opinions on how I felt towards a person based on their post count, while your method assumes what sort of posting they actually do. Pretty neat.SillyNilly said:Snip
I judge people with excessively high post counts in a short amount of time. It tends to be with people like that, they want to play "catch up" and be "known". Usually with these motives, their posts tend to be awful.Daystar Clarion said:Nah, I take into consideration the time a user a user joined, more than their post count. I've seen people with 3000 posts but have only been members for like 3 weeks.