Topic: Ban useless replies (Read 4303 times)
This is a good idea, I think with advertisers paying users by their post count it was inevitable.
+1 
I agree that posts should be removed if they do not contain any meaningful addition to the conversation.
I do have a question: If somebody puts up a '+1' post, that would add the thread to their 'Show new replies to your posts' list. But if that post is later deleted by a mod, would that also remove the thread form their relies list? I have recently switched to using the watchlist so I guess that would not affect me, but some people might miss out on conversation they were interested in.
I agree that posts should be removed if they do not contain any meaningful addition to the conversation.
I do have a question: If somebody puts up a '+1' post, that would add the thread to their 'Show new replies to your posts' list. But if that post is later deleted by a mod, would that also remove the thread form their relies list? I have recently switched to using the watchlist so I guess that would not affect me, but some people might miss out on conversation they were interested in.
I believe the watchlist bases itself off of the most recent post ID in the thread.
I.E. if the watchlist knows you have looked at #202, then #203 comes up and is deleted, it will not pop up on the watchlist because the most recent reply that is active is #202.
I was thinking more along the lines of I post a "+1" to subscribe to the thread, the mod deletes my post, the next time somebody posts in the thread it will show up in 'watchlist' (if you have selected the option of automatically adding posts to the watchlist) but not in 'show new replies'.
Can we ban useless replies like
they do nothing except to bump up post count and clutter up the forum.
Quote
this
Quote
^^^^
Quote
great!
Quote
what he said
Quote
+1
Quote
interesting...
they do nothing except to bump up post count and clutter up the forum.
+1
hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 500
It's all fun and games until somebody loses an eye
+1
I agree that posts should be removed if they do not contain any meaningful addition to the conversation.
I do have a question: If somebody puts up a '+1' post, that would add the thread to their 'Show new replies to your posts' list. But if that post is later deleted by a mod, would that also remove the thread form their relies list? I have recently switched to using the watchlist so I guess that would not affect me, but some people might miss out on conversation they were interested in.
I agree that posts should be removed if they do not contain any meaningful addition to the conversation.
I do have a question: If somebody puts up a '+1' post, that would add the thread to their 'Show new replies to your posts' list. But if that post is later deleted by a mod, would that also remove the thread form their relies list? I have recently switched to using the watchlist so I guess that would not affect me, but some people might miss out on conversation they were interested in.
I believe the watchlist bases itself off of the most recent post ID in the thread.
I.E. if the watchlist knows you have looked at #202, then #203 comes up and is deleted, it will not pop up on the watchlist because the most recent reply that is active is #202.
I was thinking more along the lines of I post a "+1" to subscribe to the thread, the mod deletes my post, the next time somebody posts in the thread it will show up in 'watchlist' (if you have selected the option of automatically adding posts to the watchlist) but not in 'show new replies'.
+1
I agree that posts should be removed if they do not contain any meaningful addition to the conversation.
I do have a question: If somebody puts up a '+1' post, that would add the thread to their 'Show new replies to your posts' list. But if that post is later deleted by a mod, would that also remove the thread form their relies list? I have recently switched to using the watchlist so I guess that would not affect me, but some people might miss out on conversation they were interested in.
I agree that posts should be removed if they do not contain any meaningful addition to the conversation.
I do have a question: If somebody puts up a '+1' post, that would add the thread to their 'Show new replies to your posts' list. But if that post is later deleted by a mod, would that also remove the thread form their relies list? I have recently switched to using the watchlist so I guess that would not affect me, but some people might miss out on conversation they were interested in.
I believe the watchlist bases itself off of the most recent post ID in the thread.
I.E. if the watchlist knows you have looked at #202, then #203 comes up and is deleted, it will not pop up on the watchlist because the most recent reply that is active is #202.
hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 500
It's all fun and games until somebody loses an eye
+1
I agree that posts should be removed if they do not contain any meaningful addition to the conversation.
I do have a question: If somebody puts up a '+1' post, that would add the thread to their 'Show new replies to your posts' list. But if that post is later deleted by a mod, would that also remove the thread form their relies list? I have recently switched to using the watchlist so I guess that would not affect me, but some people might miss out on conversation they were interested in.
I agree that posts should be removed if they do not contain any meaningful addition to the conversation.
I do have a question: If somebody puts up a '+1' post, that would add the thread to their 'Show new replies to your posts' list. But if that post is later deleted by a mod, would that also remove the thread form their relies list? I have recently switched to using the watchlist so I guess that would not affect me, but some people might miss out on conversation they were interested in.
What about a thread in meta asking for people to vote?
Voting is the worst way of making a decision like this. Very few people will vote for, "No, I don't want a new feature that costs me nothing to have."
