"Low content posts"

[hexFrank202]

So I recently got a warning for this post I made for being "a low content post":
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.317066-is-playing-with-freinds-in-the-same-room-completley-dead?page=4#12906504

Now I'm sure as HELL not here to complain, or demand that this action be undone. I posted it fully aware that it might be bad, but took the risk because I thought it was a joke that just had to be made. But now that it's actually happened, I think it's appropriate to just talk about The Escapist's Moderation policy. It can't hurt to be a little critical, can it?

With this post, even though it was just a video containing no text, I'm basically implying...

"We don't have television licenses here in America. Or at least as far as I know. Oh yeah! America is awesome!"

And I guarantee you that post would be safe. Even though, honestly, just posting that video gets across the exact same information. And does it in a more original, concise manner. But because it technically doesn't have enough words, it doesn't matter.

Soooo yeah, basically, I see that the Escapist, to some extent, sort of doesn't allow you to make "implied" statements. In a way. Which sucks, because implying things is a big part of communication, and taking away from the community the freedom to use it just because it makes the post short sucks. BUT, I can see why it's important to cut down on short posts, no matter what they say. And that there are plenty of 1-word posts that really ARE spam; and you can't waste the time telling them apart. I totally understand. I'm just saying that, if it were me, I would at least try to not make 'no low-content posts' such a big rule and focus a little more on 'no meaningless posts that use words but don't say anything and are just padded text'.


PS: This kind of conflicts with my previous thread. Well I have to admit, yes it does a little. But that last thread dealt with a special situation in which spammy-one-word posts are a problem that is otherwise almost completely unstoppable. AND I'm going to have to admit it wasn't a 100% perfect idea (or even 60%) anyway.


PS2: Also, another thing I'm a little bothered by is The Escapist's attitude of banning and warning people in such a public manner. I mean I can kind of understand showing all the posts that people got in trouble for (almost), but that Forum Health Meter thing is awfully obtrusive and awkward. I mean what if the government forced you to have a giant banner in your living room charting out every single crime and ticket you've ever gotten in your life, and showing how many more offenses away you are from going to prison? Other than sex offenders being forced to go on public listings, you don't generally out people like that.
Now again, it's not too big of a deal, it's only a freaking website, but I don't think it's necessary. I know you do it to encourage people to not break the rules themselves, but I still see people get banned all the time anyway, and for some people it will only make them nervous and unstable and make for crappy members who make their posts crappy because of how scared they are. I know. I've been there.
And above all, can't you just rely on the community itself to be good and nice enough to discourage spammy, mean behavior in a natural way? Again, most websites don't do this and they don't seem to have more vandalism than here.
Now I guess you could say that Escapist APPEARS to have more spam and banning because we always see it. Well... I suppose that's possible...

 

[manaman]

OP it doesn't. That might be what you intended, but a video is only a little more useful then posting a picture. It's not a real addition to the conversation. Aside from a picture of text, but that's another story.

You also can't really expect the mods to read the whole conversation and watch the videos to make sure content in the videos is relevant to the topic at hand can you?

agreed

Ya goof. You where just asking for that.

 

[BristolBerserker]

I got a warning for posting 'BACON'. I was annoyed to say the least.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.316884-Whats-RIGHT-with-the-world#12889947

 

[hexFrank202]

No, it's not.

Yes, it is.

You also can't really expect the mods to read the whole conversation and watch the videos to make sure content in the videos is relevant to the topic at hand can you?

I already said basically that exact thing. (Although it is a long post; I can't blame you for missing it.)

agreed

Awesum!

 

[6_Qubed]

Brevity is wit.

It is a sad day when you have to pollute a pristine post with extra words just to avoid getting banned.

 

[Mikeyfell]

snip

Quick edit your op into something that totally ass kisses all over the mods before they perma-ban you for no good reason.

But in all seriousness I'm on your side. I've been in arguments with people on this site who have posted "low content posts" that were more than a paragraph long, and if you can get your point across in one sentence no one should stop you.

The Forum Health Bar is bad for more than that reason. It boils everything down to the same offense, so somebody could post the most racist sexist hateful thing in the world and it would have the exact same ramifications as posting "first". It's a pretty bad system.

