Forum Post Counters

[[stewart]]

I recon I'll turn em back on soon, but if the spamming comes back they'll be off longer.

[Puasonen]

What kind of post is a spampost? Can senior members or site admins make some flexible "rules how and what to post"? And could they warn the spammer instead of turning off the counters from the whole site? Edited March 29, 2004 by Puasonen

[Breunor]

I expect post count is a global setting for all users, so it's all or none.

 

Generally, a relevant post is going to add to the discussion by providing additional information, etc. Spam posts tend to add nothing, and some include the "Me Too" or "That's Cool" type posts in the spam category. Consider what a person a month from now reading a thread will want to read, stuff that's irrelevant should be avoided for brevity.

[Robo Dojo 58]

I expect post count is a global setting for all users, so it's all or none.

 

Generally, a relevant post is going to add to the discussion by providing additional information, etc. Spam posts tend to add nothing, and some include the "Me Too" or "That's Cool" type posts in the spam category. Consider what a person a month from now reading a thread will want to read, stuff that's irrelevant should be avoided for brevity.

I agree.

 

 

 

This has been an example of spam. Would you want to read through pages of this? I wouldn't.

[centurion]

[...]Consider what a person a month from now reading a thread will want to read, stuff that's irrelevant should be avoided for brevity.

So essentially all argument/discussion would be deemed spam, because once there is an agreed point of view, all preceding stuff becomes irrelevant?

 

This would be a spam post in the situation I am describing.

[Breunor]

I think relevent discussion of a point is very important info, otherwise the new person will likely say, "have you considered this aspect?", which was likely part of the discussion. But reading a post that only say "lol", knowing the person laughed for whatever reason doesn't really help, right? A major point of the thread is discussion, but the extraneous "uh-huhs" that you occasionally see are the wasted posts.

[[stewart]]

Also bear in mind the number per day of the "yeah me too" posts. If that's mostly what you post but you only post a few posts a week then it's not too bad.

 

Some discussions contain inherrantly short messages. Such as the "forum members in my game threads". So I'll leave the clock off in the saved games forums for example.

[Cpl. Facehugger]

Okey dokey. And you could put spammers into their own group (which doesn't accumulate posts?) I remember you did something like that awhile back, with the No Edit group.

[[stewart]]

I'd have to create a few spammer groups (some with mod priveges . . . cough!). The filter is by forum . . . come to think of it I think a can turn it off on a group basis!

Group: "In the doghouse"; hmmm?

[Cpl. Facehugger]

I have no doubt that I'll get into the spam group.

[Puasonen]

If a post "agree" is considered as a spampost, how does an asker know if people agree with his/her opinion? This will only make the spamposts longer because people know they have to "come up" with some additional (but as futile) stuff to avoid spam-accusations.

 

example:

 

Random Poster:

I think it would be a great idea to add one more leg to this alien, like this:

[picture here]

 

You cant answer:

"I Agree"

 

So you write some additional irrelevant shuckeroonies to avoid spam-accusations:

"I agree! If you would add even more legs, it would look stupid and if you remove one leg, it looks stupid too!"

 

Ok, now it isn't a spampost but is as useless from its content as the "I agree" post. Who is the judge who decides what post is spam and what's not? I guess this "rule" would reduce the amount of spam but won't stop it completely. Worth trying I guess..

[Breunor]

The goal, in addition to cutting posts that don't offer anything, is to get people more engaged. I regularly see a person ask for feedback and get several 'cool' replies, rather than 'cool, I like the way the head balances with the body, looks like it could walk with those proportions' type of replies. If a person feels obligated to add more detail, that's good. We don't need 'Yes Men', we need contributions in any form we can.

[Deimos]

I'd like to add to Breunor's post that feedback is the only way that the work team actually know when they've got it right or wrong. It is indeed quite frustrating to just get 'that looks cool' or similar. What we need is a more in depth review of the piece (I'm not saying write a thesis) just something that you all have not just looked at the work but also studied it.

 

Again Breunor hits it on the head with what he said about detail. I know some people might be afraid to leave constructive critism for whatever reason, but it is needed to help us all make a better game.

 

Obviously insulting someone's work because the commenter doesn't like it is out, but if the design, model or whatever doesn't fit say so in a constructive way. It helps us all. Also take the time to notice the small details, trust me the work the team put into fine detail pays off when someone notices it. It makes me feel good inside when someone has noticed a detail in my work, and I'm sure it does for everyone else too.

[Puasonen]

I know some people might be afraid to leave constructive critism for whatever reason, but it is needed to help us all make a better game.

I guess I'm one of those people, I have left negative comments to some work a few times but have had bad results by that. So when you're critisising someones work, it's good to:

 

1. Remind it's only your opinion

2. Suggest a better solution

3. Tell exactly why you don't like some aspect about it

[[stewart]]

and remind again and again that it's nothing personal.

