WorkingVaca,
It would, IMO ,be a bad idea. Perhaps you should worry more aboiut your own posts and leave other people alone. Looking through your old posts, I see that a high percentage of them are criticizing other people’s posts
I think forumosa is fine the way it is; lots of good info, opinions, and plenty of bollocks for a good laugh.
And why would anyone want to do that? You’re nothing but a killjoy, IMO. Doing it “to keep their post counts high?” What the hell is that supposed to mean? Oops! Sorry, you’ve already posted once. You’re not allowed to post again on this topic. After all, you made your point and you made it well.
IMO, those are the kind of posts that make Forumosa a community, and not just a dull, dry information resource. OK, a somewhat dysfunctional community but one nevertheless. I don’t know about anyone else, but I don’t give a damn about artifically increasing my post count. I post when I’ve got something to say, even when it’s silly and pathetic.
In practical terms, a one-post-per-thread rule would be a nightmare to police, as well as a nightmare to read when people keep editing their posts in response to points made further along the thread. “As for what tigerman says on page 2, post 3 of this thread, blah blah blah…” I would say the idea borders on the absurd for an open message board - maybe for yea or nay responses, but the idea of discussion is that people, should, well, discuss. Freely.
Good intentions, WorkingVaca, and I understand your motivation, but it’s impractical. I’m trying to get people to comply with the “no consecutive posts” rule, and wait for a response before replying. (or edit the original post)
almas john wrote:
WorkingVaca…Looking through your old posts, I see that a high percentage of them are criticizing other people’s posts
I just checked through my paltry 144 posts and found all of SEVEN directly criticizing somebody else’s opinion. Hardly a “high percentage.” And even then I didn’t stoop to name-calling and telling people their questions or opinions are STUPID.Seven out of your total posts? No way. Let
[quote=“Maoman”]
I moved the poll from flounder into feedback. Your cross-post (a forumosa no-no) remains floundered (and locked - I want people to respond to your comments here, not there.). Noone’s being censored. And this IS the appropriate forum for this topic, whether you agree or not. :p[/quote]
While not a censorship, it is most certainly a sugar-coated attempt to avoid an unfavorable result to your interests. You know quite well the majority of members don’t spend much time in this forum. The votes so far have been from chronic posters, so no wonder there is a high disagreement. I’d love to see you dare move it back into the Living Forum, or at least the Open Forum, to see how the rest of the community votes. If members overwhelmingly vote NO, then I will accept defeat much more graciously, and you can all nya-nya-nya at me to your heart’s content. Despite my rep as a KILLJOY, I’m quite easy-going about being proven wrong.
I’d love to see you dare move it back into the Living Forum, or at least the Open Forum…[/quote]
Sorry, I’m afraid I’ll have to disappoint you on this…
…Actually, if we look at your last 10 posts, we can see that seven of them are criticizing (but not naming) other posters…[/quote]
That’s right, I said SEVEN out of almost 150 posts. Still not that HIGH PERCENTAGE you mentioned. And you make a bogus claim about my last ten posts but only directly quote 5–none of which where I use the word CRAP to describe forumosa or directly insult another poster. As for you and Sandman, I’ve avoided directly pointing you out, but now that you’ve forced me to: You both ridicule and put down other members’ posts on a regular basis. Why not check out your own record?
[quote=“Maoman”]I’m trying to get people to comply with the “no consecutive posts” rule, and wait for a response before replying. (or edit the original post)[/quote]What about where a poster has some substantial new information to add to a thread, days, months or even years after his/her last post? If he or she just adds to the last post by means of the edit function then the thread won’t show up in the ‘posts since last visit’ so people will miss it. I know because I just tried it out.
Another case where consecutive posts might be helpful is to maintain clarity. Topics can be broad at times and threads naturally evolve. Say I want to post on the “Motorcycle Touring” thread about a new helmet model available, and also give details about a route through the hills near Taichung? Or what if I want to reply to two posters on these two separate issues? My feeling is that it may actually be clearer to keep the issues separate in two posts. This also aids searchability: I can set the first post topic as “SuperWhizz G7 full-face helmet out now!” and the second as “Nice afternoon ride through Xinshe.”
