It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Suggestion to help with the New Minimum Character Count rule

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 03:37 PM
link   
I think you might find that this gets swallowed a bit easier if the stars and flags option also had the option of the s&f fan giving it was listed.

People contribute pointless Woo-Hoo! type posts because they want everyone to know that they personally approve of the message.

An (optional) listing of Fans would probabaly serve this purpose.

Alternately, the other end of the spectrum. People who want everyone to know that they personally disapprove of this message. Don't know if that will work so much as it might become a bit Yahoo-Answers popularity contest. But it might satisfy the one-line urge.




posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 03:39 PM
link   
No I think people should just deal with rules put in place. If they don't have a response that's longer than the required character count, then they aren't contributing the conversation and should just not post.

It makes no sense to start making up new rules cause a few members can't figure out more than two lines of words for a post they've liked.

~Keeper



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


So, are you saying that 100 char. are needed in oder to get a point through? (see, i needed 16 chrs after typing that question)



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 04:21 PM
link   
some posts don't deserve more than a brief answer. Perhaps you could establish rules for the length of the original post. Some just ask a simple question, like "Am I wrong about this?"

That type of post invites a snippy answer.



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 10:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons


Alternately, the other end of the spectrum. People who want everyone to know that they personally disapprove of this message. Don't know if that will work so much as it might become a bit Yahoo-Answers popularity contest. But it might satisfy the one-line urge.


I suggested a 'negative stars' function ,as a means for people to disagree without getting snippy with a rash response to a perceived inflammatory remark which has been starred.. The feedback i got , was that anything which discouraged text responses would be the antithesis of a growing site . Its a good point.



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 10:23 PM
link   
Hmmm.

I had an idea, but decided to post this instead, as I quickly realized that my idea would not work:

Wow, I think moderators can understand government more than they would like to admit.


How do you make everything "fair" without giving "criminals" the ability to take advantage of the system?



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 10:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by dragonking76

Wow, I think moderators can understand government more than they would like to admit.




Yeah well in a sense, the mods are running a government. Think about it, we have a sort of bill of rights/ set of laws that are to be followed. The mods maintain order and enforce the laws etc...

They run the "government" that keeps ATS succesful, civl and the best place in the world to discuss the things we do.

No wonder they seem to understand government so well. they are running one!

That said, this new minimum character requirment is a wise addition. If you only have something to say that takes up less charaters than the minimun required, well than it probably doesnt need to be said at all.

How many off topic, inappropriate, or trolling posts do you see that are one liners? ALOT. This will help cut back on that. At the very least the people who are breaking the rules will have to be alot more thorough with their posts and will actually mabye stop and think about wasting everyones time with pointless nonsense.

[edit on 13-4-2009 by gimme_some_truth]

[edit on 13-4-2009 by gimme_some_truth]



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 11:05 PM
link   
I have been on other forums that had a Minimum Character Count rule and it backfired on them. Now a 100 character is not all that many so maybe it will work here. But if you start trying 200 or more you will have problems. The last site I was on started a 250 Minimum Character Count rule and the site all but stopped in a few weeks. In a month is was dead. But if ATS keeps it low like it is now then it may be be a problem. One good sentence can burn up a 100 characters real easy. If is stays at the 100 mark I see no problem.



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 11:34 PM
link   
reply to post by fixer1967
 

The real problem isn't the amount of characters a person puts in. it's the content. Rows of smiley faces, and just plain filler will be the norm. There are too many people here who will fudge the rule just to get their non-productive crap in. unfortunately the mods have their work cut out for them.

Yeah yeah a person can make a point or say something profound ina few words. how about not assuming everyone will understand your pearl of wisdom and elaborate a little so nobody has to come back and say "what? I dont understand."

As a side note, why do we even need smileys and symbols? Isn't the subject matter we usually discuss of enough gravity that flaming mad faces and laughing smileys is kind of absurd?

Personally, I don't come here to be entertained and have a good time, I come here to learn something and expand my mind. At the bare minimum I come here to get my argument fix in.

Edit: Oh yeah, to the OP. It's not a popularity contest around here, you dont get points for agreeing with the cool people. If you believe the truth or espousing the truth, it shouldn't matter who specifically agrees with you, the stars and flags should tell you everything you need to know. If you MUST wear your S&F like a badge, U2U the person and see if they even give a %$#@.


[edit on 13-4-2009 by Gigatronix]



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 11:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gigatronix
reply to post by fixer1967
 


Personally, I don't come here to be entertained and have a good time, I come here to learn something and expand my mind.


Since when are those two notions mutually exclusive?



