But some of the best users only have a few of posts (MDT anyone?), while some posters made over 1000 since the start of the beta.
So about the post count... I don't care.
Forum Index > Polls & Liquibet |
shalafi
394 Posts
But some of the best users only have a few of posts (MDT anyone?), while some posters made over 1000 since the start of the beta. So about the post count... I don't care. | ||
HDstarcraft
United States577 Posts
| ||
Husky
United States3362 Posts
| ||
arew
Lithuania1861 Posts
| ||
Jon The Baptist
Ireland24 Posts
not unless you make a video with puppys! | ||
snpnx
Germany454 Posts
otherwise it's still a good thing to put a bit more weight into answers from users with ridiculous high post counts. As the commandments say, you should respect your elders. | ||
defuzas
248 Posts
| ||
Iplaythings
Denmark9110 Posts
| ||
Apolo
Portugal1259 Posts
| ||
Eatme
Switzerland3919 Posts
| ||
---Disco---
United Kingdom8 Posts
| ||
meegrean
Thailand7699 Posts
| ||
Kyo Yuy
United States1286 Posts
On June 14 2010 21:31 snpnx wrote: Let it stay as it is, if someone spams for more posts, ban him, otherwise it's still a good thing to put a bit more weight into answers from users with ridiculous high post counts. As the commandments say, you should respect your elders. I know quite a few users who joined TL around the same time as me (late 08/early 09) who have five times my post count or greater. A low post count does not imply a new member. I just don't post that much because I don't have that much that I want to say. | ||
ZenDeX
Philippines2916 Posts
| ||
Kanil
United States1713 Posts
Unfortunately, my post count is rather... short. But some day, it might be large and I could lord myself over the small dicked newbies! So we should keep it as is. | ||
Mykill
Canada3402 Posts
| ||
NuKedUFirst
Canada3139 Posts
| ||
KasPra
Estonia983 Posts
| ||
Titusmaster6
United States5932 Posts
| ||
wishbones
Canada2600 Posts
| ||
Subversive
Australia2229 Posts
On June 14 2010 21:44 meegrean wrote: Posts + Average post per week as well would probably better insight about user. This would be nice. Seriously, people who spam every thread they see with one to two words like 'awesome!' '+1', the name of the progamer being discussed, or 'This' are so irritating. Padding post stats doesn't make you a 'veteran' in my eyes. I'd rather read an MDT thread or 7mk comment than most of the people who manage 500 posts a week. On June 14 2010 21:39 Eatme wrote: Postcount in profile and joindate where the postcount is. If not keep it as it is now. On June 14 2010 22:17 NuKedUFirst wrote: Post count and date joined, Posts:500 Date: 08/07/07 or something like that would be excellent ^_^ Either of these would be fine as well. I usually check join dates because I don't trust the raw post count number. Edit: On June 14 2010 22:22 KasPra wrote: If you take the post count down people will post less and there will be a lot less useless posts imo, ive seen that action taken in a lot of forums and it usually works quite well. I voted i dont care though cause i never visit the sc2 forums. Keeping post counts seems a nice way of seeing who a veteran is though as well as how active they are on the forums. But agreed, it might cut down on spam. | ||
Boundz(DarKo)
5311 Posts
| ||
Aurdon
United States2007 Posts
I agree with the people that have said that Join Date is far more telling of a person's veteran status than whether a person has a high post count or not. | ||
diggurd
Norway346 Posts
| ||
Subversive
Australia2229 Posts
On June 14 2010 22:32 Boundz(DarKo) wrote: I choosed "keep it as it is" but when I thought about it, I'd really like to see the "joined tl.net date" instead of post count. Either one or both! Agreed. Poll needs to have that option. I chose 'keep it as it is' but I'd prefer an option 'add join date' or 'posts per week'. | ||
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
On June 14 2010 22:41 diggurd wrote: if this is a matter of veterans and oldschoolness join date should replace post count. This is not OT. Having post count only is just fine imo. Having a join date appear instead of a post count encourages lurking and gives entitlement to users with a certain join date. The sites been around forever so a join date is pretty useless. Most posters before 07 are the "BW players" and a lot of the newer users are "BW players AND/OR SC2 players." Does that make them any different? Not really so why use join date? Also post count is a better reflection of user quality than join date. Anyone who spams typically gets smacked by the ban stick a few times, and the mods MUST have a way to keep track of this. On June 14 2010 22:24 wishbones wrote: Post counts are awesome I always check a users post count before posting some of my responses to their posts. Lol, and then when I go and click user profile If they joined before me, with a post count of 2 I definitely change my post. Simply put, the longer a member has been here, the more leisure they have over me. Well get me a soda!!! | ||
Whole
United States6046 Posts
What if you remove both completely? You won't have people padding threads with their one liners just to increase post count. People who are so eager for forum fame will have to try to get it by being recognized through quality posts. And discussions of strategy won't instantly get shut down because the person didn't not have high enough post count. This isn't a matter of being a veteran or not, it is a matter of increasing quality of the forums and to reduce discrimination. | ||
TheNessman
United States4158 Posts
| ||
NeV
Italy370 Posts
On June 14 2010 22:24 wishbones wrote: Post counts are awesome I always check a users post count before posting some of my responses to their posts. Lol, and then when I go and click user profile If they joined before me, with a post count of 2 I definitely change my post. Simply put, the longer a member has been here, the more leisure they have over me. In my opinion postcount should be only visible to admins and mods, so they can take their decisions in case of spam or bad posts etc. On the other hand I don't see a real reason to keep them visible to everyone (if not to enlarge the ego of old users, which is not a valid reason in my opinion). It wouldn't be a problem if everyone was mature enough, but from my experience on tl forum, which lasts from 2006, that's not the case. I've seen many times the "old" user trash talking and acting cocky towards the newcomer just for his status. | ||
Qwertify
United States2531 Posts
It is a bit coarse and somewhat unscrupulous, but I don't think users have oodles of time to constantly check join dates and other info. EDIT: Join Date does not equal (~=) time spent on the forums. I can have joined six years ago, have rediscovered SC, and only now have started posting. I think people just have to use a combination of info, including the posts themselves, previous posts, join date, post count, posts this week, etc. In short, you are trading one kind of hole of information for another. Besides. just because someone created an account on TL.net recently, does not mean they are a noob to the scene. Again, on the opposite end, just because someone joined a few years back does not make them an automatic veteran. Long Time Member + Large Post count = Veteran (<- this is the only logical thing to conclude) Long Time Member + Small Post count = ??? Short Time Member + Large Post count = ??? Short Time Member + Small Post count = ??? | ||
FreshVegetables
Finland513 Posts
| ||
ZenDeX
Philippines2916 Posts
On June 14 2010 23:03 Qwertify wrote: Long Time Member + Large Post count = Veteran (<- this is the only logical thing to conclude) Long Time Member + Small Post count = Lurker Short Time Member + Large Post count = Spammer Short Time Member + Small Post count = Newbie There. | ||
Subversive
Australia2229 Posts
On June 14 2010 23:03 Qwertify wrote: Yeah, keep as is. I actually look at post count before I see the name. In a LR I know who said what by their post count. If it is a new number, like 788, and no one I've seen recently has that much in the LR, then I will scan the name in conjunction with the message to see if what they say has any value. It is a bit coarse and somewhat unscrupulous, but I don't think users have oodles of time to constantly check join dates and other info. EDIT: Join Date does not equal (~=) time spent on the forums. I can have joined six years ago, have rediscovered SC, and only now have started posting. I think people just have to use a combination of info, including the posts themselves, previous posts, join date, post count, posts this week, etc. In short, you are trading one kind of hole of information for another. Besides. just because someone created an account on TL.net recently, does not mean they are a noob to the scene. Again, on the opposite end, just because someone joined a few years back does not make them an automatic veteran. Long Time Member + Large Post count = Veteran (<- this is the only logical thing to conclude) Long Time Member + Small Post count = ??? Short Time Member + Large Post count = ??? Short Time Member + Small Post count = ??? I agree with what you're saying here. However, I'd hasten to add that while join date certainly does not equal time spent on the forums, neither does a lack of post count signify a lack of time spent on the forums. It simply happens that some people lurk a lot and don't post but spend heaps of time here while others spam like crazy - irrespective of the total time they spend here. I think the point is though, it shouldn't matter greatly if you're new to tl or have been here since the beginning. What seems more important is the quality of what you write, your contributions to the community and the way you treat other people on tl. Let me say though that I agree that forum members who have been here for years or do stacks for the site/community deserve everyone's respect. And in some cases adulation (unless they're pricks ) | ||
noname_
454 Posts
EDIT: Join Date does not equal (~=) time spent on the forums. I can have joined six years ago, have rediscovered SC, and only now have started posting. Posting frequency and post count are equal with the time spent on forums? I do not think so. There are people who just like reading stuff too. Why should someone post in every possible topic? Just to "post something very important" - what usually has not got any value or does not have to do anything with the actual question/discussion. | ||
TheKnight
Romania77 Posts
| ||
iamho
3344 Posts
| ||
mcneebs
Canada391 Posts
| ||
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
=> Result: less spam ^^ | ||
IceCube
Croatia1403 Posts
On June 14 2010 21:46 Kyo Yuy wrote: A low post count does not imply a new member. I just don't post that much because I don't have that much that I want to say. This plus thing is that if I don't have anything good to say I rather keep it to myself and prefer not to troll. | ||
okum
France5776 Posts
| ||
Hyde
Australia14568 Posts
And besides, people who frequent this site already know who the spammers are and who the great posters are already. People who continuously disrespect this forum/have horrible posting habits are removed in the long run so I don't think we really need to change anything, but I voted remove post count (before thinking properly). | ||
Incanus
Canada695 Posts
Join date would be nice though, maybe just going by years to keep it simple? Or best of all, have the option to see users post count or join date? | ||
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
On June 14 2010 23:45 Hyde wrote: I don't know, I voted too quickly before thinking about it. I don't think erasing post count will eradicate spamming, people will always write lol or one liners no matter what anyway. If you do remove them then people will most likely turn to icons as some indication. It'll be no different since worker icon is the same thing as low post count. Then people will spam again to change their icon. And besides, people who frequent this site already know who the spammers are and who the great posters are already. People who continuously disrespect this forum/have horrible posting habits are removed in the long run so I don't think we really need to change anything, but I voted remove post count (before thinking properly). I think there is a formula to prevent this from happening | ||
Lovin
Denmark812 Posts
| ||
GreEny K
Germany7312 Posts
| ||
Taekwon
United States8155 Posts
| ||
Trozz
Canada3439 Posts
Is this to reduce spam threads? like "1000th post!" | ||
So no fek
United States3001 Posts
| ||
G3nXsiS
United States656 Posts
