Poll: Is the Low Content Rule any good?

[Olrod]

*Someone else's post*

This.



See? Wasn't that a meaning contribution to the discussion?

I think the low content rule works just fine.

 

[Ectoplasmicz]

Its a good thing I believe. If you don't have the capacity to write more than a couple of words in a response, then you really don't need to respond at all.

 

[mega48man]

i once got put on probation for posting a single "forever alone guy" picture on a thread. it was how i found out there was a rule against that. after being so used to "we can only talk with pictures" boards, i didn't think a site as cool and awesome as the escapist would have a problem with a kind non-abusive poster like me. since this, all my posts have been either this long or longer, going 2 weeks on the escapist without being able to type in the forums traumatized me.

I thought my post was utterly hilarious; it made perfect sense, it was good humor, it was relevant, it had all the qualities of a proper and decent joke.

i felt like i was paying too high of a price for a small crime, like the ridiculous war on drugs here in america where someone who has a zip lock snack bag of weed on their persons get's their life ruined with years on end of jail time sharing a cell with a big mean homicidal man named Tina.

actually, no, better example; getting 5 years in prison for downloading a movie. that's what it felt like. i know being mean and abusive towards other escapists is also not allowed here, but I've been a victim to that kind of abuse and i didn't see them get a fuckin probation. so why the hell do i get punished for an innocent post while assholes post freely?

if the sites policies are up for a revision, then let me pitch my idea; low content posts must be proofread by a moderator and that moderator must use their good judgement to determine if the low content post is appropriate based on the nature of the discussion, nature and intent of the posts' content, and possibly the forum health meter of the poster.

i understand that eliminating low content posts is a way to forcibly create forums for the purpose of intelligent discussions, but what about forums that AREN'T about that? like a "pictures only" forum? i find pictures only forums a lot of fun, but they'd be considered low content posts and wouldn't be allowed to happen.

so if you disagree with me, i wouldn't mind if you told me why with an intelligent argument. but if you attack me and call me an idiot for 'not reading the rules' or some other shit, i'll go as far as reporting you.

god, i feel pretty uptight and tense right now.

 

[targren]

No, I think it's worse than the issue it purports to fix. It's wielded heavy-handedly and inconsistently (the 5-words guideline has been known to be ignored), and leads to artificially inflating one's posts in hopes of evading whatever whimsical mod is feeling nitpicky.

 

[Risingblade]

I think it's a pretty good rule, it encourages discussion from everyone in way.

 

[Random Fella]

I believe so (Even though it's got me a few warnings and a suspension)
It pretty much means people won't give one word answers, they'll give logical reason for their answers therefor contributing toward the thread.
It may not always be the case, but it's my opinion that it has a beneficial effect toward it.

 

[tippy2k2]

i once got put on probation for posting a single "forever alone guy" picture on a thread. it was how i found out there was a rule against that. after being so used to "we can only talk with pictures" boards, i didn't think a site as cool and awesome as the escapist would have a problem with a kind non-abusive poster like me. since this, all my posts have been either this long or longer, going 2 weeks on the escapist without being able to type in the forums traumatized me.

I thought my post was utterly hilarious; it made perfect sense, it was good humor, it was relevant, it had all the qualities of a proper and decent joke.

i felt like i was paying too high of a price for a small crime, like the ridiculous war on drugs here in america where someone who has a zip lock snack bag of weed on their persons get's their life ruined with years on end of jail time sharing a cell with a big mean homicidal man named Tina.

actually, no, better example; getting 5 years in prison for downloading a movie. that's what it felt like. i know being mean and abusive towards other escapists is also not allowed here, but I've been a victim to that kind of abuse and i didn't see them get a fuckin probation. so why the hell do i get punished for an innocent post while assholes post freely?

if the sites policies are up for a revision, then let me pitch my idea; low content posts must be proofread by a moderator and that moderator must use their good judgement to determine if the low content post is appropriate based on the nature of the discussion, nature and intent of the posts' content, and possibly the forum health meter of the poster.

i understand that eliminating low content posts is a way to forcibly create forums for the purpose of intelligent discussions, but what about forums that AREN'T about that? like a "pictures only" forum? i find pictures only forums a lot of fun, but they'd be considered low content posts and wouldn't be allowed to happen.

so if you disagree with me, i wouldn't mind if you told me why with an intelligent argument. but if you attack me and call me an idiot for 'not reading the rules' or some other shit, i'll go as far as reporting you.

god, i feel pretty uptight and tense right now.

I know a lot of people in here have said "A picture is worth a thousand words" but I find that most of the time, the picture being used is a tired old meme that stopped being funny about five minutes after it was released (yes, Forever Alone Guy included). That is why I think that a picture-only post would be a low-content post.

If you want a picture-only forum, go to a picture-only forum. It's been said repeatedly here but I'll say it again: The Escapist is a forum that tries to not just be a pool of crap. While there are times the Mods can be heavy-handed, I would take that over the Wild West of other forums any day.

 

[DirgeNovak]

Yes, it needs to stay.

If the OP asks us a yes/no question, you have to explain why you answered yes or no.
If the OP asks us to recommend a game/movie/TV show/song/whatever, you have to explain why you recommend this one in particular.

