New Minimum Character Count For Replies.

reply to post by Smack

---

ermmm....this is the Barbeque.....you WILL BE GRILLED here...but, of course, all content is safe, unless you violate the T&C that includes really, really bad language.

Certainly, I don't have the ability to make the rules....I just understand them.

I see this 'thread' as a way to blow off steam, in a sense. AND, the Owners of this Site have all the rights to manage it as they see fit.

So read and post, responsibly....or don't post at all... Simple decision.

reply to post by cranberrydork

---

Whenever someone would make a single line post, and then they would add "not a one-liner", what they are doing is surpassing the filter, and T&C. It's no different from surpassing the bad language filters.

What you just did, I would consider an attempt at cirumventing the rules.



[edit on 12-4-2009 by 0nce 0nce]

I have one last point to make on this topic. Promise.

I think, like myself, most people don't embrace change. And the owners of this site are keenly aware of this. I suspect what this "change" represents are simply growing pains.

I think most of us would like to at least "believe" we have a say. Whether we do or not. I suspect it is the manner in which this bomb was dropped that we are feeling somewhat blind-sided.

And I once again use an analogy to make my point.

Tina and Nina worked in their father's deli. Customers would always wait in long lines to be served by Tina while Nina's counter was often empty. This continued for months and perplexed their father. He would rotate their stations and the same would occur. Finally one day the father asked how they would satisfy a customers request for a pound of product.

Nina replied she would throw a bunch of meat on the scale and take some off to reach the desired pound.

Tina replied she would continually add, little by little adding until the scale reached a pound.

The point is, a pound is a pound. It all depends on how you feel you've been served.

Regards...KK

I've always wanted to see a system based on member response.

Say your in an interesting thread and someone comes along and says "interesting topic" and that's all they say. The system as it stands now, fellow members can STAR that reply.

What I would like to see is a minus star or whatever, for that reply. If enough minus stars are given, the reply is simply auto removed from the thread. This way members who feel the reply adds nothing to the thread subject have voted. Majority rules, no moderating needed.

Just an idea

And I'm glad "arbitrary and capricious" (edit, MY quote) rules are not found on other sites, It allows more concise discussion. No, I would not like to see an IM Instant Messenger response capability, but I dont need a stranger's "War and Peace" thrust upon me when only a few words may suffice. Some posts are enlightening, but I don't have the time nor inclination to wade though the BS here to look for the pearls. Lets agree to disagree.

[edit on 4/12/09 by scooterstrats]

[edit on 4/12/09 by scooterstrats]

---

---

reply to post by scooterstrats

---

I agree. On many occasions less is more.

Being forced to add more content can sometimes make a powerful statement trite and tedious.

weird

before typing any content it says i can submit reply

whatever

why is that circumventing the rules?

it was precisely the length needed and was right on topic

reply to post by Burginthorn

---

Thats almost like You Tube comments with the negative and positive, thumbs up and thumbs down votes. THAT would be cool to have on ATS.

However, to have a post removed when it gets too negative votes, well, thats not a good idea, because then anything that goes against someones beliefs or view point that could be very valid will be removed.


[edit on 12-4-2009 by 0nce 0nce]

reply to post by cranberrydork

---

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that when you PAD characters to get past the character count, it is considered circumventing the rules.

reply to post by logician magician

---

Your point and purpose being what?

Honestly.

... less than transparent testing of the code? under the Supposed guise of "Wrong thread"? Whoops? etc.




~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
as a Member of these boards

quite typical... given the opportunity and seeming inability to refrain from taking advantage of the same... opportunities to poke

/Member


nonsense

Is this a form of depopulation in hope that many members leave ATS because it is too troublesome to get a simple message across?

I am one of those who like to be short and sweet for the most part. I just don't see the need to rehatch what others members may have already said or to throw in additional words that are not needed to convey my message.

I will abide by the new rule but just wanted to make my opinion known.

reply to post by defcon5

---

I am essentially a newbie that lurked a while off and on. I joined for all the reasons you stated here and I am feeling much of the same disappointment that you mentioned.

I was wondering what happened. Now at least I have an answer.

reply to post by 0nce 0nce

---

thank you

ill excuse your rudeness this time and chalk it up to frustration

but you're right

it doesnt take a rocket scientist

It takes a person with a literary background and some skills at writing, composition, and grammar to understand that insightful, smart, and cogent responses need not be limited to any particular length. Especially when applied to this medium.

In fact, outside of the "column" needs of print media, forcing a writer to pad content simply to fit an editorial template, violates many of the foundational concepts of good writing. Sure, 100 characters is no big deal; I can do that on my hands. Heck, I can produce a couple thousand words on nearly any subject you want, in short order. But who wants to read that kind of wall of text on a forum? Not me.