| ||
cronican
Canada424 Posts
Post count /= good poster Having a post counter visible is a reward for people who spam shit posts. Which, IMO, is the worst thing about the team liquid forums. In order to get to anything useful I have to wade through pages and pages of "Lol" and "Epic" or stupid things like that. Why would you reward someone who does that with respect? Regdate is much better, because it gauges how long someone has been following the scene, AND that he or she has not been banned in that time, so their posts are therefore somewhat more useful to read. | ||
CCGaunt
United States417 Posts
Keep post counts, only weak posters fear having their posts shown. | ||
khellian
Korea (South)922 Posts
| ||
Shiladie
Canada1631 Posts
| ||
nttea
Sweden4353 Posts
| ||
valaki
Hungary2476 Posts
| ||
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
| ||
wiesel
Germany727 Posts
| ||
Vequeth
United Kingdom1116 Posts
On June 15 2010 01:23 travis wrote: I don't see the point of removing it? Is it to fight spam? You think those idiots won't make shitty posts for reasons other than post count as well? Its to stop the high post count circle jerk that goes on if people less than 100 posts make a comment. If you guys want to compete with this new website husky/hd just opened up you are gonna have to be a bit more welcoming to people who aren't 'old vets'. Posts should be judged on the content of the post, not the guy who posts it. | ||
bubblegumbo
Taiwan1296 Posts
As long as there are special icons for those that contribute and work for TL then there shouldn't be a problem. | ||
liaf
Norway318 Posts
| ||
potatoedoughnut
United States334 Posts
| ||
yB.TeH
Germany413 Posts
| ||
Misrah
United States1695 Posts
| ||
mcgriddle
United States253 Posts
| ||
MorroW
Sweden3522 Posts
| ||
xsn
Poland66 Posts
easy way to tell which posts to pay attention to | ||
Grobyc
Canada18410 Posts
On June 14 2010 21:24 arew wrote: Keep postcount as it is! | ||
StarStruck
25339 Posts
If you have been here long enough, you know who the quality posters are. The icons and stars beside a guy's name is a good enough indicator to separate the good contributors from the bad. There was a huge influx of spammers for beta keys. We should give others no incentive to post a ridiculous amount of times. I think you would see a huge boost in quality over quantity on this website. Something we have been missing around here since 2004. | ||
ccdnl
United States611 Posts
| ||
SoL[9]
Portugal1370 Posts
| ||
holy_war
United States3590 Posts
| ||
Thrill
2599 Posts
| ||
Kezzer
United States1268 Posts
| ||
QueueQueue
Canada1000 Posts
| ||
Leath
Canada1724 Posts
Although, I understand we want to keep our forums free of trolls, I find that this system is a bit too harsh on newcomers. A lot of old members get some sort of get way card on their inappropriate responses, while the new members get bashes and ignored for their opinions. Just keep the forums clean and convenient regardless of members age, sex, color, post count, nationality or w/e other discrimination. | ||
Actuality
United States13 Posts
| ||
myopia
United States2928 Posts
One thing I've always wondered though is why our profiles have an average daily and weekly post count, when the latter is always just 7x the former. | ||
ibreakurface
United States664 Posts
| ||
Naoko
Sweden53 Posts
| ||
Biff The Understudy
France7653 Posts
Most people who arrive here don't know who Idra or Incontrol are. So for a noob, being able to make the difference between someone who has 36 post and someone who has 11 000 is very important. Removing it would be plain silly. | ||
Pokebunny
United States10654 Posts
On June 15 2010 02:08 Misrah wrote: Having Join date would be nice would take that in place of post count. meeple is a great example of a post spammer... really join date i think is the best way to gauge users what do you have against meeple lol I've seen a few posts of yours like this. | ||
404.Delirium
United States1190 Posts
On June 14 2010 21:41 ---Disco--- wrote: People discriminate based on post count Generally for good reason. Also, I don't see why there's any call to change things. I'm afraid of change D: | ||
Pablols
Chile517 Posts
| ||
enzym
Germany1034 Posts
a system that lets people rate posts of other people might be a better measure to see how good of a poster they are. but rating others down could also lead to abuse (as seen on youtube, or "being carried by a majority doesnt make something right"). that could be prevented by stopping to count negative votes at 0 reputation and you could then get good rep by a few amazing posts or by a larger sum of good posts, which means that both quality and loyalty are rewarded. i voted to remove postcount entirely, but having it next to a real reputation system would do no harm as spammers would then be exposed anyways just by having both numbers next to each other. | ||
Jayme
United States5866 Posts
On June 14 2010 21:18 shalafi wrote: Sincerely, the join date is more useful to classify people. I see myself looking at join dates all the time. "This HAS to be a post sc2 user"->check->95% of the times I'm right. But some of the best users only have a few of posts (MDT anyone?), while some posters made over 1000 since the start of the beta. So about the post count... I don't care. It's unfortunate how accurate what you said is...I've certainly noticed the same thing. Join date is far and away more important than someone's post count. I usually give an extra year to peoples join date due to how often people before 2009 lurked awhile before even creating an account...I know I lurked for about half a year before posting a single time. | ||
Issor
United States870 Posts
| ||
flamewheel
FREEAGLELAND26780 Posts
I like people going "wtf y so many posts" | ||
micronesia
United States24342 Posts
| ||
ThePhan2m
Norway2736 Posts
On June 15 2010 03:34 Biff The Understudy wrote: It would be horribly hard for newcomers to know who is who and who you should remember etc etc etc without the post count. Most people who arrive here don't know who Idra or Incontrol are. So for a noob, being able to make the difference between someone who has 36 post and someone who has 11 000 is very important. Removing it would be plain silly. agreed, tho the most important people on TL have special Icons | ||
Engdrew
United States890 Posts
i voted for keeping post count...but we'll see | ||
surprise
Germany38 Posts
I'm mostly a lurker and don't feel the need to add my 5 cents. As long as a person has something valid to say, post count does (read: should) not matter. | ||
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
| ||
Slayer91
Ireland23335 Posts
| ||
3FFA
United States3931 Posts
On June 15 2010 05:05 Chairman Ray wrote: I want everyone to know how big a spammer I am! lol Just realized I'm a bigger spammer than you since I joined last February. More On Topic: 1st of all, who made this?!? 2nd of all, keep it as it is! Lets us distinguish veterans from non-veterans easier. I personally think this is because of the biggest spammer on TL.net. HIM. | ||
newvsoldschool
428 Posts
| ||
GreatFall
United States1061 Posts
| ||
Deleted User 31060
3788 Posts
On June 15 2010 00:39 Trozz wrote: I'd keep the post count. Is this to reduce spam threads? like "1000th post!" We need to keep the post count to keep track of how many haikus Trozz has blessed us with. But seriously, I don't see any reason to change this. I definitely see the benefit of displaying join date, too. | ||
LonelyMargarita
1845 Posts
| ||
GreEny K
Germany7312 Posts
On June 15 2010 00:32 GreEny K wrote: I think a join date should be applied to the user banner as well, I usually post with more respect to the older users, unless their posts are garbage and most of them are "LOL" "THAT WAS SWEET" "OMG" or my personal favorite "^" (to agree with the previous poster). Anyway, join dates with post counts would be cool. On a side note, since sc2 beta came out and the influx of new members I can definitely notice the difference in posts. You can tell when a post is made by a post beta member or by an old school BW player. On June 15 2010 02:17 Grobyc wrote: Like I said. | ||
Darksun
United States17 Posts
| ||
Evoke
New Zealand50 Posts
Later, announce facebook integration of TL, for great justice. | ||
Qw4z1
Sweden55 Posts
| ||
LunarDestiny
United States4177 Posts
| ||
Qw4z1
Sweden55 Posts
On June 15 2010 05:52 Evoke wrote: Add a little clickable star rating feature near the post count, so that people can rate other people's posts. Whoever gets x 5-rated posts gets +1 in whatever 'count of quality'.. Later, announce facebook integration of TL, for great justice. Dude... plz dont read my mind... | ||
DeathByMonkeys
United States742 Posts
| ||
NeV
Italy370 Posts
On June 15 2010 01:42 Red_Storm wrote: Show nested quote + On June 15 2010 01:23 travis wrote: I don't see the point of removing it? Is it to fight spam? You think those idiots won't make shitty posts for reasons other than post count as well? Its to stop the high post count circle jerk that goes on if people less than 100 posts make a comment. If you guys want to compete with this new website husky/hd just opened up you are gonna have to be a bit more welcoming to people who aren't 'old vets'. Posts should be judged on the content of the post, not the guy who posts it. This. I don't understand how you can't get it. It seems absolutely fair to me | ||
Biff The Understudy
France7653 Posts
On June 15 2010 05:57 NeV wrote: Show nested quote + On June 15 2010 01:42 Red_Storm wrote: On June 15 2010 01:23 travis wrote: I don't see the point of removing it? Is it to fight spam? You think those idiots won't make shitty posts for reasons other than post count as well? Its to stop the high post count circle jerk that goes on if people less than 100 posts make a comment. If you guys want to compete with this new website husky/hd just opened up you are gonna have to be a bit more welcoming to people who aren't 'old vets'. Posts should be judged on the content of the post, not the guy who posts it. This. I don't understand how you can't get it. It seems absolutely fair to me Just no. When you see someone like Incontrol with 10K post, you know that probably he knows more about this website and sc in general than the Joe Noob and his 34 posts. And the point is, Tom Noob doesn't know either Joe Noob and Incontrol. So there is the post count to make the difference. It's perfectly normal that people have an idea of how much someone they talk with has brought to this website. I know the name of most 5K+ post user, because when I see a 5K+ post user, I read his name twice. I wouldn't know anybody except the mods without the post counts. | ||
Silentness
United States2821 Posts
On June 14 2010 21:18 shalafi wrote: So about the post count... I don't care. ^^^ This reminds me of the shoryuken website. They hid the "join date" because a lot of the older members were bashing the new members that joined right after SFIV came out. Honestly long as the poster makes quality posts it doesn't matter when they joined/how many posts they have. | ||
XFire
United States131 Posts
| ||
NeV
Italy370 Posts
Just no. When you see someone like Incontrol with 10K post, you know that probably he knows more about this website and sc in general than the Joe Noob and his 34 posts. And the point is, Tom Noob doesn't know either Joe Noob and Incontrol. So there is the post count to make the difference. It's perfectly normal that people have an idea of how much someone they talk with has brought to this website. I know the name of most 5K+ post user, because when I see a 5K+ post user, I read his name twice. I wouldn't know anybody except the mods without the post counts. I partly agree with your point, but i repeat: this system would be ideal if everyone was wise enough not to judge the comments ONLY by the post count. Unfortunately that's not the case, and you can see it reading this thread. A lot of the people just ignore the comments from newcomers. Well, that's not fair and doesn't induce new users to give their contribute, and for example it's the reason why I have only 80 posts even if I've been on this site for 4 years: posting here is frustrating cause basically nobody cares if you haven't a high post count. | ||
FaCE_1
Canada6117 Posts
| ||
Contagious
United States1319 Posts
| ||
Simsar
Sweden27 Posts