 

Keep in mind folks that sometimes the only reply required is a short one. In this case when some is replying just so that they can get a credit for it is where the issue is, and when they are doing many time per day you end up with clutter.

 

We have the Offtopic spamming forums for quick silly conversations, keep them there; heck we even have the Official Canned Ham thread.

[[[Micah]]]

In addition to Stewart's remarks, I'd like to add that PMs are fair game. If you want to make some spall jab or have a quick silly conversation but offtopic doesn't cut it for you, go to PM.

[Cpl. Facehugger]

What do you mean by that? Are you saying that someone can chastise someone else for talking off topic? Edited April 1, 2004 by Cpl. Facehugger

[Extralucas]

I recon I'll turn em back on soon, but if the spamming comes back they'll be off longer.

Is a month soon enough?

 

How about turning postcount on only in Off-Topic? If postcounts are luring spammers, then you need 'em in The Patio rather than in Workshops.

[[dipstick]]

Why not just warn/suspend/ban/punish SPAMers? I, for one, am willing and able to take up the noble cause of SPAM deletion for you.

 

I know I am a SPAMmer, but not all the time, and CERTAINLY not in the wrong forums.

 

BRING BACK THE POSTCOUNT I say.

[Mustang]

I am sorry, I spammed so much... But you can bring back everyone lese's post counters, I really don't care how many posts I have

[Breunor]

There is always that option of removing post count permanently too. It doesn't really make any difference does it?

[Robo Dojo 58]

There is always that option of removing post count permanently too. It doesn't really make any difference does it?

I disagree. Post count does so much.

 

- It teaches us who are the newcomers, and who are the old guys, in one convienent number.

- The Spam ratio. Newer people with many posts are more likely spammers than old guys with many posts. And thus fun to tease.

- Imposters don't have a post count in the thousands. Should Xcomufo ever have one, they'd be easily separated from the genuine people.

- Same thing with cons, although there aren't many reasons for one to be here. They'd quickly get their postcount zapped to zero anyways, and everyone would know.

- Two for one specials at Ibby's, every Saturday. They turn your post counts (and your soul) into delicious meals.

 

Spam and conduct are handled so excellently at this site, that it'd be a shame to get rid of postcounts.

[ATeX]

I don't agree completely. For example. Some people say more than they work for the project and vice versa. Some people are here for ages and haven't said that much but are still very valuable. Other people 'just arrived' and already have a huge postcount number.

[Kamikazee]

Just turn spammers post count to -1000. Although i doubt anyone would care. i'd rather you just turn the counters off.

 

Also i hope you do know youre gonna make some people paranoid, and they may stop posting valuable comments in the fear they gonna get a spanking. And i hope u also realise it will take the life out of the forums and bore people to death. do you really want to see death certificates with the word 'death by xenocide forums' on them?

[Puasonen]

Take them all off but also remove the postcount number under avatar too because it sucks as it is now. There's a postcount number but that doesn't show the real amount of posts you have posted. That's just so damn stupid. So:

1. Remove all postcounts

2. Remove the post number under everyones avatar

That's my "vote"

[Breunor]

The idea that more posts means more experience isn't accurate IMO. As Atex said, there are people who get work and are busy with that, and maybe post a few times each week, but contribute 10 times the effort as someone who sits online every day offering their 2 cents to every topic.

 

I doubt there are very many times when a person arrives, reads the basics of the project, and then looks at postcounts to decide who to ask questions of. I'd hope they'd ask the admins and seniors, who could redirect if needed.

 

I think the benefit of removing counts (less spamming) outweighs the possible negative (confused new person who can't follow directions for P.O.C.). But either way works.

[[stewart]]

We'd rather the spamming was at appropriate levels then have to twiddle with post counts. Someone could spam a lot of crap and then have their count lower but the spam is still there and needs to be cleaned up.

 

Actually post counts can be reasonably accurate if the clock stays off in offtopic and people dont spam outside offtopic. Maybe it's a pie-in-the-sky goal, but we try.. . .

[Puasonen]

We'd rather the spamming was at appropriate levels then have to twiddle with post counts.  Someone could spam a lot of crap and then have their count lower but the spam is still there and needs to be cleaned up.

 

Actually post counts can be reasonably accurate if the clock stays off in offtopic and people dont spam outside offtopic.  Maybe it's a pie-in-the-sky goal, but we try.. . .

Hmm, doesn't hurt to try one more time. Let's see if we drown to spamposts. I fear the worst because there's a lot of new members -> more spammers. Interesting to see how this turns out.

[Robo Dojo 58]

I got my spam-thwacker 2000. I'm ready.