The point is, a decision has been made that appears to mean, no content of less than 100 characters is worthy of our time and server space.

How capricious is that?

Why not actually create a way for members to USE THEIR POINTS other than some kind of "I have more points than you, ergo, I know what I'm talking about."

reply to post by cranberrydork

---

Obviously, I was wrong, it DOES take a rocket scientist, and you obviously are not one.

The point you are missing about the 100 character limit, is that it is best to save your ideas, and points of view, until you have enough to pass the 100 character limit. For example, if you compressed every single post you made on this thread into ONE post, you would have easily surpassed the character limit.

The problem with most people is that they can't wait to get their last word in, and can't wait to make a point, or tell a dumb joke because they think they are a comedian, so they just rush and post a one-liner. They then wait for someone to reply to them, and they post another one-liner, and it continues like that until you have multiple pages of one-liners. All of that could be avoided if those one-liners actually waited till the time was right, and added all those one-liners into a one-paragraph-er.

Does that make sense to you? Or should I teach you about mathematics, physics, mechanics, and avionics, so that you can become a rocket scientist?

I haven't read the whole thread but I just wanted to say that I am much more irritated by deceitful posting than I am by short posts. The great thing about a one line post is that it is only one line. I suppose it would be even greater if it were no lines long, particularly if it is a pointless post.

At least a pointless one line post has the virtue of being short.

If it is one line of brilliant wit, fabulous. They say that the soul of wit is brevity. In a two hundred character post world, bye bye wit.

Rather than having a post character count, couldn't the whole pointless post issue be taken care of by alerts, plus point docking?

On second thought, I just don't see short posts as being a problem. Most often the content of posts is the problem.

Maybe more monitors are needed?

Incidentally, are monitors paid? ATS is getting big. Ad revenue is there. Possibilities of revenue from content are there. I'm waiting for the first time ATS sues a media production company for theft of a copyrighted idea or for the first big media deal that happens between ATS, a media company and members who generate the ideas on ATS.

We live in interesting times.

You know, I have to say I'm honestly stunned by the responses. Absolutely, completely, gobsmacked stunned... to the point where this is in my top-ten list of surprising outcomes on ATS. And after seven years of some really wild stuff... that's saying a lot.

The imposition of these incredibly minor limitations were initiated as a means to gently remind our members of our desire to focus more on meaningful content than quantity of content.

Yes... there was a synchronization glitch between our servers such that updated code didn't propagate and the character count for quoted replies wasn't computing correctly. My fault for not checking, but that was not the way it was supposed to work.

But I have to tell you... I honestly thought the majority of our members, especially the longer-term members, would have applauded this step. Really. I'm serious.

We get several complaints about 1-liner or trivial posts every day.

We often see longer-term members complaining about an apparent quantity over quality focus (not true).


I spent the better part of yesterday reviewing many popular ATS threads... and there has indeed been a significant growing trend of trivial posts that do little more than say "good post, you're right." And more often than not, such replies are found in large popular or highly-flagged threads.

We have always desired posts of substance, and often remind our members of this and bring it up again when it becomes a problem and have even included this text about the reply form: "Please do not create minimal posts or simple "I agree" posts when replying to threads."


I've seen, in this thread, gripes to the effect of, "other boards don't do that." And generally, yes that's true. But we're not other boards are we? We don't want to be just like any other board... every policy, feature, technology, and requirement initiated over the years has been focused on making ATS better, so that our members may be inspired to contribute their best.


The point is... we constantly consider what we (ATS management) need to do to ensure the content on ATS is as good as it can be... and push our members to consider making it better. With this particular policy of limiting minimal replies, our reminders, warnings, U2U's, threads, links, etc. have not had much (if any) effect of late. As a result, this very-trivial imposition of exceptionally minor minimum contribution serves as a more immediate reminder of our desire for each post to have substance.

That's all it is. And I still remain stunned that efforts focused on solving a common complaint are received this way. No kidding... I really am.

reply to post by SkepticOverlord

---

Personally I welcome this, no-one is taking notice of the single line posts warnings, and on occasion admitedly i have posted a SLP too (although very rarely).
Whats worse though, and i'm seeing alot more of is the one line or NO line threads, which contain a thread title and a video or link with no explanation or effort put into it at all.



[edit on 12-4-2009 by MCoG1980]

Is there a possibility that you are off-track in this situation?

I know I am much more likely to be irritated by posts that are too long or posts consisting of one immense paragraph.

Bottom line, I'm happy to have the outlet for my ideas and will put up with whatever the policy is . . . at least for the moment. My back hasn't met the straw that will break it yet.


======================================================

[edit on 4-14-2009 by William One Sac]