New Minimum Character Count For Replies.

Originally posted by blupblup
reply to post by ArMaP

 

Well, you certainly know your stuff mate.
I know it's frustrating for sure.

Hopefully the kinks will be ironed out.

I'm sure Springer or S.O. will be along with an explanation before too long

Forget ironing out the kinks, the whole idea should be scrapped.
Some endeavors are just not worth the effort. This is one.

I tried and apparently a POEM has to be 200 characters as well.

135 more characters to finish this thought. I DO NOT think this law should apply to the writers forum. Seems unfair to restrict the writing.

Ok to submit

reply to post by GENERAL EYES


We all agree that the me tooers and the one liners that contribute nothing to the tread as useless. Myself and others have started threads about these one liners doing nothing but making them look silly. The problem is not everybody is going to fill their replies with fluff to meet this new requirement.

I would rather read a one or two line post that contributes to the discussion. If the content is good it doesn't matter how many words it takes to get the point across.

While I do attest to the reason this is being implemented and I will admit that I have used one liners myself to get my point across or when I am just enjoying a good humor post. I do have to say that you do not need this rule. This is what you have moderators for. They are here to enforce the forum's laws, if you have having trouble doing so why not find a few new, very active moderators to help curve the forums of one liners.

Enforcement of the laws strictly causes crime to lower.

I also do not like how I am afraid to post now thinking I will get a warning just for offering my opinion...

While I certainly realize the need to maintain the high standards here on ATS, my initial reaction is mixed. Thus far, I think the mods have been quite lenient and fair regarding the existing policy. I realize we want to avoid the "ditto" short, snarky quips and replies that plaque other sites but think this may encourage rambling, useless verbiage.

Posters avert the 2nd line rule frequently in clever and not so clever ways. I am sure I do. But sometimes a well crafted, succinct reply does suffice.

In closing I am reminded of a short story. When challenged to write a novel in 6 words or less, Ernest Hemingway obliged with:

For Sale. Baby shoes. Never used.

I rest my case.

Regards....KK

[edit on 12-4-2009 by kinda kurious]

I really don't buy this either.

I'm known for making long-winded posts and elaborating extensively on whatever I say but every now and then, you come across moments when you can express your opinion on an issue or make a retort to a particularly ignorant/far-flung statement for example, with just a few words.

Like SO said, quality over quantity always triumphs and this kind of contradicts the purpose of that.

reply to post by schrodingers dog


I know that I will get used to it, after all, when I joined back in 2004, I was thinking I would make just a handful of posts each month, at most, and now here I am with almost 7,000 posts (#81 on the most posts made chart, and climbing ).

The only problem I have with this new system is that it looks, as we say in Portugal, "made over the knee", in a hurry and without enough testing, because all these bugs are bugs that would not pass a test (as we can see) and would have resulted in a re-making of the code or even a re-thinking of the system (that I think it's the best solution).

So, let's just wait some more and see what happens.

reply to post by ArMaP


1. Thanks, the refresh worked for me.
2. I agree. There should be some type of BETA TESTING area.

Hopefully the site owners will temporarily remove this from main stream posting until the bugs can be worked out.

Eh, I don't know.


Just about all of my posts are in the introduction forum or answering other member's questions. So since both of those aren't usually that many characters, and I can't really stretch them out...if you need help...figure it out yourself. Use the search button.

So, the minimum is 200! Thats alot for a reply!!!

Just a basic poor program design as it relies on the user not changing variable data passed to him.

Guess this supports the theory of program flaws allowed the Whisper in the Dark episode to occur instead of a real event.

Culling the members.

I would be interested in the post stats after this and other recent rule implementations.

Sure quality over quantity, but that should apply to individual posts as well.

I have noticed, have any mods/admins weighed in on this yet?

Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

That simple statement speaks volumes and can sum up a whole discussion. I personally tire from overly wordy long winded posts. Get to the point and move on.

The history of man is a history of rule or ambition to rule. It is not, as Marx claimed, a history of constant class struggle between bourgeoisie and proletariat, even though class struggle may be derived from the fundamental division of society into “rulers” and “ruled.” An important part of this history is the continuous “race to the top” among self-centered power seekers, trying to gather as large a number of subjects as possible to rule.

