Posting habits people can do without

[Afrodyte]

Looking at my post again, I realize that everything I said boils down to not being mindful of what someone is trying to say and what kinds of things they're really looking for, even when these things are explicitly stated. Only the poll-type threads seem relatively immune to this, and I suppose it's because no one is usually required to "listen," as it were. So, what happens a lot is that many threads contain posts that are irrelevant or repetitive which makes for bulky threads. Now, I love bulky threads when everyone contributes their own experiences and insights relevant to the topic, but I loathe it when a people take up space to say a lot of nothing.

 

[Afrodyte]

Crothian,

It's easy to ignore a few posts that are irrelevant, but I don't like wasting my time skipping through a whole thread, especially when it involves an off-topic discussion.

If you want to debate with someone (and usually it's only 2 people, 3 at most, who engage in this sort of behavior within a single thread), hijacking the thread isn't necessary. For community supporters, using private messages works just as well. For those who are not community supporters, starting a new thread is definitely feasible. That way, people who are interested in the argument can watch it and particpate to their hearts' content.

For long posts, I tend to be of the persuasion that if you can't be bothered to read it and understand it within the proper context, it's best not to respond at all. That way, nobody wastes their time.

None of these requires "heavy-handed" moderation at all. It only requires people to think about something besides what they want to say. You have to ([jk]*gasp!* horror of horrors![/jk]) consider that there are other people involved.

 

[Desdichado]

In my experience when most people descend to this level (Hi Hong! ), they've already lost the argument and are just being snarky.

There's a big difference between simply nit-picking every little point of someone's thread, and clearly marking what you're responding to. Who even said line by line responses are arguments, anyway?

Furthermore, the Forge's implication that line by line's are the equivalent of interrupting after every sentence is presposterous; that's rude because you're literally interupting someone you're speaking to; in this case, the person you're speaking to has said their entire piece before you make any response. I don't see how there's any comparison between the two.

 

[Teflon Billy]

...Furthermore, the Forge's implication that line by line's are the equivalent of interrupting after every sentence is presposterous; that's rude because you're literally interupting someone you're speaking to; in this case, the person you're speaking to has said their entire piece before you make any response. I don't see how there's any comparison between the two.

Agreed.

However The Forge lost me when I was watching Fusangite trying to get them to explain GNS theory so it made sense. It didn't (at one point they tried to both deny that the "Gamist" part of GNS had anything to do with Gamist eleemtns, but couldn't come up with what they actually did think it meant...sad)

 

[Hand of Evil]

I am so guilty of some many of those I have to wonder why I am not banned or ignored more! Except for 7, that is just too much work to answer a post line-by-line.

 

[Teflon Billy]

...and that right there is a hijack

Oops!

 

[JimAde]

I think the "line by line" disagreement is, as Teflon Billy said, a matter of how it's used. Here I am making a single point. If somebody broke it up into individual sentences and interspersed comments, then yes it's rude an unhelpful. But if I ask:

1) A Question

2) A Related question

3) unrelated but kind of similar question

4) something else.

Then I would hope the replies would be broken out in the same way.

Basically, I think 99% of all rules can be reduced to those immortal words of wisdom from Bill and Ted:

Be excellent to each other, and party on dudes.

(If you don't get that reference you are too young and should not be using a computer unsupervised )

 

[DaveMage]

I'd like message boards better if everyone was limited to one sentence per post, and couldn't post back-to-back and no run on sentences.

 

[Ferret]

What I find slightly tedious when people use forums like chat rooms, making short sentence that doesn't add much. I don't mind what they say, and if they occured in chat rooms or IRL I wouldn't mind. But when you have someone post, not spam, but unwitty quips, it can irk me. I don't mind it with some seriousness as well.

Also when people try to eliminate all traces of vowels, and when people don't use the edit button to it's fullest potential, it can make me Irrate.

 

[Brother Shatterstone]

I absolutely agree with Afrodyte about point 7, line by line replies. Here's what another message board, The Forge, has to say about them.

Wow... I guess that's one message board I should never visit… I would be banned within a few hours.

Looking at my post again, I realize that everything I said boils down to not being mindful of what someone is trying to say.

I think that's a better solution, and the true thing to strive for... Much like having a conversation with someone theirs no hard and fast rules on what to do.

I do “line by line” replies, though a better description might be a point by point, as it’s the easiest way to assure that others have the best chance of getting my point without unneeded confusion.