On June 15 2010 06:31 NeV wrote: + Show Spoiler + Just no. When you see someone like Incontrol with 10K post, you know that probably he knows more about this website and sc in general than the Joe Noob and his 34 posts. And the point is, Tom Noob doesn't know either Joe Noob and Incontrol. So there is the post count to make the difference. It's perfectly normal that people have an idea of how much someone they talk with has brought to this website. I know the name of most 5K+ post user, because when I see a 5K+ post user, I read his name twice. I wouldn't know anybody except the mods without the post counts. I partly agree with your point, but i repeat: this system would be ideal if everyone was wise enough not to judge the comments ONLY by the post count. Unfortunately that's not the case, and you can see it reading this thread. A lot of the people just ignore the comments from newcomers. Well, that's not fair and doesn't induce new users to give their contribute, and for example it's the reason why I have only 80 posts even if I've been on this site for 4 years: posting here is frustrating cause basically nobody cares if you haven't a high post count. I agree completly with you, I just joined in november 2009, even though i had been visiting the site since march, not to get into the discussions of the Sc2, but rather because me and some of my friends was at the Dreamexpo in person and as the demand of info from the testing of SC2 was so high. After that, I rarely even posted, just because of how little everyone cared. | ||
Nal_rAwr
United States2611 Posts
| ||
Klapdout
United States282 Posts
It just feels less community oriented, with no sense of seniority, and more anonymous, at least thats the impression I get when viewing forums with no post counts. | ||
PineappleSage
Canada109 Posts
I would love to have ranks of team liquid: some idea's Proplayer TLO, Day[9]'s aprentices, Husky's video addicts, tecys, timmies (day9 refrence) A big <3 you TL =) | ||
crate
United States2474 Posts
| ||
KaRnaGe[cF]
United States355 Posts
| ||
DownMaxX
Canada1311 Posts
| ||
MutaDoom
Canada1163 Posts
| ||
QuixoticO
Netherlands810 Posts
| ||
da_head
Canada3350 Posts
| ||
Trezeguet
United States2656 Posts
Post count is fun, icons are fun, join date is fun. It is nice to know who the veterans and lurkers and spammers are, but none of these things really mean as much as a star next to someone's name, or the perception the community has of that person. This site is awesome, no matter what is chosen, some people will wish it was another way. | ||
Lightningbullet
United States507 Posts
| ||
FiWiFaKi
Canada9858 Posts
| ||
enzym
Germany1034 Posts
On June 15 2010 07:38 Skillz_Man wrote: I like it how it is, but what do you guys think about words/post? I think that could tell quality pretty well and it would encourage people to not yes say useless stuff like "GO Flash"... I don't know what you guys think but I like that idea. And for joined TL date, I was a lurker for a long time even though I had an account. word count would lead to people writing long ass posts just for the sake of it, instead of because getting their point across in a well formulated way requires it. post count leads to people writing lots of posts instead of only writing them when they have something to say. | ||
PanoRaMa
United States5068 Posts
1. Posts AND Join Date 2. Posts in Profile, Join Date on bar | ||
FiWiFaKi
Canada9858 Posts
On June 15 2010 07:48 enzym wrote: Show nested quote + On June 15 2010 07:38 Skillz_Man wrote: I like it how it is, but what do you guys think about words/post? I think that could tell quality pretty well and it would encourage people to not yes say useless stuff like "GO Flash"... I don't know what you guys think but I like that idea. And for joined TL date, I was a lurker for a long time even though I had an account. word count would lead to people writing long ass posts just for the sake of it, instead of because getting their point across in a well formulated way requires it. post count leads to people writing lots of posts instead of only writing them when they have something to say. Well yes but Words/Post and Join date would be perfect tbh, people like showing that effort they put in, people want to have many posts, but instead if it's words/post then even if it's a "long ass post" it will have more insight in it no matter what, and I think it would be better than reading pages of one liners. I think that would be the way to go, at first I suppose it feels like a weird statistic but atleast people wont be posting very useless stuff. | ||
Thrill
2599 Posts
| ||
SC2Phoenix
Canada2814 Posts
| ||
Ouga
Finland645 Posts
But on poll, I think postcounts are like stats in bnet, iccup and such - you just want to know where you stand and how hard you've "worked". It's matter of preference where they are shown, but removing postcounts would serve no purpose. As said, it's easy to be annoying elitist and deleting postcount wouldn't really affect how these people behave. | ||
kajeus
United States679 Posts
| ||
Whole
United States6046 Posts
Also, be aware that issue isn't as big of a problem yet. Basically, we have Brood War veterans with high post counts that everyone respects, and these people deserve it too because they're likely better than us who are new to the genre. The only problem right now is spam and people outright bashing others with lower post count. Imagine about a year after Starcraft 2 is released. Now anyone can have a high post count if they wish by spamming shallow replies. Other people will be bias toward these people, and rarely they will check their actual posts to see if it has any quality. Most people look and judge based on the quantity displayed on top of the post, not the quality of that user's post. In large communities, this is a snowball effect. The more time that passes, the more time people can spend inflating their post count. Removing post count won't remove spam entirely, but it would, at the very least, give no benefit for spamming. Also, it would highly encourage those who desire forum fame to actually earn it by posting post and threads to actually be remembered. Without post count, people will look at the actual reply before judging that person. If they make a quality post, the readers will remember the name for the quality, not the little number next to the name. | ||
Mastermind
Canada7096 Posts
| ||
enzym
Germany1034 Posts
On June 15 2010 08:54 Mastermind wrote: Keep it please. Post count is an important tool you can use to help judge someone's post. When I see someone with a low post count giving questionable advice in a strategy thread I know to just ignore it because they are a noob. Also, when someone gets to 5000 posts and they arent banned, it lets you know that the person's input is probably decent, although thats not always the case. Post count is a helpful guide if used properly. just in case you are not trolling and this is a serious reply i want to remind you that 5000-posts-people started out with 0 posts, too. do you believe that their posts were worth less that time than they are now? | ||
danieldrsa
Brazil522 Posts
Im under 500 posts but joined around 2007, i just prefer to post when i feel its worth saying something | ||
kajeus
United States679 Posts
| ||
Contagious
United States1319 Posts
| ||
Kuja900
United States3564 Posts
| ||
Xxio
Canada5565 Posts
On June 15 2010 08:57 enzym wrote: Show nested quote + On June 15 2010 08:54 Mastermind wrote: Keep it please. Post count is an important tool you can use to help judge someone's post. When I see someone with a low post count giving questionable advice in a strategy thread I know to just ignore it because they are a noob. Also, when someone gets to 5000 posts and they arent banned, it lets you know that the person's input is probably decent, although thats not always the case. Post count is a helpful guide if used properly. just in case you are not trolling and this is a serious reply i want to remind you that 5000-posts-people started out with 0 posts, too. do you believe that their posts were worth less that time than they are now? I do, most definitely. When you don't know anything, you probably aren't going to be very insightful/passionate/helpful. When I first started posting I was horrible, but now I think, because of how much time I've spend following StarCraft, my posts are a lot better. One of the staff, I think Hot_Bid or Chill? I don't remember, but one of them said that when they first came to TL they were a huge troll and totally useless, and they never thought they would become staff. I think that, like it is with all things, people can either learn from experience or ignore it. For a couple reasons I think most members fall into the former category: StarCraft and the Korean scene are inspiring, exciting, and every nerd's dream. The moderators and long-time members set a great example. The community you're joining provides so much content that at times it's overwhelming and amazing, motivating people to contribute or at least not dumb down the forums. I think putting someone's join date next to their post count is a bit aggressive, and, if anything, reinforcing the idea that only oldies are worth listening to (which, despite what I said before, isn't true) rather than people who provide content. Post count is helpful for new members more than anything. People with higher post counts know the people on the forum already, who to listen to, agree with, what kind of poster they are etc., and can tell new comers just from their icon, so it doesn't really matter. New members, on the other hand, especially with the number of people now posting, don't really know who to believe, what threads to read, who is the knowledgeable or experienced in a certain area. Post count, in combination with icons and forum stars, helped me to remember certain posters, look for them in threads, and gauge the credibility and knowledge behind posts/threads/discussions when I first joined. I like the way it is now, but even if post count goes away, the icons are good enough for me atm. | ||
shimpoe
88 Posts
Lots of constructive discussions end up being unvalidated because of some people's post count. Obviously, the moderators intervene when it's a large problem, but I still feel like it's something that happens more often on these forums than any other forum I've ever been on (possibly due to the competitive level of an RTS game like Starcraft? Not 100% sure on the reason). It just rubs me the wrong way when discussions are unvalidated based off of the person's post count, rather than the quality of their content. I often wonder sometimes to myself, I bet if Flash were to come on tl.net and make an account and post about strategy, he'd get flamed for his post count, and that's a sad truth on occasion here. However it's not all hopeless to me, I've seen moderators do great job of handling things like that when it gets too out of hand, but it still rears it's ugly head quite a lot. Either way I'll still keep coming back and following along the great topics provided here on these forums, but it's disheartening to say the least when I come across elitism on these boards, and it certainly discourages a number of people from participating on these forums. Although it's worth pointing out, I don't believe the flaw is in the post count being displayed, but actually in the person's interpretation of that number. Edit: Sloppily added in paragraph breaks to make readability increase by approximately 4000% | ||
Chuiu
3470 Posts
Meh. | ||
Athos
United States2484 Posts
When I read threads in my head, my brain prioritiezes information this manner. Good players: Lz, ret, nony Adminstrators: the reds Moderators: the blues High post count Short post count Just because you have lot of posts shouldn't make your post any less valid, who you are and what you're expertize will though. I think its a good number to have around, and people can interpret it however they want. | ||
anTi_
United States499 Posts
Plus it's always nice to see konadora's post number climb. | ||
-orb-
United States5770 Posts
| ||
KevinIX
United States2472 Posts
| ||
Aduromors
United States279 Posts
| ||
cgrinker
United States3824 Posts
| ||
TriniMasta
United States1323 Posts
The avatar should show people how much you have influenced this forum, as the higher tier the avatar the more posts you have. | ||
DrivE
United States2554 Posts
| ||
Chill
Calgary25938 Posts
