But this isn't the same. You logic is sound, but it honestly is different. First, those crimes have victims, or at the very least, have the potential to have victims. These do not have victims in hardly any sense other than just a bad community. Second, those are widely considered bad, this on the other hand has a wide gray area and the rules haven't always been aimed against them. I'll say this, I have no qualms with the rule expect the picture part, but saying its comparable to stealing a TV or putting children in mortal danger is quiet crazy.Rottweiler said:
So, the low post content rule...
- Thread starter OptimisticPessimist
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Saying one word is so dangerous, thank god the moderaters are here to stop us from comiting rampage.Rottweiler said:
This is a forum to discuss things, that one word is part of the discussion and can be totally valid if appropriate.
a warning seems a little harsh to me, why not just block the post off. 'this post was blocked because of low content' and adding that to a 'block count' of 5 before a warning seems fair enough. The picture one is a little odd though, I mean a picture can say a thousand words (that is ofcourse only when you have like a picture if that is not a popular meme picture). A description would sometimes be nice though even if only a single sentence related to said picture. Unless that would mean the forum gets flooded with picture only pony posts (wow, say that one as much and fast as possible)
It's to keep people from getting away with extrememly short posts like "lol", "nope", "yes", and the like. Also so that you don't get just a picture or video with no explanation as to why it was posted(yes a picture is worth a 1000 words, but it isn't always obvious what those words are).
There are times when a one word post is useful. Like if the thread is based around low content posts (The "Each Post must contain a Picture" Thread comes to mind). Hopefully the mods take that into account when they are reviewing a post to see if it should receive some sort of warning.
The only real problems I have with it is that sometimes a short post words much better than a long-winded one and that people will also add something like "random stuff so this post isn't low content" after they post something like "lol". These aren't that bad though and are better than the forum being filled with "lol"s and "no"s everywhere. Sure the Escapist isn't the bastion of Internet Intellect that some people make it out to be, but at least it's a bit more polite and well-kept than other sites out there. That counts for something.
Edit: Course I've never run afoul of this rule because if I'm going to make a post, I'm at least going to make sure that it's worth the effort and thus has more meaning than a simple one word response. It's one of the easiest rules to abide by, so long as you try.
There are times when a one word post is useful. Like if the thread is based around low content posts (The "Each Post must contain a Picture" Thread comes to mind). Hopefully the mods take that into account when they are reviewing a post to see if it should receive some sort of warning.
The only real problems I have with it is that sometimes a short post words much better than a long-winded one and that people will also add something like "random stuff so this post isn't low content" after they post something like "lol". These aren't that bad though and are better than the forum being filled with "lol"s and "no"s everywhere. Sure the Escapist isn't the bastion of Internet Intellect that some people make it out to be, but at least it's a bit more polite and well-kept than other sites out there. That counts for something.
Edit: Course I've never run afoul of this rule because if I'm going to make a post, I'm at least going to make sure that it's worth the effort and thus has more meaning than a simple one word response. It's one of the easiest rules to abide by, so long as you try.
Because it contributes nothing to discussions. If you agree or disagree with something, keep it to yourself unless you have something to say that hasn't been said before. Or elaborate on a previous point.
Forums are a place of discussion. If you simply want to express [dis]approval, just use the 'Like' button on Facebook [or don't], or thumbs-up [or down] a video on YouTube.
Forums are a place of discussion. If you simply want to express [dis]approval, just use the 'Like' button on Facebook [or don't], or thumbs-up [or down] a video on YouTube.
Unfortunately, running this forum has little to do with one's personal sense of humor. There are rules and we all have to follow them. Moderators are subject to the same rules as users.Eri said:
I got a low content post telling off just for quoting someone and saying "For teh lulz" it was relevant 
Do you have mods to mod the mods. Who then mod the other mods who have all the cake?GeorgW said:And I'm sooo tempted to give you a warningNasrin said:
What's your policy on mods moderating admins? I knew Spin's, but what's yours?
It's a damn good rule, it keeps the forum civilised. And as for pictures, we realise that your opinion could be expressed with just a picture, and the problem is not about that. It's that we want your personal opinion using your own words, we don't want a standard file used specifically to help people state simple, common opinions as quickly as possible. They're more than welcome to be used to enhance your point, but not to be the entirety of it.
Don't you remember there is no cake, with other words they are moderators because they have proven they don't need cake.TimeLord said:Do you have mods to mod the mods. Who then mod the other mods who have all the cake?GeorgW said:And I'm sooo tempted to give you a warningNasrin said:
What's your policy on mods moderating admins? I knew Spin's, but what's yours?
It's a damn good rule, it keeps the forum civilised. And as for pictures, we realise that your opinion could be expressed with just a picture, and the problem is not about that. It's that we want your personal opinion using your own words, we don't want a standard file used specifically to help people state simple, common opinions as quickly as possible. They're more than welcome to be used to enhance your point, but not to be the entirety of it.
Even the most robotic, soul crushing entity from the depths of space and the beginning of time needs cake at one point in his/her/it's existence! Or at least a pie shaped like a cake.JochemDude said:Don't you remember there is no cake, with other words they are admins because they have proven they don't need cake.TimeLord said:Do you have mods to mod the mods. Who then mod the other mods who have all the cake?GeorgW said:And I'm sooo tempted to give you a warningNasrin said:
What's your policy on mods moderating admins? I knew Spin's, but what's yours?
