Poll: Okay, is it just me? (post count)

[TheTygerfire]

How come every topic I see that either completely stupid or devoid of any real substance, the members post count is under 30? Now normally I don't give a damn how many posts you've had, it's quality not quantity.

But when neither quality nor quantity is any good, I judge.

 

[GyroCaptain]

Yep, it's swing the axe time if they're illiterate morons who haven't posted anything yet. Of course, it's harder to judge when they're illiterate morons who have escaped mod wrath and haven't been objectionable enough to go yet.

 

[xitel]

I will admit, if you have less than 50 posts and you've started 3 threads, then yeah, I'm going to think worse of you. At the same time, if you have over 1500 posts and I don't remember seeing you around, I'll think that you're going for quantity over quality and I'll think less of you again. Really, again, it's quality that matters.

 

[PayNSprayBandit]

How come every topic I see that either completely stupid or devoid of any real substance, the members post count is under 30? Now normally I don't give a damn how many posts you've had, it's quality not quantity.

But when neither quality nor quantity is any good, I judge.

Not usually, but in the scenario you described, I may be inclined to write someone off.

 

[Gitsnik]

It's ironic that Xitel's post count is where it is at - because he is thus the exemption to the proverbial rule.

For me it's not post count, it is an arbitrary sliding scale of post-count to join date that affects me. There are people who have been around since 2007 who have ~30 posts, and it just suggests to me that they are busy and/or not on the Escapist that often.

Then there are people who joined in Feb this year and have over 2k post counts (or even over 1k) and that just makes me ignore their posts in disgust (and when I say ignore, I mean read but very rarely respond).

But there it is, normally that sort of thing doesn't apply to me - I just read the post then glance at the details before responding, a person who is known for starting flames is not likely to get a response out of me (most of the time )

 

[Seldon2639]

I barely notice, honestly. We all started off with no posts, and most of us were probably as thoughtful back then as we are now. If someone's annoying and silly, I won't like them (even if they've gone gonzo). If someone's thoughtful and insightful, I'll respect them even if it's their first post/thread. It seems like there are just a lot more low-post people, still testing the waters. They'll get their sea-legs (or they'll leave)

 

[Booze Zombie]

Well, it can have some sway.. but not much.

 

[Glerken]

It's not so much post count, it's obviously post quality. But I'll admit that post low quality threads are made by people with low post counts simply because the Escapist scares away people that aren't smart enough to think out a thread/post.

 

[NeutralDrow]

I feel like I'm the wrong sort to post in this thread, but...I sort of do. Specifically, if you have a higher post count than me, but write worse, I'm going to be sort of judgmental.

 

[D_987]

I'm judgmental on the persons grammar - not the post count.

 

[Fire Daemon]

I find that the threads without any real substance are usually the threads that are attractive to newcomers. Threads without much substance are usually jump in and then jump out threads that don't require much thought or careful representation of your feelings. These don't have much substance (like what is your favourite gun in CoD4) but are open to mostly everyone and as a new user you are not going to want to go posting in those higher substance threads because you're on your toes, not wanting to piss people off or make yourself look like an idiot.

Maybe not everyone is as cautious as I am, I mean, I still avoid writing in some types of threads but I think the reason a lot of new members are seen in lower substance threads is because they are playing it cool and finding their feet.

I don't judge people by their post count or join date, I judge them by the content of their post.

 

[sky14kemea]

Well the quality of what they post is just as important. Idiots will always talk more than geniuses, after all. (see: kent hovind versus the entire scientific community.)

that said, low post counts for users who joined in the month of march are indicative of something else entirely YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.

wooo!
seconded, on both things

 

[DoctorNick]

I'm absolutely shit with names, and can't tell most of you apart anyway with few exceptions. So thus post counts don't really matter to me because I probably don't remember who you are regardless.

 

[Ranis]

I somewhat see the people with a fat amount of posts as more respectable, but in the end the only way to truly gain my respect is to post something funny

 

[Noamuth]

I don't really notice people's post counts. I more go by how often I've been them around and how they've expressed themselves previously.

 

[Archaeology Hat]

Somewhat. Although the people I find most interesting are the ones like me with a relatively low post count but an old "registration date"... a sure sign of a compusive lurker.

 

[Altorin]

I will admit, if you have less than 50 posts and you've started 3 threads, then yeah, I'm going to think worse of you. At the same time, if you have over 1500 posts and I don't remember seeing you around, I'll think that you're going for quantity over quality and I'll think less of you again. Really, again, it's quality that matters.

It's kind of funny, you have 4000 posts and I don't remember seeing you

 

[XJ-0461]

I barely notice, honestly. We all started off with no posts, and most of us were probably as thoughtful back then as we are now. If someone's annoying and silly, I won't like them (even if they've gone gonzo). If someone's thoughtful and insightful, I'll respect them even if it's their first post/thread. It seems like there are just a lot more low-post people, still testing the waters. They'll get their sea-legs (or they'll leave)

Truely very insightful.