On June 15 2010 09:46 shimpoe wrote: Actually one of the biggest reasons why this forum turns me off so much is from seeing the rampant elitism and arrogance of a lot of the users, solely based off of people's post count. For someone like me, I've followed the proleague scene for years, have owned and played starcraft since before Broodwar was even out, and lurked the forums for a very long time before ever actually making a post/account. I keep coming back to the forum because there is a lot of quality content on these boards, but at times it feels like the elitism and overall arrogance overshadows that, and a lot of that revolves around bigotry over trivial things like someone's post count. Lots of constructive discussions end up being unvalidated because of some people's post count. Obviously, the moderators intervene when it's a large problem, but I still feel like it's something that happens more often on these forums than any other forum I've ever been on (possibly due to the competitive level of an RTS game like Starcraft? Not 100% sure on the reason). It just rubs me the wrong way when discussions are unvalidated based off of the person's post count, rather than the quality of their content. I often wonder sometimes to myself, I bet if Flash were to come on tl.net and make an account and post about strategy, he'd get flamed for his post count, and that's a sad truth on occasion here. However it's not all hopeless to me, I've seen moderators do great job of handling things like that when it gets too out of hand, but it still rears it's ugly head quite a lot. Either way I'll still keep coming back and following along the great topics provided here on these forums, but it's disheartening to say the least when I come across elitism on these boards, and it certainly discourages a number of people from participating on these forums. Although it's worth pointing out, I don't believe the flaw is in the post count being displayed, but actually in the person's interpretation of that number. Edit: Sloppily added in paragraph breaks to make readability increase by approximately 4000% Can you cite some examples? | ||
]343[
United States10328 Posts
| ||
Vancebla_
29 Posts
| ||
Saturnize
United States2473 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + lol | ||
faction123
Australia949 Posts
force people to use their brains please | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On the other hand, I don't really see a reason to keep them either. I still like getting different icons, though. :x And the big 10k/20k posts. I've got no problem with elitism though. | ||
Chill
Calgary25938 Posts
On June 15 2010 12:55 Jibba wrote: I can't recall many of examples of people "prejudging" each other based on post number. I guess I might biased on whether they have a pro team selected (a quick way to judge if they followed BW) or when their join date is, but it usually doesn't change my reaction to them. If they say something retarded, then I'll just check their post history to see if they're like 60% SC2 forum, 40% Kpop thread. On the other hand, I don't really see a reason to keep them either. I still like getting different icons, though. :x And the big 10k/20k posts. I've got no problem with elitism though. Yea, I really think it's just some phantom force people feel without it actually existing. I've never seen someone talk down to someone based on post count. | ||
PobTheCad
Australia893 Posts
| ||
shimpoe
88 Posts
On June 15 2010 11:50 Chill wrote: Show nested quote + On June 15 2010 09:46 shimpoe wrote: Actually one of the biggest reasons why this forum turns me off so much is from seeing the rampant elitism and arrogance of a lot of the users, solely based off of people's post count. For someone like me, I've followed the proleague scene for years, have owned and played starcraft since before Broodwar was even out, and lurked the forums for a very long time before ever actually making a post/account. I keep coming back to the forum because there is a lot of quality content on these boards, but at times it feels like the elitism and overall arrogance overshadows that, and a lot of that revolves around bigotry over trivial things like someone's post count. Lots of constructive discussions end up being unvalidated because of some people's post count. Obviously, the moderators intervene when it's a large problem, but I still feel like it's something that happens more often on these forums than any other forum I've ever been on (possibly due to the competitive level of an RTS game like Starcraft? Not 100% sure on the reason). It just rubs me the wrong way when discussions are unvalidated based off of the person's post count, rather than the quality of their content. I often wonder sometimes to myself, I bet if Flash were to come on tl.net and make an account and post about strategy, he'd get flamed for his post count, and that's a sad truth on occasion here. However it's not all hopeless to me, I've seen moderators do great job of handling things like that when it gets too out of hand, but it still rears it's ugly head quite a lot. Either way I'll still keep coming back and following along the great topics provided here on these forums, but it's disheartening to say the least when I come across elitism on these boards, and it certainly discourages a number of people from participating on these forums. Although it's worth pointing out, I don't believe the flaw is in the post count being displayed, but actually in the person's interpretation of that number. Edit: Sloppily added in paragraph breaks to make readability increase by approximately 4000% Can you cite some examples? Sure, I'll just throw out a random example http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=130776¤tpage=3#53 Now to be fair, I have a few things to say about that post. First, I'm not really looking to get people warned/banned, I don't have some agenda to tattletale. Also it's quite possible that maybe I'm just being defensive and putting a negative tone to what that user (Ahzz) said. But when I read a post like that I think to myself, "Ugh, why would you mention post count when the OP is just trying to have a legitimate discussion revolving around his concern of being bored with protoss?" Now obviously the thread was closed, but that's besides the point. Now this isn't the greatest example, it's just the first one I found, but the point is: one user feels it's important that the OP's post count should be brought into the discussion. Also I understand that it's very much a minority of posters who even engage in that kind of behavior, but there's no denying that it happens. If you want further examples, just look closely at the thought process that many people have expressed throughout this thread about low post count users. I know I didn't really dig for much longer than maybe 2-3 minutes so I didn't provide the best example, but I have to wonder: Why do you ask for a citation? Not that it's an unreasonable request, it's just that I can't imagine that you would be unaware that that kind of behavior does exist. I mean look at any forum ever, people are constantly put down by other posters solely based off of their post count / join date, there's really no denying that it happens, here or anywhere. If you would really like, I'm sure I could dig deeper and find more examples for you, but my point isn't to call out every instance this has occurred, my point is just that the behavior undeniably exists. So I can't help but think that maybe you were just being defensive to what I had to say, in which case I think it's my fault that I didn't communicate my point correctly. I'm not at all saying that the moderators willingly let this behavior happen, or that moderators don't do anything to combat that behavior, in fact I know that they don't. I can honestly say that the moderators here have been particularly impressive in their activity; which is quite refreshing for a forum, especially when considering that I'm pretty certain a lot of, if not all moderators are not paid for the work that they do here. So I wasn't at all trying to insinuate that the moderators are doing a poor job here. As Day9 would say, focus on the broad strokes: The point is that to me, post count / join date bigotry is something that undeniably exists in this world, on this forum or elsewhere, and it's just such an unproductive behavior. But like I said, I enjoy these forums and would happily continue reading here for the wealth of information that the boards provide. I just cannot express how much I absolutely hate when I see discrimination of a person solely based off of their post count / join date because it just drags down the discussio. And for the record it hasn't happened to me specifically here yet, but then again I haven't actually made that many posts and I try to stay away from strategy discussions if I can, it's just a behavior I have noticed on every forum I've ever been to. Well that was long winded but I hopefully fully expressed what I was trying to say earlier. Edit: Lol I wasn't trying to sound like that behavior is this viciously offensive thing or that it's totally rampant and ruining these forums, just simply that it's very unproductive to discussions and it certainly does exist. | ||
Redmark
Canada2129 Posts
Frankly, judging the value of posts by post count (or skimming or scanning or whatever you want to call it) is stupid. It just means that you aren't reading all the posts. You should be able to tell whether a post is good or bad immediately, just by the content of the post. If you need to know how many posts a user has made to decide whether a post is good or not, you're probably not familiar enough with the subject matter for it to matter anyway. | ||
imPERSONater
United States1324 Posts
On June 15 2010 10:11 Athos wrote: The exclusion of information is never a good idea in my eyes. When I read threads in my head, my brain prioritiezes information this manner. Good players: Lz, ret, nony Adminstrators: the reds Moderators: the blues High post count Short post count Exactly my though process. High post count is a worthwhile factor to consider when reading advice. It at least gives some credence to them because if they were doing something stupid/spamming they would have made it that high. At the very least they have read and commented on many threads and that alone is good enough to offer a varied and informed opinion in most cases. I could give or take the join date, but I really like the post count. | ||
shucklesors
Singapore1176 Posts
On June 15 2010 13:20 Redmark wrote: I would think that a better question to ask is 'is there a reason to keep post count?' instead of the negative version - and I don't think there really is. Frankly, judging the value of posts by post count (or skimming or scanning or whatever you want to call it) is stupid. It just means that you aren't reading all the posts. You should be able to tell whether a post is good or bad immediately, just by the content of the post. If you need to know how many posts a user has made to decide whether a post is good or not, you're probably not familiar enough with the subject matter for it to matter anyway. Totally agree. I'm sorry to offend like the whole TL community, but I genuinely can't think of any other main reason other than boosting your esteem if you post a lot and want the post count to be kept. Some like to express opinion, some don't. If you love expressing, good for you. People will easily see your name over and over again, and that's how you gain the 'respect' you crave; of course they will remember the general usefulness of your posts. Date joined on the other hand would be a lot more useful. These lurkers don't express their opinions as much, but don't those who speak usually think more? I see no need for post count. | ||
EZjijy
United States1039 Posts
| ||
ilbh
Brazil1606 Posts
I collected data from the last 4 pages of the automated ban list thread, here are the results: banned people with 2000 to 20000 posts = 5 banned people with 1000 to 2000 posts = 4 banned people with 500 to 1000 posts = 5 banned people with 1 to 500 posts = 52 so, from a user with a lower number of posts you have a higher chance of getting an awful post. ofc that if we want reliable results from 500+ posters, we need way more data, like 100 pages. not viable for someone without database access... it is not elitism, its pure math. | ||
Hot_Bid
Braavos36362 Posts
There are several options, one of which is removing it from the forum and having it viewable to everyone through profile. You will always be able to see a user's rank icon though, which functions similarly to post count but factors in join date. | ||
Trang
Australia324 Posts