This feature is actually listed on the new forum software specs, so I agree that it would be helpful, but I don't think that it'll be very helpful, and so it's a low priority.
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
Theymos (and everyone else) please see this as well https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1908247
I think positive reputation is good, but right now it appears that there is only negative reputation (ignore color). Until positive reputation methods are introduced, negative reputation methods should be better managed.
I think positive reputation is good, but right now it appears that there is only negative reputation (ignore color). Until positive reputation methods are introduced, negative reputation methods should be better managed.
vBulletin has a "thank you" feature for those who feel the need to "upvote" or "like" to contribute:
http://www.cbr250.net/forum/off-topic-discussion/7564-following-users-say-thank-you-useful-post.html
http://www.cbr250.net/forum/off-topic-discussion/7564-following-users-say-thank-you-useful-post.html
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
There's actually a solution for that (Facebook already does it). When someone "like's" something, it would show their name right under that person's signature on that post. "The following people appreciated this post".
That's what I had in mind, but people would still not be happy with that. (And why should they be? No one will ever read the list of +1s.)
I wouldn't want to invest time and energy into something that I didn't think people would use either, but why not find out if that's actually the case?
What about a thread in meta asking for people to vote?
There's actually a solution for that (Facebook already does it). When someone "like's" something, it would show their name right under that person's signature on that post. "The following people appreciated this post".
That's what I had in mind, but people would still not be happy with that. (And why should they be? No one will ever read the list of +1s.)
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
Some forums got a "Thank you" feature, where if you like someone's post, you can just click on the link or button and your name gets added to the list of people thanking for that post. I would like that more than a voting system, feels more personal, and doesn't merge disagreements with agreements.
People would still post "+1" stuff all the time because they'd want their opinions to be more visible.
There's actually a solution for that (Facebook already does it). When someone "like's" something, it would show their name right under that person's signature on that post. "The following people appreciated this post".
Has anyone figured out which sockpuppetry Grue belongs to?
I met a Grue, "Said how do you do?"
Said, "How do you do, too?"
To which I replied, "Fine by you."
Not so true, Grue.
If by inferring Grue not true,
Could Grue still be true to you?
Perhaps it is not Grue by GNU,
Or Grue by U?
But grew by Grue that rings true.
Time flew, "Must be going, Grue."
Uncomfortable pause grew...
Grue knew that apart from that,
Grue had to know that,
Time flew, glad that,
Moving past,
Uncomfortable moment, thought,
"Well, that's enough of that!"
FF
I met a Grue, "Said how do you do?"
Said, "How do you do, too?"
To which I replied, "Fine by you."
Not so true, Grue.
If by inferring Grue not true,
Could Grue still be true to you?
Perhaps it is not Grue by GNU,
Or Grue by U?
But grew by Grue that rings true.
Time flew, "Must be going, Grue."
Uncomfortable pause grew...
Grue knew that apart from that,
Grue had to know that,
Time flew, glad that,
Moving past,
Uncomfortable moment, thought,
"Well, that's enough of that!"
FF
^ This, is a perfect example of a post with no real clear contribution to the thread, yet is not "^^" or "+/-1".
Good for laughs though lol.
Has anyone figured out which sockpuppetry Grue belongs to?
I met a Grue, "Said how do you do?"
Said, "How do you do, too?"
To which I replied, "Fine by you."
Not so true, Grue.
If by inferring Grue not true,
Could Grue still be true to you?
Perhaps it is not Grue by GNU,
Or Grue by U?
But grew by Grue that rings true.
Time flew, "Must be going, Grue."
Uncomfortable pause grew...
Grue knew that apart from that,
Grue had to know that,
Time flew, glad that,
Moving past,
Uncomfortable moment, thought,
"Well, that's enough of that!"
FF
I met a Grue, "Said how do you do?"
Said, "How do you do, too?"
To which I replied, "Fine by you."
Not so true, Grue.
If by inferring Grue not true,
Could Grue still be true to you?
Perhaps it is not Grue by GNU,
Or Grue by U?
But grew by Grue that rings true.
Time flew, "Must be going, Grue."
Uncomfortable pause grew...
Grue knew that apart from that,
Grue had to know that,
Time flew, glad that,
Moving past,
Uncomfortable moment, thought,
"Well, that's enough of that!"
FF
^ This, is a perfect example of a post with no real clear contribution to the thread, yet is not "^^" or "+/-1".
Good for laughs though lol.
Has anyone figured out which sockpuppetry Grue belongs to?
I met a Grue, "Said how do you do?"
Said, "How do you do, too?"
To which I replied, "Fine by you."
Not so true, Grue.
If by inferring Grue not true,
Could Grue still be true to you?
Perhaps it is not Grue by GNU,
Or Grue by U?
But grew by Grue that rings true.