 

[Valagetti]

The guy who posted after you had a smaller post, did he get in trouble?

 

[Kotaro]

-snip-

You, sir, make an excellent point. Admittedly, for the mods to read every single post and watch every single video in order to check for relevance... that's madness. No way they can possibly do that.
Still, you should have the right to contest this, and say to them "Hey, it added to the conversation. Can you take another look?"

 

[Mikeyfell]

agreed

Brave soul. I commend you on your bravery.
As you can tell I'm not as brave as you are.
But ironically this post has a lot less content to it than yours does.

 

[manaman]

OP it doesn't. That might be what you intended, but a video is only a little more useful then posting a picture. It's not a real addition to the conversation. Aside from a picture of text, but that's another story.

You also can't really expect the mods to read the whole conversation and watch the videos to make sure content in the videos is relevant to the topic at hand can you?

agreed

Ya goof. You where just asking for that.

well that depends on the video
if its the trololol man then your entirely right.

But say you were having a discussion about grammar nazi's and posted the well known stephen fry rant on people abusing these rules it could be valid. Especially given how eloquently and precisely fry manages to make the point he's arguing. Much more so than most people will do on a regular basis in any doubt, In such cases surely the best example of your point of view should be what is brought up by a poster, even if its just to quote somebody who is more of linguist than them and able to make the point in a more substantial way.

And my god i apologise for turning that into a wall of text, got carried away, anyway hope my point is comprehensible in that mess.

I went a head and boldified a point there. Yes it can be valid, and yes it can quite easily make a point. Problem is the mods have to deal with tons of posts each day. Volunteer mods doing so in their spare time. It's not to much of an inconvenience to add a line of text is it? Because the other way around the mods actually having to read the posts and watch all those videos to see the relevance is a major inconvenience.

No, it's not.

Yes, it is.

I already said basically that exact thing. (Although it is a long post; I can't blame you for missing it.

That wasn't a long post. It just wasn't very well organized. That makes it more difficult to pull relevant information and understand the points you are trying to make. As for the length; I pity someone that looks at something like reading that short bit of text as an achievement.

 

[FreakSheet]

It would be better if it just said "NEED MORE INPUT." before it lets you post.

ps: references that only a few people get are so awesome

 

[Daverson]

It's not just a low content post - it's a low content double post (ie, you posted when the last person who posted in the thread was you, after only 6 minutes). The edit button exists for a reason! (You can find it just next to the "reply" option on one of your own posts - moderators can edit everyone's posts because they're awesome like that)

Sure, it might seem a bit pedantic to sort out this behaviour when it's just two posts next to each other by the same member, but if you don't crack down on this sort of behaviour you'll have posters flooding threads by making a new post for each paragraph! (Or worse - every sentence, it sounds impossible, but nothing is impossible! Not on the internet!)

 

[hexFrank202]

To lump someone who is making a valid comment in one sentence into the same category as the guy that posts "FIRST" is sticky ground.

I know but I had to do that, because I JUST got out of defending a totally stupid idea that the first post on a major thread (for a video like ZP) should have a word number limit. And honestly, I think that rule wouldn't be TOTALLY bad if it applied to just the first few posts, and I still think it would be worth a try, but after how many legitimate arguments people made against it, I'm not very convinced it would work. And I said that.

STILL, however, I don't want to look like a hypocrite or anything. So I wanted to make that clear.

 

[manaman]

OP it doesn't. That might be what you intended, but a video is only a little more useful then posting a picture. It's not a real addition to the conversation. Aside from a picture of text, but that's another story.

You also can't really expect the mods to read the whole conversation and watch the videos to make sure content in the videos is relevant to the topic at hand can you?

agreed

Ya goof. You where just asking for that.

Depends on how you look at it. My single word post brings a lot to the table. To some it's an idiot posting for no reason at all, to others its an ironic post that conveys all that is wrong with an infraction for a post with little content.

Think about famous speeches and such. How many speeches are famous for the entire speech? How many people can recite entire speeches rather then a single line from a speech? It is quite possible to make an impact with only a few words.

To lump someone who is making a valid comment in one sentence into the same category as the guy that posts "FIRST" is sticky ground.

I never denied that videos can be valid points. I simply said the mods can't be expected to investigate each case to differentiate the valid ones from the inappropriate ones, when all you have to do is add a little bit of text to your post. You are asking a volunteer helping out the site to invest extra time so you can save 10 seconds in front of your keyboard.

 

[Caverat]

Brevity is wit.

It is a sad day when you have to pollute a pristine post with extra words just to avoid getting banned.

This.

It's nicer when rules aren't subjective. I guess they should give a minimum word count per post, which is ridiculous, or relax a bit.

 

[hexFrank202]

But in all seriousness I'm on your side. I've been in arguments with people on this site who have posted "low content posts" that were more than a paragraph long, and if you can get your point across in one sentence no one should stop you.

Absolutely!

The Forum Health Bar is bad for more than that reason. It boils everything down to the same offense, so somebody could post the most racist sexist hateful thing in the world and it would have the exact same ramifications as posting "first". It's a pretty bad system.

That's ANOTHER thing that's wrong with it, you're right!


Now I could go around replying to everyone who agrees with me, but then I would just be saying "yep" and, well, that would be pretty low content.

I got a warning for posting 'BACON'. I was annoyed to say the least.

I noticed that someone above you already posted 'bacon'. They added a few words, but still, do you think you were banned for saying something that was already said?

It's not just a low content post - it's a low content double post (ie, you posted when the last person who posted in the thread was you, after only 6 minutes). The edit button exists for a reason!

Well, I would simply edit my posts all the time, but I discovered that if you were to add a new quote in the edited version of the post, the user that you're quoting will not get a message in their inbox that someone replied to them. If my memory serves, I actually made myself look a little stupid in an argument here on the escapist, because I didn't read someone's post towards me, because they added my quote in an edit.

You, sir, make an excellent point. Admittedly, for the mods to read every single post and watch every single video in order to check for relevance... that's madness. No way they can possibly do that.
Still, you should have the right to contest this, and say to them "Hey, it added to the conversation. Can you take another look?"

That's about exactly how I would say it! Take note of this as I go into the next quote...

That wasn't a long post. It just wasn't very well organized.

Oh, well, now you know. Even though this would be hard to moderate, they should still give it a try.

 

[Phlakes]

Just a quick look at the rules-

Pictures, Links and Videos

These will all be considered low content posts if not accompanied by a well thought out opinion, debate or reasoning. Pics, links and videos should help to strengthen your stance or opinion, not the other way around.

Sounds reasonable to me. Once image/video only posts are allowed, we get one step closer to 4chan, something that should never happen. Ever.

 

[Furioso]

In a discussion forum posting a video that someone else created doesn't express your opinion, it expresses theirs, you might agree with the posted video, but its still not you adding anything meaningful, actually, your not adding anything at all, no matter what the intention is

 

[Something Amyss]

Just posting a Youtube video, or "this" or "yes" is pretty freaking annoying. I, for one, have no problem with such posts being modded.

 

[hexFrank202]

"These will all be considered low content posts if not accompanied by a well thought out opinion, debate or reasoning. Pics, links and videos should help to strengthen your stance or opinion, not the other way around."

Why? Why does an image--which can express complex ideas or illustrate detailed graphs--have to be the side kick while static, 1-dimensional text gets to have top billing? Adding onto that, a video has moving visual AND audio. And a link can take the viewer to anything.

Well maybe the argument there is that the user didn't create any of their own material; that you have to make your OWN stuff to some extent and not just copy and paste someone else's work 100%. Okay, but now you're getting into a completely different topic that has nothing to do with 'low content'. Now we're talking about 'low original content'.

Sounds reasonable to me. Once image/video only posts are allowed, we get one step closer to 4chan, something that should never happen. Ever.

I think website communities need to find the balance between having almost no limits and incubating chaos, and putting up so many arbitrary rules and policies that no one gets to have any creativity or fun. The 'low content post' policy leans a little too much towards the latter, and I think it needs to be fixed a little.