On June 15 2010 13:42 ilbh wrote: I voted to keep as it is. I collected data from the last 4 pages of the automated ban list thread, here are the results: banned people with 2000 to 20000 posts = 5 banned people with 1000 to 2000 posts = 4 banned people with 500 to 1000 posts = 5 banned people with 1 to 500 posts = 52 so, from a user with a lower number of posts you have a higher chance of getting an awful post. ofc that if we want reliable results from 500+ posters, we need way more data, like 100 pages. not viable for someone without database access... it is not elitism, its pure math. Pure math? This isn't pure maths, it's a bunch of statistics pulled from ad hoc forum data. Nothing pure maths about that. You pointed out the correlation, sure, but you neglected to consider that correlation does not amount to causation. It's true that people with lower post counts probably do post more ban-worthy stuff, but maybe not to the degree that you seem to be trying to say by pulling out those numbers. Did you ever consider that maybe people with a lower post count are accorded less leniency? I see high post count people getting away with poor one-liners like "this" and "qft" or "lol" all the time. | ||
Ethic
Canada439 Posts
| ||
MAX.Void
Cuba8 Posts
| ||
Luddite
United States2315 Posts
| ||
pr0jekt
United States24 Posts
| ||
wiesel
Germany727 Posts
Like teamliquidsc2.net or whatever with link on the buttom of original TL. Hiding post count or whatever won't prevent spamming. | ||
Cygnus
United States835 Posts
| ||
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
| ||
29 fps
United States5717 Posts
checking the quality of a post is probably more useful than dismissing it or accepting it purely based on post count. | ||
Grobyc
Canada18410 Posts
On June 15 2010 05:42 GreEny K wrote: Show nested quote + On June 15 2010 00:32 GreEny K wrote: I think a join date should be applied to the user banner as well, I usually post with more respect to the older users, unless their posts are garbage and most of them are "LOL" "THAT WAS SWEET" "OMG" or my personal favorite "^" (to agree with the previous poster). Anyway, join dates with post counts would be cool. On a side note, since sc2 beta came out and the influx of new members I can definitely notice the difference in posts. You can tell when a post is made by a post beta member or by an old school BW player. Show nested quote + On June 15 2010 02:17 Grobyc wrote: On June 14 2010 21:24 arew wrote: Keep postcount as it is! Like I said. lol come on >.> I don't do it often, I just didn't have anything new to add. fine as it is in my opinion | ||
Trogdor
United States158 Posts
| ||
Subversive
Australia2229 Posts
On June 15 2010 06:31 NeV wrote: Show nested quote + Just no. When you see someone like Incontrol with 10K post, you know that probably he knows more about this website and sc in general than the Joe Noob and his 34 posts. And the point is, Tom Noob doesn't know either Joe Noob and Incontrol. So there is the post count to make the difference. It's perfectly normal that people have an idea of how much someone they talk with has brought to this website. I know the name of most 5K+ post user, because when I see a 5K+ post user, I read his name twice. I wouldn't know anybody except the mods without the post counts. I partly agree with your point, but i repeat: this system would be ideal if everyone was wise enough not to judge the comments ONLY by the post count. Unfortunately that's not the case, and you can see it reading this thread. A lot of the people just ignore the comments from newcomers. Well, that's not fair and doesn't induce new users to give their contribute, and for example it's the reason why I have only 80 posts even if I've been on this site for 4 years: posting here is frustrating cause basically nobody cares if you haven't a high post count. Yeah I agree with both sides of the argument. Biff is right, it's helpful to be able to identify who's been around for a while. Personally I don't have a problem remembering new users or old, if they post garbage i remember them with venom, if they post really well their name lights up to me as much as if it was in red. Equally I see where the other side is coming from, particularly people who have been here for a while (greater than 1 year) but don't post all the time. They're probably just more quiet or thoughtful and considered opinion type people, who don't see a need to add their opinion to every thread, especially if it's just "LOL". The key is read every post and not be overly biased towards new users. Elitism if it includes rudeness to new users should (and is) punished. Post spamming isn't usually punished, especially if the person otherwise provides content and this is as it should be too. Spamming isn't the end of the world if you write articles for us or give lots of insight. Hell, that's why old members who troll, flame and spam get away with it - because their worth is greater than any bad habits they might have. And even then, if you follow the ban-list you'll see plenty of big post names getting banned each week for over stepping the line. + Show Spoiler + On June 15 2010 07:05 brendan.zerg116109 wrote: I like how it is now but some things chould change. I found that people look down to the people that dont post that often. I see team liquid as a sight that is a tool for learning to play starcraft and whenever i see a noob, asking why sompthing is one way and they get banned because they are new to TL with there first 1-10 posts it makes me sad. The admins should not ban people for there opinions even if they are stupid. I feel like it scares new players to ask questions out of fear they will be banned. However they should for racism, trolls and the person that dose a huge "lol" to make more space in the chat. The post count should change to skill and ladder rank. Mabey since this sight is going to be 2 games, have what game u play or both. I would love to have ranks of team liquid: some idea's Proplayer TLO, Day[9]'s aprentices, Husky's video addicts, tecys, timmies (day9 refrence) A big <3 you TL =) I don't think the skill part would work simply because people who are D or D+ in bw or silver in sc2 but provide great content should be recognised. TL isn't simply a strategy forum, but a place where people who love to watch sc/sc2 come together. | ||
No_eL
Chile1438 Posts
| ||
Butigroove
Seychelles2061 Posts
If new users don't want to be judged by post count, then they should consider putting more effort and thought into their posts. (Who would have thought?) I think things are fine the way they are. Join date is not necessarily accurate either. I browsed teamliquid for a looong time before finally needing to making an account to post. | ||
tbrown47
United States1235 Posts
But of the options listed... keep it the same. | ||
Kuzmorgo
Hungary1058 Posts
On June 15 2010 14:27 Trang wrote: Show nested quote + On June 15 2010 13:42 ilbh wrote: I voted to keep as it is. I collected data from the last 4 pages of the automated ban list thread, here are the results: banned people with 2000 to 20000 posts = 5 banned people with 1000 to 2000 posts = 4 banned people with 500 to 1000 posts = 5 banned people with 1 to 500 posts = 52 so, from a user with a lower number of posts you have a higher chance of getting an awful post. ofc that if we want reliable results from 500+ posters, we need way more data, like 100 pages. not viable for someone without database access... it is not elitism, its pure math. Pure math? This isn't pure maths, it's a bunch of statistics pulled from ad hoc forum data. Nothing pure maths about that. You pointed out the correlation, sure, but you neglected to consider that correlation does not amount to causation. It's true that people with lower post counts probably do post more ban-worthy stuff, but maybe not to the degree that you seem to be trying to say by pulling out those numbers. Did you ever consider that maybe people with a lower post count are accorded less leniency? I see high post count people getting away with poor one-liners like "this" and "qft" or "lol" all the time. Although i agree with you that it isnt pure maths, the problem with it is different imo. I think i saw a lot of high post count members warned for 1 liner posts or such, and also some low post-count members get away with it... Its more just, the mods didnt care, or dunno, missed it or whatever. However my problem with the statistics is that it does not consider the total number of members in each category. For example i dont think there are as many members in the 1000 to 2000 category overall as in the 1-500... But maybe im wrong. Anyway it matters a lot! The other thing is, I would like to see a similar statistics but based on reg date (for comparison). I think however that post count matters more in some cases, while reg date in other. For example if the discussion is about pro SC, i tend to believe veteran posters more, on the other hand im pretty sure, that some1 who has much more forum experience than me (wrote more), and better english, could have made this post much much more comprehensible... | ||
Patriot.dlk
Sweden5462 Posts
| ||
Ioannis
Greece62 Posts
| ||
StorrZerg
United States13906 Posts
| ||
Kyuukyuu
Canada6263 Posts
| ||
GiftPflanZe
Germany623 Posts
| ||
Deleted User 39582
317 Posts
| ||
Zoler
Sweden6339 Posts
| ||
Helios.Star
United States548 Posts
On June 14 2010 23:22 lolaloc wrote: Show nested quote + On June 14 2010 23:03 Qwertify wrote: Long Time Member + Large Post count = Veteran (<- this is the only logical thing to conclude) Long Time Member + Small Post count = Lurker Short Time Member + Large Post count = Spammer Short Time Member + Small Post count = Newbie There. So as a long time member you think its alright to have a one word response after a quote? Trying to pad the post count are we? But I guess I'm a bigger bane on the community, and more of a noob, by being only registered a short time and having a much much lower post count. Like its been said already, time registered does not translate into time spent playing bw or time spent lurking on the site, its just another way for long time members to flex their superiority muscles over members who haven't been registered as long. I can remember coming here in 2005 for bw replays but I only registered a couple months ago. Also, I say get rid of post count completely. The quote above is a perfect example why. | ||
Zoler
Sweden6339 Posts
On June 15 2010 22:16 Helios.Star wrote: Show nested quote + On June 14 2010 23:22 lolaloc wrote: On June 14 2010 23:03 Qwertify wrote: Long Time Member + Large Post count = Veteran (<- this is the only logical thing to conclude) Long Time Member + Small Post count = Lurker Short Time Member + Large Post count = Spammer Short Time Member + Small Post count = Newbie There. So as a long time member you think its alright to have a one word response after a quote? Trying to pad the post count are we? But I guess I'm a bigger bane on the community, and more of a noob, by being only registered a short time and having a much much lower post count. Like its been said already, time registered does not translate into time spent playing bw or time spent lurking on the site, its just another way for long time members to flex their superiority muscles over members who haven't been registered as long. I can remember coming here in 2005 for bw replays but I only registered a couple months ago. Also, I say get rid of post count completely. The quote above is a perfect example why. Isn't that your problem that didn't make an account lol | ||
StarStruck
25339 Posts
On June 15 2010 13:06 Chill wrote: Show nested quote + On June 15 2010 12:55 Jibba wrote: I can't recall many of examples of people "prejudging" each other based on post number. I guess I might biased on whether they have a pro team selected (a quick way to judge if they followed BW) or when their join date is, but it usually doesn't change my reaction to them. If they say something retarded, then I'll just check their post history to see if they're like 60% SC2 forum, 40% Kpop thread. On the other hand, I don't really see a reason to keep them either. I still like getting different icons, though. :x And the big 10k/20k posts. I've got no problem with elitism though. Yea, I really think it's just some phantom force people feel without it actually existing. I've never seen someone talk down to someone based on post count. It's an unconscious decision. Why would anyone want to show all their cards before the hand is done? | ||
Helios.Star
United States548 Posts