Time flew, "Must be going, Grue."
Uncomfortable pause grew...
Grue knew that apart from that,
Grue had to know that,
Time flew, glad that,
Moving past,
Uncomfortable moment, thought,
"Well, that's enough of that!"
FF
I met a Grue, "Said how do you do?"
Said, "How do you do, too?"
To which I replied, "Fine by you."
Not so true, Grue.
If by inferring Grue not true,
Could Grue still be true to you?
Perhaps it is not Grue by GNU,
Or Grue by U?
But grew by Grue that rings true.
Time flew, "Must be going, Grue."
Uncomfortable pause grew...
Grue knew that apart from that,
Grue had to know that,
Time flew, glad that,
Moving past,
Uncomfortable moment, thought,
"Well, that's enough of that!"
FF
Some forums got a "Thank you" feature, where if you like someone's post, you can just click on the link or button and your name gets added to the list of people thanking for that post. I would like that more than a voting system, feels more personal, and doesn't merge disagreements with agreements.
People would still post "+1" stuff all the time because they'd want their opinions to be more visible.
But in this case, it would be fair to punish those people, as there is already a system in place to +1 people without creating a new reply.
Free Speech > Nitpicks.
It's not about restricting free speech. If you (don't) support someone, that's fine. All I ask is not to post replies that add nothing to the conversation.Exactly.
That's irony.
Some forums got a "Thank you" feature, where if you like someone's post, you can just click on the link or button and your name gets added to the list of people thanking for that post. I would like that more than a voting system, feels more personal, and doesn't merge disagreements with agreements.
People would still post "+1" stuff all the time because they'd want their opinions to be more visible.
...
Maybe not, but banning/deleting posts which you don't agree with, for whatever reason, is to be against freedom of expression. I can understand spam (as in, real spam,) and I abhor spam, but when someone has nothing to add to a conversation and yet wants to express that they are in agreement (thus cutting redundancy, i.e., Bill speaks his mind, Jane is in complete agreement because she was going to say the same thing, so instead of saying that same thing, she simply +1's), I don't feel it is up to a higher power (the mods and our beloved admin) to enforce a personal tick. I say this because I've never been bothered by +1, ^, "This", etc., especially when they're in favor of my posts
Sure, we can force people to make detailed posts. But sometimes a +1 is all someone wants to get off their chest. Perhaps this is an effect of social media, however...it's easy to "Like" a post on Facebook or "thumb-up" a comment on YouTube, right?
To meet in the middle, I'd propose a system in which users can vote up and vote down posts, if for nothing more than to eliminate the need for the +1 posts. There could also be a feature which auto-hides posts with a high amount of downvotes.
Maybe not, but banning/deleting posts which you don't agree with, for whatever reason, is to be against freedom of expression. I can understand spam (as in, real spam,) and I abhor spam, but when someone has nothing to add to a conversation and yet wants to express that they are in agreement (thus cutting redundancy, i.e., Bill speaks his mind, Jane is in complete agreement because she was going to say the same thing, so instead of saying that same thing, she simply +1's), I don't feel it is up to a higher power (the mods and our beloved admin) to enforce a personal tick. I say this because I've never been bothered by +1, ^, "This", etc., especially when they're in favor of my posts
Sure, we can force people to make detailed posts. But sometimes a +1 is all someone wants to get off their chest. Perhaps this is an effect of social media, however...it's easy to "Like" a post on Facebook or "thumb-up" a comment on YouTube, right?To meet in the middle, I'd propose a system in which users can vote up and vote down posts, if for nothing more than to eliminate the need for the +1 posts. There could also be a feature which auto-hides posts with a high amount of downvotes.
Free Speech > Nitpicks.
It's not about restricting free speech.Maybe not, but banning/deleting posts which you don't agree with, for whatever reason, is to be against freedom of expression. I can understand spam (as in, real spam,) and I abhor spam, but when someone has nothing to add to a conversation and yet wants to express that they are in agreement (thus cutting redundancy, i.e., Bill speaks his mind, Jane is in complete agreement because she was going to say the same thing, so instead of saying that same thing, she simply +1's), I don't feel it is up to a higher power (the mods and our beloved admin) to enforce a personal tick. I say this because I've never been bothered by +1, ^, "This", etc., especially when they're in favor of my posts
Sure, we can force people to make detailed posts. But sometimes a +1 is all someone wants to get off their chest. Perhaps this is an effect of social media, however...it's easy to "Like" a post on Facebook or "thumb-up" a comment on YouTube, right?To meet in the middle, I'd propose a system in which users can vote up and vote down posts, if for nothing more than to eliminate the need for the +1 posts. There could also be a feature which auto-hides posts with a high amount of downvotes.
Jump to: