Poll: Is the Low Content Rule any good?

[David Bjur]

'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.

I'm sorry, what is this supposed to mean exactly?
Wrong how and moreover, could you provide examples? I don't think I get what you're saying here.

OT: Anyways, yeah I'm a huge fan of the low content moderation. These forums are meant for discussion, and if somepony posts something that doesn't help or lead to discussion, it's just really out of place.

Additionally, some newer people to these forums carry bad habits from other sites, as I've seen six or seven people who equate their post count as an E-peen as it were. So they would naturally try to post really really short replies just to pad out their count.

Hmmm, I guess this will be abit hard to explain, but let's say a person has posted a long post about, let's say, game mechanics in a game. He/she knows nothing about game mechanics at all but still says that people are stupid, even though he is the person that's wrong.

If they don't know anything about what they are saying but are still saying it, it wouldn't matter how long a post it is.
That's going to happen regardless of the length of the post. As a wise man once said, "You can't fix stupid".

Yes, but having smug people feeling more smug about themselves encourages them to post more posts of smugness and keep spreading their smug.
Conclusion: Don't feed the smug.

 

[Radoh]

'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.

I'm sorry, what is this supposed to mean exactly?
Wrong how and moreover, could you provide examples? I don't think I get what you're saying here.

OT: Anyways, yeah I'm a huge fan of the low content moderation. These forums are meant for discussion, and if somepony posts something that doesn't help or lead to discussion, it's just really out of place.

Additionally, some newer people to these forums carry bad habits from other sites, as I've seen six or seven people who equate their post count as an E-peen as it were. So they would naturally try to post really really short replies just to pad out their count.

Hmmm, I guess this will be abit hard to explain, but let's say a person has posted a long post about, let's say, game mechanics in a game. He/she knows nothing about game mechanics at all but still says that people are stupid, even though he is the person that's wrong.

If they don't know anything about what they are saying but are still saying it, it wouldn't matter how long a post it is.
That's going to happen regardless of the length of the post. As a wise man once said, "You can't fix stupid".

Yes, but having smug people feeling more smug about themselves encourages them to post more posts of smugness and keep spreading their smug.
Conclusion: Don't feed the smug.

That has no bearing on what we do.
If they post to feel smug, responses wouldn't do anything.

 

[Soviet Steve]

Imagine the escapist forums. Now imagine it with 60,000 extra posts consisting of "lol" and "omg".

Is the escapist forum significantly improved by this addition?

 

[Cazza]

Yes...

See if that was all I said there would be no discussion. The forums are for discussion not a bunch of people giving an opinion and everyone either agreeing or disagreeing.

 

[FamoFunk]

I do like the low content rule, as it stops people just spamming pictures or saying, "LOLOLOL"

But, sometimes, a few words can be a lot more powerful than a whole paragraph, especially when quoting people and such. But I hope the Mods would realise those posts are actually good and not worthy of action, that I would find ridiculous.

 

[Caliostro]

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?

No. The "low content" rule is in place to prevent people spamming the forums with pointless or inane posts made to either attention whore or inflate their own post count (which ultimately serves the same purpose: to attention whore).

If you have anything worth saying, say it. If you don't, don't post. You don't HAVE to post. Shit like "Lol!", "I don't care", "I agree", "+1"... Not worth posting. If all you have to say is that you "don't care" (why are you even posting then?) or to simply parrot what someone else already said, then they've already said it.

'Cause you'll then have smug people feeling more smug and superiour of themselves when they post ridiculous long posts,

And? Someone feeling smug only affects you if you're feeling insecure about your own value. That's your problem.

Otherwise, they're feeling smug... And? They're either right or wrong regardless. If they're right, then they should feel smug. They're right. If they're wrong, who cares that they're feeling smug? They're wrong, and "feeling smug" won't change that.

Feeling good or bad about how people you don't care about feel is extremely petty at best, not to mention depressingly sad.

And if it is bad, what should we do to prevent low content posts?

...Wait, what?

You're saying, if the rule is wrong, and low content should be allowed, what should we do to prevent it? Why would we want to prevent it if we were going to allow it? Did you really think this one through here?

 

[Scentless Apprentice]

*Someone else's post*

This.



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

I think the low content rule works just fine.

This.

 

[David Bjur]

snip

I think the Low Content rule is good. Your putting words in my mouth, friend.

 

[The Diabolical Biz]

Lets be fair, if anyone posted that topic/question, every response would be this [http://bit.ly/yAGgsi].

And then they get mod wrath for being a smarmy ****. I don't see the issue.

Generally I haven't seen nearly enough mod wrath for smarmy cuntiness, but I guess you're right.

 

[C F]

The mere possibility of a large amount of low-content posts flooding the forums is enough to validate the rule. Whether or not such a thing would happen is debatable, but I'd rather not risk it.

I'd like to go back to Post 93 on Page 3 for a moment, bear with me.

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

In keeping with the Low Content rule, you could at least make the effort to explain your reasoning behind things. Instead, we get opinions without any sort of justification. It doesn't have to be a good reason, mind you. It might make you look stupid, but remember: so do low content posts. Just an additional sentence or two.
[color=f7f7f7]Post 89 doesn't even use proper capitalization, and he gave a reason. A debatable one, but at least it's there.[/color]

 

[Brandon237]

Yes. [sub]Sure, it's slightly annoying in discussions where you could give a sufficient (and funnier) answer with just a single picture or video, but I believe that's a price we'll have to pay to keep discussion quality aloft.
One word replies are really useless. If we just wanted to know how many people held a certain opinion, we'd use a poll. The forum is intended for discussing the reasons behind your reply, not so much your reply itself.[/sub]

While I applaud both the irony and bravery, the last person who did that got a warn...
You sneaky snake

And I agree fully...
If I want to post 3 words, I have Facebook for that. Escapist is for a little more than that... I like my discussion!

 

[Varitel]

It's a very important rule that keeps conversation going in these forums. I don't think that we all just go to the forums to see a long list of yes/no answers.

Yes, because it stops those fuckwads from quoting someone and just typing "this". ************, what the hell. Why the fuck did you even post. You obviously have nothing to say, just shut the fuck up and come back when you have something proper to contribute. That shit is irritating as fuck.

You are correct, but if there's one thing worse than "this" it's "I'll just leave this here". Also, why the wanton profanity?

Well, when someone says "I'll just leave this here", at least he tends to actually leave something in the thread. Unlike "this" posters.

As for the profanity, I dont know man. From time to time I just get in this mood to swear like a sailor.

The "I'll just leave this here" people certainly do bring something to the conversation, but not really something that is their own.