As is shown by Lord Acton’s famous words of wisdom that “power corrupts,” what characterizes the history of man is the corrupted leaders blinded by their power and might. Throughout history, monarchs, religious and ideological leaders, as well as elected presidents go crazy. The French king Louis’ XIV claim “L’Etat, c’est moi” (I am the State) is typical to the leaders then and now.

Power does corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Lord Acton did not, however, identify the meaning of power and corruption fully; his “truth” is only a half truth.

Great men and women coming to power may use it wisely, and bring peace and prosperity to the land as in the Disney sagas. At least for a very short while; the real kings and queens of history have truly been tyrants oppressing the people to gain personally in prestige or wealth. The ones called “the Great” are worse than the other rulers in the subjection and killing of “ordinary” men; winning many wars (read: killing a lot of people) does not make a man great; on the contrary, it shows his inability to use his intelligence and to reason.

The wars between countries (read: states) throughout history are overwhelmingly started not because of pressure from the people. The men in the kingdoms were the ones being slaughtered in the kings’ wars, and the women, children, elderly and disabled were left to take care of their chores on the farms as well as all the men’s. And they were all being heavily taxed to finance the wars in order to gain prestige for their ruler.

Some (civil) wars were nevertheless started by “the people,” but it has through the years only been used as a final resort to get rid of a much too oppressive ruler. Most civil wars have nothing or almost nothing to do with the people; they derive from either a ruler’s attempt to force his (it’s usually a man) subjects to obedience, or a power-seeking aristocrat seeking to increase his powers.

The same is true in our “civilized” time; no wars have been started because it is a just war supported by the people – it is always the chiefs of the state making the decision. War has always to do with an attempt to increase (or somebody’s attempt to reduce or take over) the powers of the chief: Hitler aimed to increase his powers by increasing the size of Germany; the Soviet leaders wished to rule the world under communism; Iraq’s Saddam Hussein tried to put Kuwait under his rule; the Serbian leader Milosevic wanted to increase his Serb domain; and George W. Bush sought to stabilize his presidency through invading Afghanistan and Iraq.

The “power game” has reached its peak during our age, the age of democracy. With democracy, it is in everybody’s theoretical reach to gain power over everybody else, indeed making society an eternal struggle between individuals and groups for power. Marx would have been correct in this “power struggle” if he had seen the 20th and 21st Century democracies, but he never saw democracy in full.
The ordered and organized society of history has thus weakened in favor of the power struggle in democracy. This has also unleashed the power-seekers throughout society. These people, corrupted to the very soul with their pathological quest for power, have in democracy a foundation from which..oh oh running our of characters

reply to post by AntiConspirator


You are not supposed to use any character of your choice to fill the space, like you did with the spaces, you can be penalised for it.

As the above explanation was done in 20 characters less than the minimum, I had to add this.

reply to post by Blogstalker


I think they publish statistics, but I don't remember with what frequency.

I will look.

I really wish one could star in these type threads as so many have made some great points.

It could give the PTB some idea what ideas are popular without reading every post, especially now they have to be longer.

Immediately after reading the spammed u2u I thought to myself " man is that a bad idea." and "I bet there will come a time when they regret that decision."

Treating brevity and succintness as if they are universally undesirable here seems a bit foolish if you ask me.

All you are going to do with this is encourage diarrhea of the keyboard.

If anybody cares or is taking votes, this is a terrible idea. I get the meaning behind it, but this has failed. One poster asked if they had described me well, to which the answer was "yes". I had to make 200 characters out of that one word answer, to which I probably sounded like an idiot.

The only thing that this new system will accomplish is there will be longer empty posts. Those with something intelligent and insightful to say will still be able to say it; those who have nothing constructive to say, will still have nothing constructive to say, only now they will have to fill 200 characters.

On the whole the A.T.S staff do a really good job, it's just that time to time a rule is enforced that defies common sense, this is one of those rules as it's probable people will spout more drivel for us to trawl through to get their character count up rather than prompting people to think deeper in order to add more.

I'm just glad to be a contributing member of this site (that was 65 characters and typing this used another 47!)

Personally I think it's a little arbitrary, but I'm happy to jump through a hoop so we can push for higher standards - Now the tab says I can submit this post

It does make you reassess what you are going to type - a pause for thought, a very tentative on this idea.