If those things are too hard for you, maybe you should think a bit about why exactly you're frequenting Internet forums.

 

[Drexlor]

I think that in general it is a good rule, but sometimes the context should be taken into account. Although I think about a year ago I was able to get away with a 1 word reply, but that is the only time that I have ever done that.

 

[manic_depressive13]

There is a rule on the Escapist that prevents people from posting low content posts too prevent bad debates and 'LOL' posts from happening, but isn't that kind of a double edged sword? 'Cause you'll then have smug people feeling more smug and superiour of themselves when they post ridiculous long posts, even though they are completely wrong. Is the rule good, or bad? And if it is bad, what should we do to prevent low content posts?

EDIT: And if it is good, what should we do to prevent smug idiots?

How exactly would removing the low content rule prevent people making smug and erroneous posts? People don't need to post ten paragraphs to come across as smug and arrogant. You managed it in just five sentences. If people writing out opinions that you disagree with bothers you, perhaps the internet isn't the place to be.

The low content rule is a good rule.

 

[Right Hook]

It's a good rule, it forces people to explain why they feel a certain way, if you only wanted to say "LOL" than don't even bother posting. How to prevent smug idiots? Ideally we would go to their houses and bash their heads into their keyboards...if only...

 

[somonels]

There are actual mods? I thought there are just bots, but this does not really matter as the amount of content the two can comprehend is about the same.

if there's a poll involved, it's an excellent rule. Occasionally, one link or one word can adequately sum up the extent of your thoughts on the subject, but usually, if you want to promote discussion, you need more than 1 or 2 words.

What discussion, how many people actively follow threads they have posted in unless they have been quoted? The name forum is very misleading as for the majority of internet users these are places to speak one's mind and move on.

 

[Bat Vader]

i once got put on probation for posting a single "forever alone guy" picture on a thread. it was how i found out there was a rule against that. after being so used to "we can only talk with pictures" boards, i didn't think a site as cool and awesome as the escapist would have a problem with a kind non-abusive poster like me. since this, all my posts have been either this long or longer, going 2 weeks on the escapist without being able to type in the forums traumatized me.

I thought my post was utterly hilarious; it made perfect sense, it was good humor, it was relevant, it had all the qualities of a proper and decent joke.

i felt like i was paying too high of a price for a small crime, like the ridiculous war on drugs here in america where someone who has a zip lock snack bag of weed on their persons get's their life ruined with years on end of jail time sharing a cell with a big mean homicidal man named Tina.

actually, no, better example; getting 5 years in prison for downloading a movie. that's what it felt like. i know being mean and abusive towards other escapists is also not allowed here, but I've been a victim to that kind of abuse and i didn't see them get a fuckin probation. so why the hell do i get punished for an innocent post while assholes post freely?

if the sites policies are up for a revision, then let me pitch my idea; low content posts must be proofread by a moderator and that moderator must use their good judgement to determine if the low content post is appropriate based on the nature of the discussion, nature and intent of the posts' content, and possibly the forum health meter of the poster.

i understand that eliminating low content posts is a way to forcibly create forums for the purpose of intelligent discussions, but what about forums that AREN'T about that? like a "pictures only" forum? i find pictures only forums a lot of fun, but they'd be considered low content posts and wouldn't be allowed to happen.

so if you disagree with me, i wouldn't mind if you told me why with an intelligent argument. but if you attack me and call me an idiot for 'not reading the rules' or some other shit, i'll go as far as reporting you.

god, i feel pretty uptight and tense right now.

Most likely the reason they didn't get punished is because less than two separate users reported them. I believe it takes two or more separate users to report a post for it to end up in the moderation queue.

 

[Throwitawaynow]

The rule doesn't go far enough. I wish it applied to avatar, favorite, and any other thread where a single sentence is pretty much the maximum anyone says in the entire thread.

If that is too steep, I wish those threads would not show up on the popular forum posts module on the front page.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Considering you can avoid the low content rule by writing about the low content rule, no.

This. It really isn't difficult to conjure a minimum of 5 words, even if that is to just churn out a laconic, sarcastic quip.

Actually if those posts get reported they will still get sanctioned, mods read the reported posts so if you have no worthwhile content it will get moderated.

 

[Death Carr]

its probably already been said, but I think that the low content rule is a brilliant way of ensuring people put alot of thoughgt into their posts and it helps encourage discussion further than just 'yes' or 'I agree with Person X'

 

[Snotnarok]

It's a decent rule...the point of a forum is to discuss things. So how do single word things contribute to a conversation? THey really don't. I mean I guess it's a silly thing to get in trouble for but, seriously it's not hard to post some stuff.

 

[marurder]

I've been bitten by this, I said a response that was serious but to the point. I was reported because many users obviously disagreed. However later in that same thread, there were many MANY responses that were just the same as mine... but only I was reported... It's a stupid rule.

 

[TacticalAssassin1]

It's a fucking awful rule and needs to be removed.

 

[Bat Vader]

I like the Low Content Rule. It makes people explain why they agree with someone instead of just saying this or yes.