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by schrodingers dog

Originally posted by Gigatronix
reply to post by fixer1967
 


Personally, I don't come here to be entertained and have a good time, I come here to learn something and expand my mind.


Since when are those two notions mutually exclusive?
I never said they are or even implied it. I said what I do come here for and what I dont come here for, if they happen to overlap, that's cool too. I'm not exactly an anti-fun kinda guy, but if I want to be entertained and have a good time, I'll play video games. If want to learn and expand my horizons, sometimes I'll come here. I'm a focused and purposeful kind of guy.



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth
That said, this new minimum character requirment is a wise addition. If you only have something to say that takes up less charaters than the minimun required, well than it probably doesnt need to be said at all.


I respectfully disagree with your opinion. Some posters can speak volumes in a single sentence yet others type endlessly without saying much at all.

At the risk of repeating myself from the thread (now locked) announcing the new rule, I once again present this. The story goes that Ernest Hemingway was challenged to write a novel in 6 words or less. He responded with:

For Sale. Baby Shoes. Never used.

A short reply, if written effectively, can inspire thought. It causes you to use your imagination.

The new rule implies, Not enough notes Amadeus.

KK


[edit on 14-4-2009 by kinda kurious]



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gigatronix
reply to post by fixer1967
 
Edit: Oh yeah, to the OP. It's not a popularity contest around here, you dont get points for agreeing with the cool people. If you believe the truth or espousing the truth, it shouldn't matter who specifically agrees with you, the stars and flags should tell you everything you need to know. If you MUST wear your S&F like a badge, U2U the person and see if they even give a %$#@.


[edit on 13-4-2009 by Gigatronix]


Personally, I'm of the mind that you are best known by those who don't like you.

However, I don't care if someone on here loves or hates what I say.
I'm just pointing out that most of the useless posts that are "oh boo" or "woo-hoo" are people wanting a way to show the concur or disagree PERSONALLY.

That want won't go away because the rule changed. There will simply be more extensive Woo-Hoo Oh-Boo posts. That might not be a good thing.

[edit on 2009/4/14 by Aeons]



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 02:17 PM
link   
It's a ridiculous rule in my eyes,and even more ridiculous are the mods that put on their thinking hats and came up such a thing,nevermind implement it.I'd like to see the statistical studies that show a rebute or answer has to be a certain number of characters before deemed to be right.Of course i wont because its nonsense and the brain child of people with their brains wired to milky way bars.



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
Since when are those two notions mutually exclusive?


Just curious, how were you able to offer such a short reply?

Even though you are quoting, there are only about 55 characters in your response. I am perplexed by the new system and adding this line for no apparent reason.

Regards...KK



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by kinda kurious
 


I don't know what to tell you, I posted my thoughts and it accepted it.

As I said on the other thread it is neither my intent to go out of my way to either adhere or circumvent the new character count. That is to say that I will formulate my thoughts in a post, and if it is not enough characters then I am happy to not post them rather than going out of my way to "cheat" the system.

Plus I think the whole issue has become somewhat moot since they reduced the minimum to 100.

Your post does however raise an interesting point. Are members who have a bone to pick with another member or who have been caught circumventing the system themselves, going to start counting other members' characters in a post and alerting the staff at every turn?

I hope not, mostly for staff's sake.



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
Are members who have a bone to pick with another member or who have been caught circumventing the system themselves, going to start counting other members' characters in a post and alerting the staff at every turn?


Or conversely, are some members exempt from new rules? If so why?

(Edit to add: Oddly, my reply only had 68 charcters and was allowed. It must be related to quote function.)

Kinda Kurious




[edit on 14-4-2009 by kinda kurious]



posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by kinda kurious
 


Mmm, I can't see why they would be, and since you seem to be a mistrusting kinda fella:




posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by schrodingers dog
 


Since when does being inqusitive and "kurious" make one mistrusting?

Seems to be expected on a site strewn with conspiracy. No?

KK


[edit on 14-4-2009 by kinda kurious]



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 02:02 PM
link   
I just had an idea.

Instead of posting what you think, perhaps we, as users, should read the posts so far in a thread. If one says exactly(or very near) what you are wanting to say, STAR that post instead of replying to the thread. This way your views are standing out more without people needing to read the same things over and over again. You can flag it too if you agree with the whole thread, or want others to read it.

In essence, only post if you have something new to say, or have a different perspective on the thread than the posters before you.

Perhaps make it so that when a post is starred or a thread is flagged it goes back up to the top of the recent posts list.

[edit on 15-4-2009 by dragonking76]




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join