It's a damn good rule, it keeps the forum civilised. And as for pictures, we realise that your opinion could be expressed with just a picture, and the problem is not about that. It's that we want your personal opinion using your own words, we don't want a standard file used specifically to help people state simple, common opinions as quickly as possible. They're more than welcome to be used to enhance your point, but not to be the entirety of it.
This...Sassafrass said:
...
...post is to express my agreement with Sassafrass in a more long winded manner than is necessary.
[small]OT: It's a necessary evil but I do feel it could be more lenient in instances where a non-meme image has been used to provide wit or insight. Also, small text is probably more likely to save my butt than Sass's white text, hehe.[/small]
Because, if you're literally going to respond with one word, you're better off not replying at all.
I agree with you, but it depends entirely on the thread. For example I don't usually hand out warnings for low content in joke threads, but instantly in R&P. It's all about context.Snowalker said:While I understand the point on pictures, I think it should reconsidered, or at least be lessened, because I have seen often times where a single picture as a reply is far funnier than a picture and a comment. I mean, sure, it may not add to the discussion value, but if we start sacrificing comedic edge for discussion, well, I might get bored with this place. I do enjoy a good discussion, but what keeps me here is the sense of humor this place has, and if it loses that... well, then the discussion might become too trivial for me to care.GeorgW said:And I'm sooo tempted to give you a warningNasrin said:
What's your policy on mods moderating admins? I knew Spin's, but what's yours?
It's a damn good rule, it keeps the forum civilised. And as for pictures, we realise that your opinion could be expressed with just a picture, and the problem is not about that. It's that we want your personal opinion using your own words, we don't want a standard file used specifically to help people state simple, common opinions as quickly as possible. They're more than welcome to be used to enhance your point, but not to be the entirety of it.
Marking something as 'low content' is not just to make people tack on nonsense to the end of 'lol' in order to make it appear constructive to the discussion; the theory is that you will actually contribute, not change 'lol' to 'lol I was laughing etc. etc.' or 'I quite enjoyed a hearty chuckle from the hilarity of this situation,' but to change 'lol' to something more meaningful--to something which ACTUALLY adds value to the discussion.
An unfortunate side effect of this low-content-pruning is verbatim reiteration, in many cases; just in reading these first two pages of this thread, you can see that many people wrote a few sentences, all of which state (but do not explicate) 'the low content limit is there so you don't just write one-word responses.' I feel that this can be attributed to the declining attention spans of internet users, as discussed in 'Is Google Making Us Stupid' by Nicholas Carr [http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us-stupid/6868/], wherein the author describes how the Internet has had the unfortunate malediction to weaken attention spans. Judging by the deluge of similar responses to this thread, I would suggest that many of those replying did not read what others had to say, and simply contributed their own thoughts. While I believe everyone has a right to his opinion, a discussion gets nowhere if people constantly retread old ground. In a discussion, everything submitted should be relevant and grow upon what exists.
Further, to discuss the 'A picture is worth a thousand words' argument, I submit to you the above example, albeit using a link in lieu of a picture or video. When implemented properly as part of an argument, a picture, video, article, etc. can bolster the argument. When a meme or otherwise simple picture has nothing constructive to add to the argument, it wastes space, proliferating the waning attention span, because people are drawn to the picture before the text, and if everyone just posts pictures, why bother reading the text at all (especially if it contributes nothing to the argument)?
An unfortunate side effect of this low-content-pruning is verbatim reiteration, in many cases; just in reading these first two pages of this thread, you can see that many people wrote a few sentences, all of which state (but do not explicate) 'the low content limit is there so you don't just write one-word responses.' I feel that this can be attributed to the declining attention spans of internet users, as discussed in 'Is Google Making Us Stupid' by Nicholas Carr [http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us-stupid/6868/], wherein the author describes how the Internet has had the unfortunate malediction to weaken attention spans. Judging by the deluge of similar responses to this thread, I would suggest that many of those replying did not read what others had to say, and simply contributed their own thoughts. While I believe everyone has a right to his opinion, a discussion gets nowhere if people constantly retread old ground. In a discussion, everything submitted should be relevant and grow upon what exists.
Further, to discuss the 'A picture is worth a thousand words' argument, I submit to you the above example, albeit using a link in lieu of a picture or video. When implemented properly as part of an argument, a picture, video, article, etc. can bolster the argument. When a meme or otherwise simple picture has nothing constructive to add to the argument, it wastes space, proliferating the waning attention span, because people are drawn to the picture before the text, and if everyone just posts pictures, why bother reading the text at all (especially if it contributes nothing to the argument)?
The admins mods us. If you have a problem with a specific mod, take it up with Nasrin.TimeLord said:Do you have mods to mod the mods. Who then mod the other mods who have all the cake?GeorgW said:And I'm sooo tempted to give you a warningNasrin said:
What's your policy on mods moderating admins? I knew Spin's, but what's yours?
It's a damn good rule, it keeps the forum civilised. And as for pictures, we realise that your opinion could be expressed with just a picture, and the problem is not about that. It's that we want your personal opinion using your own words, we don't want a standard file used specifically to help people state simple, common opinions as quickly as possible. They're more than welcome to be used to enhance your point, but not to be the entirety of it.