What about where a poster has some substantial new information to add to a thread, days, months or even years after his/her last post? If he or she just adds to the last post by means of the edit function then the thread won’t show up in the ‘posts since last visit’ so people will miss it. I know because I just tried it out.
Another case where consecutive posts might be helpful is to maintain clarity. Topics can be broad at times and threads naturally evolve. Say I want to post on the “Motorcycle Touring” thread about a new helmet model available, and also give details about a route through the hills near Taichung (Taizhong)? Or what if I want to reply to two posters on these two separate issues? My feeling is that it may actually be clearer to keep the issues separate in two posts. This also aids searchability: I can set the first post topic as “SuperWhizz G7 full-face helmet out now!” and the second as “Nice afternoon ride through Xinshe.”[/quote]
I agree with joesax. Maoman, I think consecutive posts are a bit of a non-issue. Apart from in some of Fred Smith’s threads in the IP Forum, I haven’t noticed many consecutive posts.
I wasn’t going to bother to reply (having used up my one post for the thread) but I do take mild exception to the presumably deliberate use of the term “chronic”, and its negative overtones. I have nothing against you personally, WorkingVaca (in fact I’m glad to see you here and standing up for the girls in other threads ) but insulting everyone who’s responded to your thread, even negatively, is not the best way to influence them to your way of thinking. A good argument is.
This very thread is an example of why a one-post-per-thread policy wouldn’t work. You could have chosen to respond to our posts by editing your original post and setting an example, but instead posted again, probably because you didn’t think we’d see it otherwise. Likewise, you could have responded to almas_john’s criticism of you by PM, since it was irrelevant to the thread, but since he made the accusation in public, likely you wanted to reply in public. That’s fair enough, and it’s the way every single bulletin board I’ve seen works. And that’s why we get the long arguments on other threads - from exactly these kinds of reactions.
Additionally, let’s take a hypothetical scenario. The poll is moved to Open, and the members vote for a one-post-per-thread policy AND Maoman decides it was a good idea after all. Now what? Are you willing to: take on the responsibility of policing it (in EVERY SINGLE THREAD), and/or writing the code to set it up and/or warning people who offend and/or making sure all returning members know the new rules and/or responding to all the new threads and sundry posts wailing ‘where did my second post go? What happened to it? Why can’t I post again, dammit?’ If not you, then who? It’s WORK. Who does the modding work around here to try and keep the threads on topic at all? Oh, wait, the regulars - and obviously none of us are going to help you enforce the hypothetical new rule since (according to you) we’re all the ones against it
This is possibly one of the dumbest suggestions I’ve ever seen on the INTARWEB. A message board where you can only post once per thread? What? I think someone’s already said it, but have you ever tried having a conversation where each party is only allowed to say one thing? Message boards are like a time-lapse conversation online… Although that said, I can think of a couple of posters from the past few weeks (who seem mercifully to have either shut up or gone elsewhere) who could do with being limited to one post a thread
I voted, and I’m not a chronic poster (am I?).
I don’t think limiting posts is a good idea - the threads often change focus, so may end up discussing something new; as well, people think of new arguments as they look at replies to their posts.
People who really post too much get flamed (for eg., ac dropout). I think that is the best way to deal with them.
Oops! Sorry, 
but one nevertheless. I don’t know about anyone else, but I don’t give a damn about artifically increasing my post count. I post when I’ve got something to say, even when it’s silly and pathetic.
And you make a bogus claim about my last ten posts but only directly quote 5–none of which where I use the word CRAP to describe forumosa or directly insult another poster. As for you and Sandman, I’ve avoided directly pointing you out, but now that you’ve forced me to: You both ridicule and put down other members’ posts on a regular basis. Why not check out your own record?
) but insulting everyone who’s responded to your thread, even negatively, is not the best way to influence them to your way of thinking. A good argument is.