On June 15 2010 22:25 Zoler wrote: Show nested quote + On June 15 2010 22:16 Helios.Star wrote: On June 14 2010 23:22 lolaloc wrote: On June 14 2010 23:03 Qwertify wrote: Long Time Member + Large Post count = Veteran (<- this is the only logical thing to conclude) Long Time Member + Small Post count = Lurker Short Time Member + Large Post count = Spammer Short Time Member + Small Post count = Newbie There. So as a long time member you think its alright to have a one word response after a quote? Trying to pad the post count are we? But I guess I'm a bigger bane on the community, and more of a noob, by being only registered a short time and having a much much lower post count. Like its been said already, time registered does not translate into time spent playing bw or time spent lurking on the site, its just another way for long time members to flex their superiority muscles over members who haven't been registered as long. I can remember coming here in 2005 for bw replays but I only registered a couple months ago. Also, I say get rid of post count completely. The quote above is a perfect example why. Isn't that your problem that didn't make an account lol So because I didnt create an account before some users, despite having played since i was 14 (26 now) I'm a noob and dont have anything useful to contribute to the community? Because thats pretty much what is being said by some on the previous pages. Also I'm pretty sure I made an account when was like 20 and cant remember wtf the password is (stopped using yahoo mail since then so i cant be 100% sure). You also didn't address the point I made that a long time member with a high post count only used a one word answer to respond to a quote, another reason given in this thread by users to completely get rid of post count. But according to many others here his opinion should be greatly valued over mine. | ||
Subversion
South Africa3627 Posts
If it ain't broke don't fix it | ||
Vibes
Germany144 Posts
Postcounts - this is why kona is special :D | ||
ComusLoM
Norway3547 Posts
| ||
Chill
Calgary25938 Posts
On June 15 2010 22:50 StarStruck wrote: Show nested quote + On June 15 2010 13:06 Chill wrote: On June 15 2010 12:55 Jibba wrote: I can't recall many of examples of people "prejudging" each other based on post number. I guess I might biased on whether they have a pro team selected (a quick way to judge if they followed BW) or when their join date is, but it usually doesn't change my reaction to them. If they say something retarded, then I'll just check their post history to see if they're like 60% SC2 forum, 40% Kpop thread. On the other hand, I don't really see a reason to keep them either. I still like getting different icons, though. :x And the big 10k/20k posts. I've got no problem with elitism though. Yea, I really think it's just some phantom force people feel without it actually existing. I've never seen someone talk down to someone based on post count. It's an unconscious decision. Why would anyone want to show all their cards before the hand is done? Are we just throwing out unrelated analogies now, or did you just pull the carpet out from under my feet? | ||
Executioner.zealot
United States60 Posts
| ||
niteReloaded
Croatia5281 Posts
Would you vote for introducing it? I don't think so, I think many people are opposing this just because that's what humans do - oppose things, all things. I vote remove it. | ||
Chill
Calgary25938 Posts
On June 16 2010 00:15 Executioner.zealot wrote: Dump the post count. A few admins have been making bad decision lately on good post based souly on users low post count. Or keep it up and get transfer out the bad admins. Can you cite examples? You realize we can see your post count, frequency, placement, join date, akas and tons of other stats in your user info, right? I'm not sure how you are inferring that any action is based on post count. Further, if we removed it, everyone would still be able to see it in your profile. | ||
jewce
United States68 Posts
| ||
sputnik.theory
Poland449 Posts
only ppl with 2000+ elo should be taken seriously on these forums | ||
Uriel_SVK
Slovakia427 Posts
Or it might be good to let everyone choose what he would like to show there - with use of some options in profile. Edit: After reading some posts here, I think some posts/length ratio would be also very nice - for example - 1line/1post = 1 =>Bad poster - 15lines/1post = 15 =>Better poster ... | ||
niteReloaded
Croatia5281 Posts
| ||
QibingZero
2611 Posts
On June 14 2010 21:18 shalafi wrote: Sincerely, the join date is more useful to classify people. I see myself looking at join dates all the time. "This HAS to be a post sc2 user"->check->95% of the times I'm right. But some of the best users only have a few of posts (MDT anyone?), while some posters made over 1000 since the start of the beta. So about the post count... I don't care. I mostly agree with this. I'd rather see join date, but post count is better than the other options listed in this poll. Of course then we have to deal with forum conventions like 'damn 10s' and all that mess. | ||
epik640x
United States1134 Posts
It gets rid of spam as well. | ||
SolaR-
United States2685 Posts
| ||
No_eL
Chile1438 Posts
On June 16 2010 02:15 CultureMisfits wrote: post count and the join year should both be posted totally agree. some interesting fact: the vast majority of users voting about removing post data are new users... | ||
DigitalD[562]
United States80 Posts
| ||
Terranist
United States2496 Posts
| ||
Executioner.zealot
United States60 Posts
On June 16 2010 00:19 Chill wrote: Show nested quote + On June 16 2010 00:15 Executioner.zealot wrote: Dump the post count. A few admins have been making bad decision lately on good post based souly on users low post count. Or keep it up and get transfer out the bad admins. Can you cite examples? You realize we can see your post count, frequency, placement, join date, akas and tons of other stats in your user info, right? I'm not sure how you are inferring that any action is based on post count. Further, if we removed it, everyone would still be able to see it in your profile. I'm just looking at the "closed posts" section. 80% +/- of them are from posts under 200 posting. Reading through each of them; they range from valid topics, to interesting anecdotes, to just fun to talk about stuff. | ||
vanVidd
Norway38 Posts
So I say remove them, why do you actually need a counter for posts? It's childish. | ||
oo_xerox
United States852 Posts
maybe im just bullshiting, i just got out of a political economics of socialism and im fucked, also, i fucking voted "i dont care"....which is true. | ||
oo_xerox
United States852 Posts
"PvT imba" "ROFL a 2010 member, so typical" See? same thing | ||
zappa372
Chile365 Posts
Look at the "3 posts" user giving an opinion. | ||
HeadhunteR
Argentina1258 Posts
other forums discriminate harder.. for example they say you are a new full user instead of a full user which means (for the forums) you joined when the forums were more well known.. | ||
DreaM)XeRO
Korea (South)4667 Posts
i dont look at the post quantity i look at its quality if its a good post ill treat that member with respect if that post was shit ill treat him as is... a sc2 noob | ||
shimpoe
88 Posts
On June 16 2010 04:39 oo_xerox wrote: And for the people asking the inscription date, thats the same thing, if the thing TL.net is trying to avoid is the elitism and missjudging, then you guys are just changing the factors, but we all know since 3rd grade that it doesnt change the result. "PvT imba" "ROFL a 2010 member, so typical" See? same thing Words cannot express how true this is. Changing it from one thing to another doesn't actually fix the problem, it just rewords it. Just the notion that you're automatically good at Starcraft if you post on forums a lot is completely laughable, and that's putting it nicely. It's just sad when you come to a "forum" and think, "Well I can't be validated in Starcraft until I raise my post count, so I guess I'll just go post in the movie threads until I'm considered a legitimate Starcraft player." Excuse me while I roll my eyes. Edit: the second part wasn't directed at you oo_xerox | ||
StarStruck
25339 Posts
Some people. | ||
Glowy
Sweden66 Posts
| ||
number1gog
United States1081 Posts
hell look at suffeli | ||
hyst.eric.al
United States2332 Posts
| ||
Fontong
United States6454 Posts
Post Count | Join Date | Total Ban Duration | Main Forum That way we get things like this: 54 | April 2010 | 10 days | Starcraft 2 | ||
agen
Barbados111 Posts
On June 16 2010 05:13 HeadhunteR wrote: its not being elitist its trying to have a coherent and good forum.. usually newcomers dont understand everything on tl and they tend to make bad mistakes, ask dumb questions. I think that a little discrimination is good for the forums it helps create some kind of respect..the join date idea is very good idea.. other forums discriminate harder.. for example they say you are a new full user instead of a full user which means (for the forums) you joined when the forums were more well known.. I think what you're describing is what is trying to be avoided. Asking dumb questions is often the only way to learn about a new subject. Especially one about which there is as little ready information as professional starcraft. (At least outside of Korea, though the Liquipedia has worked to remedy this.) Considering that this site is really the only option for newcomers to the professional starcraft scene, discriminating against newcomers really isn't much of an option. | ||
zoLo
United States5896 Posts
| ||
tru_power22
Canada385 Posts
| ||
Gamjadori
Japan131 Posts
| ||
Kenpachi
United States9908 Posts
On June 16 2010 09:09 Gamjadori wrote: Up with unit portraits! Down with post count! lol | ||
clickrush
Switzerland3257 Posts
would be way better if the admins mods and veterans had the possiblity to give points to a member if he posts a very good answer/thread! | ||
Render
United States249 Posts
On June 16 2010 07:51 Fontong wrote: Should be like this: Post Count | Join Date | Total Ban Duration | Main Forum That way we get things like this: 54 | April 2010 | 10 days | Starcraft 2 I like this honestly. I am in support of join dates, as I think they better reflect a persons commitment to the community, and having total ban duration may end up being a disincentive for people to break the rules. Someone earlier mentioned how it might not be a bad thing to create a little bit of fear for new members so they don't crap on the forum, I think the ban duration might help do that. I also like the Main Forum idea just as a way to further identify with your particular niche in the SC community. This idea, sir Fontong, has my seal of approval. | ||
synapse
China13814 Posts
| ||
Whole
United States6046 Posts
On June 15 2010 22:16 Helios.Star wrote: Show nested quote + On June 14 2010 23:22 lolaloc wrote: On June 14 2010 23:03 Qwertify wrote: Long Time Member + Large Post count = Veteran (<- this is the only logical thing to conclude) Long Time Member + Small Post count = Lurker Short Time Member + Large Post count = Spammer Short Time Member + Small Post count = Newbie There. So as a long time member you think its alright to have a one word response after a quote? Trying to pad the post count are we? But I guess I'm a bigger bane on the community, and more of a noob, by being only registered a short time and having a much much lower post count. Like its been said already, time registered does not translate into time spent playing bw or time spent lurking on the site, its just another way for long time members to flex their superiority muscles over members who haven't been registered as long. I can remember coming here in 2005 for bw replays but I only registered a couple months ago. Also, I say get rid of post count completely. The quote above is a perfect example why. If you didn't notice he edited the quote. So it isn't a one word response. | ||
Fontong
United States6454 Posts
That way people like Konadora and Meeple, who spam like crazy, will be rightfully awarded a very high number to signify their importance to the community. + Show Spoiler [About TL Brawl] + For those of you who didn't get it, TL brawl assigned posters attributes based off of things like post count, posts per week, posts made in the last week, ect, maybe like join date too. Konadora raped face because he had a huge posts per week, post count, and a ridiculously large number of posts in the last week. | ||
bjornkavist
Canada1235 Posts
| ||
oo_xerox
United States852 Posts
On June 16 2010 05:13 HeadhunteR wrote: its not being elitist its trying to have a coherent and good forum.. usually newcomers dont understand everything on tl and they tend to make bad mistakes, ask dumb questions. I think that a little discrimination is good for the forums it helps create some kind of respect..the join date idea is very good idea.. other forums discriminate harder.. for example they say you are a new full user instead of a full user which means (for the forums) you joined when the forums were more well known.. I totally agree, a little discrimination but thats not what i was talking about. Its not a little, but a lot, and c`mon, you cant argue this one, TL discriminates very hard, its just not that visible, again, i dont care, since i made some dumb threads and posts when i was a newcomer, but a year ago i bacame a "pro" poster rofl and had to spam to a marine to be taken seriously, i cant make golden posts everytime, hell, one time is a shock, so i would like considerations on my dumb posts. Besides, how the hell can i became a good quality poster if it isnt by making mistakes? dumb mistakes are a perfect way to learn. But if i get bashed really hard by those mistakes i wouldnt post again, sometimes even mods are dragged by this philosophy, it makes users just avoid any type of serious posting, therefore making them movie thread posters in a sc forum. No offense here fellas On June 16 2010 05:46 shimpoe wrote: Show nested quote + On June 16 2010 04:39 oo_xerox wrote: And for the people asking the inscription date, thats the same thing, if the thing TL.net is trying to avoid is the elitism and missjudging, then you guys are just changing the factors, but we all know since 3rd grade that it doesnt change the result. "PvT imba" "ROFL a 2010 member, so typical" See? same thing Words cannot express how true this is. Changing it from one thing to another doesn't actually fix the problem, it just rewords it. Just the notion that you're automatically good at Starcraft if you post on forums a lot is completely laughable, and that's putting it nicely. It's just sad when you come to a "forum" and think, "Well I can't be validated in Starcraft until I raise my post count, so I guess I'll just go post in the movie threads until I'm considered a legitimate Starcraft player." Excuse me while I roll my eyes. Edit: the second part wasn't directed at you oo_xerox Yes it was you filthy sewer rat !!! lol just kidding Anyway, some people are actually smart and search the users post in the search function, i remember where there was a heated discussion and some guy came and said "says the guy with 40 posts", and then his 2000+ were only in the k-pop thread. | ||
WaZuP
Germany487 Posts
i would keep it as it is just because im used to it :D | ||
dudeman001
United States2412 Posts
| ||
deL
Australia5540 Posts
| ||
ActualSteve
United States627 Posts
On June 16 2010 14:19 deL wrote: Can we ignore votes of anyone with less than 500 posts? Oh the irony. | ||
oo_xerox
United States852 Posts
On June 16 2010 14:19 deL wrote: Can we ignore votes of anyone with less than 500 posts? rofl you bastard | ||
omninmo
2349 Posts
On June 14 2010 21:18 shalafi wrote: Sincerely, the join date is more useful to classify people. I see myself looking at join dates all the time. "This HAS to be a post sc2 user"->check->95% of the times I'm right. But some of the best users only have a few of posts (MDT anyone?), while some posters made over 1000 since the start of the beta. So about the post count... I don't care. well said | ||
NET
United States703 Posts
If I spammed my way to 9000 post I would probably say keep it the way it is. But in all honesty I would hope to see less spam if it were taken away, and more quality post in return. Join date would tell you more about the poster right off the bat. As for those people that care about post count, adding it to their profile may be a good compromise. As stated above me, "Even though I'm a lowly 200 poster..." This statement in itself shows some validity to the fact many people take post count too seriously and may entail them to believe their knowledge means more so then someone whose been here longer but with a smaller post count. Just some food for thought. | ||
Divinek
Canada4045 Posts
On June 16 2010 17:20 NET wrote: Voted: Don't care, well because I don't care. If I spammed my way to 9000 post I would probably say keep it the way it is. But in all honesty I would hope to see less spam if it were taken away, and more quality post in return. Join date would tell you more about the poster right off the bat. As for those people that care about post count, adding it to their profile may be a good compromise. As stated above me, "Even though I'm a lowly 200 poster..." This statement in itself shows some validity to the fact many people take post count too seriously and may entail them to believe their knowledge means more so then someone whose been here longer but with a smaller post count. Just some food for thought. eh, in the vast majority of cases post count is a pretty good indicator of the quality of poster the person is. This is only because there are like 039420349 retards on the internet, and retards dont last long around here thus they dont have high post counts, though there are some exceptions as some big retards here also contribute alot so they get a ton of leniency, which is overall a good system. But join date is a pretty big factor too | ||
oo_xerox
United States852 Posts
On June 16 2010 17:20 NET wrote: Voted: Don't care, well because I don't care. If I spammed my way to 9000 post I would probably say keep it the way it is. But in all honesty I would hope to see less spam if it were taken away, and more quality post in return. Join date would tell you more about the poster right off the bat. As for those people that care about post count, adding it to their profile may be a good compromise. As stated above me, "Even though I'm a lowly 200 poster..." This statement in itself shows some validity to the fact many people take post count too seriously and may entail them to believe their knowledge means more so then someone whose been here longer but with a smaller post count. Just some food for thought. says the guy with 100+ posts On June 16 2010 17:41 Divinek wrote: Show nested quote + On June 16 2010 17:20 NET wrote: Voted: Don't care, well because I don't care. If I spammed my way to 9000 post I would probably say keep it the way it is. But in all honesty I would hope to see less spam if it were taken away, and more quality post in return. Join date would tell you more about the poster right off the bat. As for those people that care about post count, adding it to their profile may be a good compromise. As stated above me, "Even though I'm a lowly 200 poster..." This statement in itself shows some validity to the fact many people take post count too seriously and may entail them to believe their knowledge means more so then someone whose been here longer but with a smaller post count. Just some food for thought. eh, in the vast majority of cases post count is a pretty good indicator of the quality of poster the person is. This is only because there are like 039420349 retards on the internet, and retards dont last long around here thus they dont have high post counts, though there are some exceptions as some big retards here also contribute alot so they get a ton of leniency, which is overall a good system. But join date is a pretty big factor too says the guy with 1500+ posts | ||
Navane
Netherlands2690 Posts
| ||
Inzek
Chile802 Posts
| ||
Executioner.zealot
United States60 Posts
On June 16 2010 17:20 NET wrote: Voted: Don't care, well because I don't care. If I spammed my way to 9000 post I would probably say keep it the way it is. But in all honesty I would hope to see less spam if it were taken away, and more quality post in return. Join date would tell you more about the poster right off the bat. As for those people that care about post count, adding it to their profile may be a good compromise. As stated above me, "Even though I'm a lowly 200 poster..." This statement in itself shows some validity to the fact many people take post count too seriously and may entail them to believe their knowledge means more so then someone whose been here longer but with a smaller post count. Just some food for thought. I defiantly feel the “oh your only 200< posts? Well your whole life’s experiences, thoughts, opinions, and game play mean nothing now”. And looking in this thread it looks like a LOT of other forum members feel the same(Just looking at opinions of people with 200< posts). That’s a VERY bad thing for a community website. As you mentioned I have felt the pressure to inject myself into almost every conversation no matter how menial or useless the thought because of the whole lesser posts counts mean classing of forum members thing(but have resisted). Many of the topics I see in these forums shouldnt be 3+ pages of 1-3 sentence conversations. Makes it annoying to try and follow the whole thing if your away for a day. I just don’t think its healthy for any forum community to have that attitude and defiantly not a welcoming attitude. Its being perpetuated by someone, and that is usually comments from the ones members look up to… admins and moderators. I defiantly felt like it was my post count that got one of my post closed. I pured over all the other post like it that were not closed looking for differences and couldnt find any. So yes, I think the post counts have turned into a virus that is holding the TL forums back. But, if thats not the direction TL wants to go, then its not my place to demand otherwise. I can only give advice and continue enjoying debates and topics not closed in other forums. | ||
zealing
Canada806 Posts
| ||
bearbuddy
3442 Posts
| ||
BajaBlood
United States205 Posts
Edit: Might as well put my serious thoughts in here... I think join date is more important than post count, but I don't really care either way; both are flawed alone and it'd be cluttered to have both together. | ||
Durak
Canada3684 Posts
On June 16 2010 22:39 Navane wrote: Keep the post count number, but remove posts from people with a lower post count than yourself. So each user only seas post from users with the same or higher post count. Hahahaha. I hope you're joking because this is hilariously awesome. I'm fine with removing post count. However, I think that the icons should be kept. Icons are an indication of post count as well as join date so they provide a better estimation of who's been around for a while. | ||
seppolevne
Canada1681 Posts
| ||
Dental Floss
United States1015 Posts
On June 17 2010 01:27 BajaBlood wrote: That way I can compete with people in my own post count group and feel like I'm making real progress. This sentence is everything that is wrong with post counts and internet forums in general. Its not a competition to see who can post the most. If your posts suck then they suck, and if they rule they rule. It doesn't matter how many of them you've made, and having post counts only encourages white noise posting and dick-waving contests. On June 17 2010 04:42 seppolevne wrote: If you make good contributions then post count won't matter. MDT, Trozz, Marcoso, milkis are all good posters with low post counts. If you are respectful, insightful and friendly you will be accepted without any discrimination. If you bust in with memes and 1-word replies and a sense of entitlement then yeah, no one will respect you. So post counts matter if you don't make good contributions? Like if you only post shit but you post a ton of it its okay? | ||
adamisuber
Canada35 Posts
| ||
Synwave
United States2803 Posts
If Im not skimming I again pay no attention to post count. So a big fat MEH from me. Voted keep as is, mine as well. | ||
ghrur
United States3785 Posts
On June 17 2010 05:34 Dental Floss wrote: Show nested quote + On June 17 2010 01:27 BajaBlood wrote: That way I can compete with people in my own post count group and feel like I'm making real progress. This sentence is everything that is wrong with post counts and internet forums in general. Its not a competition to see who can post the most. If your posts suck then they suck, and if they rule they rule. It doesn't matter how many of them you've made, and having post counts only encourages white noise posting and dick-waving contests. Show nested quote + On June 17 2010 04:42 seppolevne wrote: If you make good contributions then post count won't matter. MDT, Trozz, Marcoso, milkis are all good posters with low post counts. If you are respectful, insightful and friendly you will be accepted without any discrimination. If you bust in with memes and 1-word replies and a sense of entitlement then yeah, no one will respect you. So post counts matter if you don't make good contributions? Like if you only post shit but you post a ton of it its okay? If you only post shit, you get banned. =/ That's how it is. And honestly, I don't know what people are talking about. I've never had the feeling that post count was so important in a conversation. It simply has never come up. Personally, I think this idea that "TL rates post count too highly" is just a preconceived notion which causes people to perceive it that way. It also makes them remember the times in which this notion is correct much more than the times in which this notion is wrong. | ||