[Breunor]

I've been known to delete a few posts in my day... and as long as we have mods that watch for it, it's no biggie. But does that also lower the offender's count? If not, then only (the bigger) part of the issue is resolved. But like Stewart said, it's the goal we strive towards.

[Bobethy]

I have an idea! how bout' when you put -1000 for the post # put their rank as "cannon-fodder".

 

Oh yeah, and I've posted a few times and it still shows 0 posts... Why?

[Extralucas]

I have an idea! how bout' when you put -1000 for the post # put their rank as "cannon-fodder".

 

Oh yeah, and I've posted a few times and it still shows 0 posts... Why?

Answer.

[Puasonen]

Hmmm

How about turning on ALL postcounters? In off topic too! Then it wouldn't be nessessary to post "I agree" posts in important topics to gain posts. People who would start using this new possibility incorrectly like spamming 100 posts in a row (like in "official canned ham thread") could be punished though because "off topic" doesn't mean "spam topic", it means there are "non-related to x-com topics"

 

What do you think?

[Extralucas]

But there is "Keep spam in Off-Topic" thread pinned in The Patio. Off-Topic is supposed to be spammed.

[Robo Dojo 58]

Hmm... it's hard to argue with that logic.

 

I mean, it's pretty dumb to have a garbage dump that says "no littering", isn't it?

[Puasonen]

Hmm... it's hard to argue with that logic.

 

I mean, it's pretty dumb to have a garbage dump that says "no littering", isn't it?

How the heck can a name "off topic" bring you the idea that you're supposed to spam there? If this is a x-com related forum, it means you're supposed to TALK things which are NOT x-com related there. Common sense tells you that!

 

I don't know what kind of logic says "off topic" means garbage dump where you can say "hi" million times in a row. Womens logic? It's not a garbage dumb, it's a forum where you can talk about other things than x-com.

But there is "Keep spam in Off-Topic" thread pinned in The Patio. Off-Topic is supposed to be spammed.

No, that doesn't mean off topic SHOULD be spammed, it means you SHOULD NOT spam anywhere else. It is ALLOWED to spam in off topic though. This rule should be changed so that spamming isn't allowed at off topic either, and by spamming I mean for example:

hi

hi

hi

hi

hi

hi

hi

hi

hi

hi

hi

hi

hi

hi

hi

hi

hi

HAA! I got 17 posts!

Edited May 4, 2004 by Puasonen

[Extralucas]

Theoretically. But Off-Top=Spam Forum is how it worked for year(s). Although I wouldn't mind NoSpam sub-forum in The Patio.

 

And with 'hi' stuff -> that's why the postcounts were stopped in The Patio.

Edited May 4, 2004 by Extralucas

[[stewart]]

How about turning on ALL postcounters? In off topic too! Then it wouldn't be nessessary to post "I agree" posts in important topics to gain posts.

You may be right. Instead folks will post "1" "2" "3" "4" "5" etc. instead to get 200 posts/day and then it become a big race with garbage everywhere.

 

Ain't gonna do it.

[Robo Dojo 58]

Spam day is over. Sorry, but you'll have to wait until the next Feb. 29 before you can spam again.

[[dipstick]]

How about a SPAM subforum in Off Topic, then turn on counters in ALL forums except for it. Then us mods can rip through any spam threads/posts, and it could be treated very seriously. If we clap down on HARD on SPAMers, then that will be that. I for one am willing to forgo SPAMing except in one place, and the rest can be kept normal. And we can have counters back.

[[stewart]]

That's what Offtopic was supposed to be. It seems there are folks more interested in posting-up numbers than light conversation. I'd prefer not to ban people which is why I'm exploring other options.

[Cpl. Facehugger]

I don't spam because I want posts.*

 

*I'm trying to quit, I really am! You notice how I haven't been posting as often lately?

[Puasonen]

I don't spam because I want posts.*

 

*I'm trying to quit, I really am! You notice how I haven't been posting as often lately?

Yeah, because post counters are off

[j'ordos]

Or because he was in Europe and unable to find a computer with internet access often enough?

[mikker]

well, i know i've been spamming a few times. So i apologize if i hurt anyone. I didn't mean to increase my polycount.

[j'ordos]

I didn't mean to increase my polycount.

Yeah, it's better to keep your models low-poly

[[stewart]]

Okay, I've turned the clock back on in the following forums:

Xcom 1-4 General

Xcom 1-4 Strategy and Tactics

 

Let's see how that goes.

[[Blehm 98]]

Perhaps teh owner of these forums could give spammers a name. Then everybody knows they are spammers and can watch out for them. And the mods can keep track of those certain spammers.

 

 

P.S.-I try to make my stuff relavent so it is not spam

[Cpl. Facehugger]

Micah and Stewart are the only two who could give Spammers custom titles.

[[stewart]]

What would you like yours to be?