So, the low post content rule...
- Thread starter OptimisticPessimist
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I don't believe that typing with good form and correct spelling you improve your knowledge of your language, so it's not more positive than by using "txt speech".Snowalker said:
(Or more simply: I disagree)
__________________
(Imo, you improve your knowledge of whatever language by exposure to new words and syntax, not by being fastidious in dotting your "i"'s and crossing your "t"'s) <--actual new content
I dislike the way the rule is applied because I disagree with their definition of "content", which seems to be judged largely on word count.
While I agree with this sentiment, how best to be exposed to new words than be being around pretentious assholes that like to show off their knowledge every-time they turn around? And that the only way to become accepted in this society is to dot your "i"'s and cross your "t" in a fastidious manner.Dags90 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.
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.
Because it comes across as lazy and contributes practically nothing to a topic if you just post a single word or a picture with no text.
If you want to express your opinion on something, the least you can do is put some effort into it.
If you want to express your opinion on something, the least you can do is put some effort into it.
It's intended to give grounds to suspend people who just post pictures as responses with no words.
The vague and broad wording in it(and pretty much all the rules) allows you to stretch it to any post that doesn't add content to the thread.
Yeah we're actually not even supposed to post to answer questions, last I read. Supposed to be done through PMs. I dunno what anyone would talk about though. A million one post threads and that's it.
The vague and broad wording in it(and pretty much all the rules) allows you to stretch it to any post that doesn't add content to the thread.
Yeah we're actually not even supposed to post to answer questions, last I read. Supposed to be done through PMs. I dunno what anyone would talk about though. A million one post threads and that's it.
That stuff he said.maddawg IAJI said:
But yeah, it's there to stop the one word answers that would otherwise fill this forum. It could also have a secondary purpose of stopping people spamming one or two word posts to boost their post counts. And now, I really hope that the Mods notice I've written this in white text as if not, I'm getting a warning. XD
Why is it everyone thinks that breaking a rule 'as a joke' somehow equates to 'not breaking the rules'?
Rule: No one or two word posts. Final say is up to the Moderators.
Poster: "Lol"
Mod: "Warning."
Poster: "How could you not see that my previous post was a deeply satirical comment on the focus of the forum, and dare give me a warning!"
Mod: "Does the listed rule say 'except as a joke or satirical comment on society'? No? Then receive the consequences of breaking the rules. Your reasons for doing so aren't important."
I don't get it. Have you tried this theory in other circumstances? "I was driving 90 mph in a 20 mph School Zone as a political statement! How dare the police ticket me for speeding!"
"I bashed in a store window with a cinderblock and stole a TV, but I did it as a satirical comment on the stereotype of minorities stealing entertainment items, and therefore should not be liable to legal prosecution!"
Rule: No one or two word posts. Final say is up to the Moderators.
Poster: "Lol"
Mod: "Warning."
Poster: "How could you not see that my previous post was a deeply satirical comment on the focus of the forum, and dare give me a warning!"
Mod: "Does the listed rule say 'except as a joke or satirical comment on society'? No? Then receive the consequences of breaking the rules. Your reasons for doing so aren't important."
I don't get it. Have you tried this theory in other circumstances? "I was driving 90 mph in a 20 mph School Zone as a political statement! How dare the police ticket me for speeding!"
"I bashed in a store window with a cinderblock and stole a TV, but I did it as a satirical comment on the stereotype of minorities stealing entertainment items, and therefore should not be liable to legal prosecution!"
Sometimes they add levity, and I'd like to see the evidence that really short posts somehow take up a noticeable amount of resources to make banning them worth while.Furioso said:
What this ultimately prevents is enormous spam threads made up entirely of one-word posts. But they can't just ban the ABUSE, no, they have to ban the thing which could *theoretically* be abused.
Its funny because that guy got a warning.Snowalker said:JoshGod said:
Its so this forum doesn't become 4chan where no real discussion is held and its basically just one big group txt message fiasco.
OT: I find it wrong, most of the times it ends up not adding anything to the conversation.
Ex: Original post: "lol"
Redefined post: "lol, I laughed so hard at this, the face is so epic"
Yeah, why is there a need to say more crap that end up being the same, the idea is perfectly transmited with the "lol".