Poll: Do you judge peoples comments based on their total number of posts?
- Thread starter Ix Rebound
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Not really, although it's definitely more likely that I'll notice them if they've been around for longer and posting regularly. That may mean I read their post more carefully.
Anyone with under 50 posts I generally tend to ignore, as odds are they're a spambot.
Anyone with under 50 posts I generally tend to ignore, as odds are they're a spambot.
Only indirectly; If people are more visible by having a large post count they develop a certain reputation in my mind, pertaining to their viewpoints and the likelihood of the prospect of me reading a well thought out and worthwhile post. The common obnoxious first-time poster who earns himself several warnings with him/hers first posts is, of course, an exception to said rule.
Not in the slightest unless they've got something like under 10 and they made a controversial thread.
I do tend to lend a little more weight to folks who have an avatar though.
I do tend to lend a little more weight to folks who have an avatar though.
Less than 100 posts, anything stupid or against forum rules I ignore since they may still be getting used to the Escapist vibe. After that, they should know better.
Otherwise, no. I judge posts for their content.
Otherwise, no. I judge posts for their content.
Though I'd like to say no, I will have to admit that I look at the posts of those with a 4 or 5 digit post count with a little more respect. It at least shows that they're decent folks, not having been banned despite their post count. In the same way that people associate age with wisdom (often falsely), a high post count acts as some sort of subconscious badge of merit.
No. Sometimes people with just a couple posts actually have something interesting to say and people with 20000 are just spouting one generic post after another or are just pandering to one another. Or it could be the other way around. It really doesn't matter. Hell, I rarely even look at post counts. Really not interested in it.
User Groups. The chat counts toward forum post count.tricky-crazy said:
Some people just post in a lot of threads, too, or get into a large number of discussions/debates.
About a year ago or so there was a user named Karutomaru who always made nonsensical threads that quickly derailed and usually went on for another ten pages before getting locked, those were pretty good threads for bumping up post count too.
OT: Nope, though I tend to recognize the ones with 1000-2000+ posts more easily by virtue of having seen them more often.
Depends on the site and on the poster. Sometimes the poster has a long post-history of being rather biased on particular subjects. Sometimes I see the poster and don't bother reading their reply because I will know their response.
Other times I enjoy reading their reply. Depends on the person.
Other times I enjoy reading their reply. Depends on the person.
Yes and no, I do up to a certain point.
For example from 0-1,000 posts I generally tend to take people's posts with a grain of salt because they usually tend range from "meh" to bad; chalk it up to a teething phase/weening phase for new people.
But from 1,000+ I don't differentiate because even though some people will be in the double digit thousands, a good chunk of those posts usually come from user groups....some of which are really glorified chat rooms that just rank up the post count.
For example from 0-1,000 posts I generally tend to take people's posts with a grain of salt because they usually tend range from "meh" to bad; chalk it up to a teething phase/weening phase for new people.
But from 1,000+ I don't differentiate because even though some people will be in the double digit thousands, a good chunk of those posts usually come from user groups....some of which are really glorified chat rooms that just rank up the post count.
Yes.
I take the Sine of the Square Root of the largest Prime Divisor of the total number of posts.
If it's positive the poster is right. If it's above 0.9 he's a freaking genius.
If it's negative the poster is wrong. If it's below -0.9 he's a freaking idiot.
Which incidentally means that this post is currently near genius level with a 0.80966635472. This will however fluctuate as I make more posts. But right now my system is clearly the system to use.
I take the Sine of the Square Root of the largest Prime Divisor of the total number of posts.
If it's positive the poster is right. If it's above 0.9 he's a freaking genius.
If it's negative the poster is wrong. If it's below -0.9 he's a freaking idiot.
Which incidentally means that this post is currently near genius level with a 0.80966635472. This will however fluctuate as I make more posts. But right now my system is clearly the system to use.
No lol, Although it's sometimes clear who lives under a bridge from their post count/subjects commented on.
Nope. Outside of single digit posters who don't use avatars and make rant/controversy threads, I don't even really notice.
On the other hand, I do tend to pay closer attention to the regulars; it's not so much their post counts as it is how often I see them. After a while that sorta gives some weight to they say, atleast subconsiously for me anyway.
On the other hand, I do tend to pay closer attention to the regulars; it's not so much their post counts as it is how often I see them. After a while that sorta gives some weight to they say, atleast subconsiously for me anyway.
No, a member may had something insightful, witty, funny or deep to post which he or she just happen to sign up or just don't post alot on here.
I'm in the same boat as you (Been here about as long and haven't reached 1000 yet). I hate when people hold my post count against me, especially if they haven't even been here that long. I don't post much by nature. If I have nothing of value to add, I won't say anything.tricky-crazy said: