Poll: A survey on forum rules

[Jonluw]

Hiya escapists.

In the last year or so, it seems to me there's been an inlux of demands to change the low-content rule.
It seems to me that this is due to new users who came around with the website's more mainstream popularity, and who aren't familiar with the forum's past and want it to be more like the forums they're used to.

So I want to see if my theory is correct.

Please tell me when you first started visiting the forums and whether you would personally like the low-content rule to change.
Note that I'm asking about the year you started going to the forum, not the year you made a user.

 

[EeveeElectro]

It depends.

I got a warning for apologising for a double post because my Internet failed. What else could I do? Spam the threads?

When it's comments like "first!!1!" or just simply yes or no then we need that rule.
Sometimes people can make their point with just one line.

So I think it needs to be taken into consideration. It pretty much is right now, but I do still see some silly examples.

Started browsing here in 2008.

 

[bobmus]

I started posting in 2010, but lurked a lot, and only really ramped it up in 2011-12.
I went with '10 though, because I was lurking a lot during that time.

I'm a no. I've managed not to get troubled for low content yet, and I don't feel it's that difficult to simply ask yourself 'Am I saying anything more than "lol, i agree" here?'; if the answer is 'no', expand or don't post.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

The poll makes me feel old

No, I don't think the rule needs to go, it stops people cluttering up the forums with 'this', 'I agree with this' type posts with nothing else added.

 

[Scarim Coral]

I joined since 2010 (well lurk since 2008) and no. When I joined, I read the guidelines and rules carefully and I have no problem following them and had recieve no warning at all til this day.

 

[Raven's Nest]

I just can't think of reason why losing the low content rule would be a good thing. This is a discussion forum not a bloody youtube comments box.

 

[tippy2k2]

No, we do not need to change the rule and it's a good rule. If you're going to post on a forum, you should know the forums rules. If you decide to post anyway without reading them or lurking long enough to figure it out, you get a warning (which does absolutely nothing bad unless you decide to ignore it and post stupid things 7 more times).

I know a big argument for it is "A picture is worth a thousand words" when you posting "FAIL" or some variety is enough. If that's all it takes to get your point across, the thread has failed and you should not be posting there and allowing it to survive. Besides that, 99% of those times, your "witty picture" is just the same tired old meme that everyone has seen a million times.

I challenge anyone to give me an example where an infringing post was completely sufficient because I don't think it can be done (those "Post a picture" threads don't count because they belong in forum games, not the discussion board).

EDIT: I started visiting when I created my account, March of 2008

 

[Esotera]

Started browsing a couple of months before my join date, and the rule is working fine and we should keep it.

I wouldn't mind seeing an exception for sharing/image threads though, if the OP states it. Sometimes it's really hard to think of anything to write, and it's fairly obvious that people are just putting pointless filler sentences in, which is exactly what the rules are supposed to prevent - useless commentary/discussion.

 

[JoJo]

2010 and nothing wrong with the rule from this corner, I cringe when I go on certain other forums and literally see conversations like this:

Herp derp, [[insert video game of choice]] sucks

+1

;-)

The day this forum fills up with one word posts and flipping smiley-only posts is the day I'll be leaving this site (hopefully never!)

 

[Sean Hollyman]

I support this as my forum warnings need one more until mod intervention, and they were all low content warnings lol.

 

[Limecake]

I joined last year but have been lurking for a couple years now.

The rule is a good one! Honestly if you don't have enough to say to avoid a 'low content warning' then you might want to consider why you're posting at all.

 

[LetalisK]

I like the low content post rule. If someone doesn't have a large enough thought to go beyond a couple words or is too lazy to use more than a couple words than I don't care about their thought.

 

[The Night Angel]

I think the rule is useful, it stops forum cluttering, and makes people contribute to the discussion.

 

[evilneko]

I think the low-content rule is redundant and serves no real purpose. As I said in another thread about this, this is the only forum I'm on with a low-content rule and captchas. It's also the one with the most low-content posts and spambots.

I just don't understand the attitude of many that removal of the low-content rule would trigger a biblical-sized flood of worthless posts.

 

[Vuliev]

I think the low-content rule is redundant and serves no real purpose. As I said in another thread about this, this is the only forum I'm on with a low-content rule and captchas. It's also the one with the most low-content posts and spambots.

I just don't understand the attitude of many that removal of the low-content rule would trigger a biblical-sized flood of worthless posts.

I find it hard to believe that the Escapist forums have the highest rates of low-content and spam posts out of the forums your frequent; my experience with the Escapist and other forums has been entirely contrary to that.

I also doubt that anyone is suggesting that a truly "biblical-sized flood of worthless posts" would occur, more that it would seem like it because of how much drivel the low-content rules currently prevent. Anyone that frequents both the Escapist forums and, say, the League of Legends General Discussion forum, understands just how useful the low-content rules here are.

The poll makes me feel old

No, I don't think the rule needs to go, it stops people cluttering up the forums with 'this', 'I agree with this' type posts with nothing else added.

Except now they often do that and then type "and I'm typing this so as to avoid mod wraith" or something equally useless.

I'm not sure we gain much with this, and sometimes a brief answer is the best one.

Every instance of "and I'm typing this so as to avoid mod wraith" that I've seen has either been warned, suspended, or banned.

 

[Pinkamena]

No, I would prefer the low-content rule to be in place. It actually makes replies interesting to read. For example, if there were no low-content rule now, I could just have answered "No that's dumb". Not very interesting, is it?

 

[AngryMongoose]

I think they should be relaxed. I once got a warning for the brevity of my joke. Since then I've had to butcher one line jokes because of this rule. Low word count != low content. Grr!

 

[Colour Scientist]

It should be applied less liberally.

If someone goes 'First', 'lol' or just posts a picture then yeah, warn away, but if the response was adequately expressed in a few words then no.

It gets silly when people answer a thread and then have to type a sentence along the lines of 'just typing this extra bit so I don't get in trouble,' which happens a lot. Maybe keep the rule but apply it with common sense.

 

[busterkeatonrules]

I like the low-content rule. For all its drawbacks, it does serve the indispensable purpose of keeping our nice, shiny website free of those YouTube-style "FIRST!11!!", "faaaaaaaag" and "LOL" posts. Not to mention those asshats who respond to a somewhat lenghty OP with "TL;DR" and leave it at that.

 

[=y]

LAST!

=y

Spoiler

Actual discussion is cool. That's my two cents.