Zona
40426 Posts
On June 16 2010 22:39 Navane wrote: Keep the post count number, but remove posts from people with a lower post count than yourself. So each user only seas post from users with the same or higher post count. If we're not getting rid of post counts (which I favor, btw, not mainly because of elitism but because showing post counts is a twisted incentive), let's do this. It would be awesome. I wouldn't mind join date either, even though it might introduce a subtle layer of "discrimination" because it helps us know where the poster comes from - the Boxer era? the Savior Era? the Flash era? Or perhaps the Beta era? and it helps us interpret their post accordingly. Of course someone who lurks a long time before joining will be skewed a bit, but they will be the minority. The other idea involving showing which subforum the poster posts the most in sounds nice too. | ||
cbkenned2009
United States55 Posts
This is identical to the icon changing based on posts but more visible: Example: 0-50 Posts Drone 51-100 Posts Zergling 100-500 Posts Mutalisk 501-1001 etc. This removes the "raw" number only visible in the profile so that someone has a rough gauge of your forum experience without a number to spit out at someone. Likewise with join date: 0-1 Months New 1-6 Months Young 6-12 Months Spirited 1-2 Years Learned 2-4 Years Wizened 5+ Years Guru Example: I would be a Young Probe (Protoss) | ||
Gahlo
United States34966 Posts
| ||
InTheFade
United States1721 Posts
| ||
Ra.Xor.2
United States1784 Posts
On June 16 2010 17:20 NET wrote: Voted: Don't care, well because I don't care. If I spammed my way to 9000 post I would probably say keep it the way it is. But in all honesty I would hope to see less spam if it were taken away, and more quality post in return. Join date would tell you more about the poster right off the bat. As for those people that care about post count, adding it to their profile may be a good compromise. As stated above me, "Even though I'm a lowly 200 poster..." This statement in itself shows some validity to the fact many people take post count too seriously and may entail them to believe their knowledge means more so then someone whose been here longer but with a smaller post count. Just some food for thought. Your points are good, but I still think post count is a better indicator of how much a person spends on this site. Someone may have joined years ago yet only browse TL every few months or so. The fact that he or she is posting, even if its to say baseless one liners, is a good indication that he is reading threads and perusing the site. I've also noticed that, in general, people with higher post counts tend to be more respectful and thoughtful in their posts. There's always posters like Raithed that spam their way to 5k+ posts but we have mods for a reason. Nearly 6 years ago, Mensrea made ten commandments for TL to follow. #6 was to respect forum veterans. | ||
oo_xerox
United States852 Posts
| ||
t3tsubo
Canada682 Posts
| ||
flamewheel
FREEAGLELAND26780 Posts
I feel like I'm in a special position. I didn't join TL until the tail end of December 09, so I'm most definitely not an "old" poster. However, I have multiple thousands of posts, and besides konadora I don't think I've seen another poster with, on average, more posts per week. I have a Pen. You look at my account from a thread, and it seems like I'm a respectable person. I spend quite a bit of time on TL. I'm not afraid to admit, I spam quite a bit. I read many articles in many sections of the forum every day. I post quite a few one-liners, and of late my posting quality has probably dropped a bit. I used to actually LR, with comments about builds and games; now I'm more prone to just say something like "oops that was a fail scarab," a comment that is worthless in the sense that it wouldn't edify somebody reading through the thread without watching the stream. I moderate Mafia games in the hidden sub-forum, and most of those posts are good, since they tend to keep games going. I've written a few things now, and I'm going to continue writing. I believe those count amongst the "good" posts I make. In short, I (believe I) contribute to this forum, though I "take" from it as well, in the form of my rapid output of menial posts. Post count isn't necessarily a good or bad thing, and the 200-odd comments in this poll have already touched base on both sides of the issue. Legitimacy and veterancy (oops according to Chrome, this isn't a word) on TL isn't found in post count alone, nor is it found in time spent. Lurkers can stay here for years, and shitty posters (I am one of them!) can rack up multiple thousands of posts. True, the argument that "bad posters are recognized and banned if they try to spam" holds for most cases and is bolstered by the recent addition of the report system (which ironically I can't use, oops), but moderation on Teamliquid is handled by people, not machines. Sometimes, bad posts just slip through the cracks. Sometimes, people get away with stuff. There are some users with a lot of posts that still like to mess with other people, and there are "veteran" users that belittle newer posters. The icon system is nice--it allows one to quickly gauge the status of the person posting. You can spam a lot and have a thousand posts in a month, but still be only a worker due to the second imposition--time. You can have been a "silent forum veteran"--AKA lurker, since 2005, and still have only 50 posts. Some of the best posters and biggest contributers on TL have very few posts--look at Marcoso, aers, Arrian, etc. They all have around 500 posts but each and every one of those posts makes the site a better place. You have "quality" posters--the Trozzes of Teamliquid. You have the contributing spammers--konadora, myself, CM, etc. Some mods and administrators have thousands of posts. Others like riptide don't even top 2000. On the subject of "e-peen", I've already briefly mentioned that people like to belittle others. The internet is a cruel and anonymous place, yes. While I can say that I've never looked down upon anybody just by their post count or icon (I judge by the quality of the post itself) since I remember my metaphorical roots, I know of a lot of higher-level icon posters that don't even bother to read low-post count posts. Hell, there was a website feedback topic not long ago complaining about the lower-tier icons, wanting some way to phase them out. Okay I'm about done ranting. Icons are good, they help distinguish. Stars are good. Join date and post count are both good. To be honest, I don't see a need to have post count AND join date both placed in the thread. If somebody really cares about your online posting veterancy, I'm sure they wouldn't mind taking the extra second to control-click the "profile" tab to check. I do it every time, and it lets me get a much better sense of everybody on TL. Cheers. | ||
joe.kukish
Costa Rica14 Posts
| ||
Badjas
Netherlands2038 Posts
On June 17 2010 13:59 joe.kukish wrote: I think that the join date is more useful than the post count. It will be useful to add this information. Join dates are already visible in the user profiles. You joined on Monday, 12th of April 2010. | ||
meathook
1289 Posts
| ||
StarStruck
25339 Posts
Some of you guys are still missing the bigger picture. All of that information is tucked away inside the person's profile. As flamewheel pointed out it takes one click. ._. | ||
SichuanPanda
Canada1542 Posts
| ||
sCuMBaG
United Kingdom1144 Posts
i don't care about anything else, but that would help quite a bit | ||
DanceCommander
United States1808 Posts
| ||
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
On June 17 2010 21:39 StarStruck wrote: F.W. stepped into the light. Some of you guys are still missing the bigger picture. All of that information is tucked away inside the person's profile. As flamewheel pointed out it takes one click. ._. Welcome to Web 2.0 where ease of access doesn't require a click anymore. Seriously though FW does make a valid point, but the community as a whole has done a good job of indicating the good and bad posters. The exceptional posters and content providers are rewarded by the mods for the various icons and stars etc... those who participate in the activities like liquibet or fantasy (I'm not sure about either since I've never used them myself) get rewarded for participation. Then there's the rest of us who just post to have fun here, or post to belittle people, or post because we're bored at work, or post because we want to help in other ways, or post because we have an opinion. The idea of someone being a "bad" poster varies between the interests of the person vs. the interests of the site. Like I don't participate in liquibet or fantasy does that make me a bad poster? Because I don't follow the pro-league does that make me a bad poster? Most of the time I read threads here as opposed to posting... that's what I like to do... but at the same time I find more worth in post count generally, and I have an example... Prior to the SC2 beta when I viewed the BW strategy forum there was a clear difference between a shitty poster and a good one... guess what held true? Yeah the person with more posts MORE OFTEN THAN NOT had a better post than someone with an inferior post count. There is a "sorta" grey line after you hit a certain post count where higher quality =/= high post count I stated before in this discussion that yeah this is not exactly the case anymore, but it's a better representation than lets say.. registration date. I registered in 2005 and rarely posted until 2007... does that mean I am automatically a better poster in 2007 regardless of post history? (The answers no because I was a real dick for my first couple posts) | ||
Apolo
Portugal1259 Posts
| ||
skronch
United States2717 Posts
| ||
CharlieMurphy
United States22895 Posts
| ||
0mgVitaminE
United States1278 Posts
It seems like if a thread already has 10 + pages and i don't have a completely new idea that will just launch a new conversation -which i usually dont- i am probably not gonna post. Respect through post count is somewhat ridiculous to me anyway. Around 1000 posts is where i meaninglessly draw the line between someone i would take advice from and someone i normally wouldn't, but whether someone has 1000 or 20000 doesn't make much of a difference. | ||
MorningMusume11
United States3490 Posts
| ||
Executioner.zealot
United States60 Posts
EDIT: Made it purti | ||
zul
Germany5427 Posts
| ||
iloahz
United States964 Posts
| ||
Ioannis
Greece62 Posts
On one hand i'm ancient in the forums and tlq as a whole... then again, i don't post much ... But all in all... i don't even care about having special icons or people seeing how many posts i've made so that they can show me more respect... whatever .. This place isn't about that... it's about having something good to say and share with everybody ... and being good in Starcraft ... On the other hand it would be good to have an iccup high rank icon maybe.... maybe something similar for starcraft 2 as well... cause no matter how many posts you've made ... a noob is still a noob | ||
uberdeluxe
Canada306 Posts
| ||
Craton
United States17153 Posts
| ||
H.k[D]
United States260 Posts
| ||
LonelyMargarita
1845 Posts
| ||
Chen
United States6344 Posts
On June 18 2010 23:03 Executioner.zealot wrote: Join date is more useful I think. But I find it interesting that right now 40% want to keep it while 60% dont care, want it moved out of forums or want it changed all together. I figured considering there are a lot of people with high post counts, there would be more then 40% that would want to keep it. EDIT: Made it purti biased =/ I could easily say that only 24% of people, less than one in four, want it moved or removed. 76% of people dont actively want it to be changed. is it possible to institute both? add join date right beside the post count? seems it would satisfy both sides. theres plenty of room on that line to add something | ||
Wargizmo
Australia1237 Posts
I have a low post count and a recent join date so people will think I'm a noob either way, having moved over from BW to War3 when it came out I have missed out on the TL bandwagon until recently. | ||
seedfreedom
Canada38 Posts
| ||
infinity2k9
United Kingdom2397 Posts
On June 16 2010 05:46 shimpoe wrote: Show nested quote + On June 16 2010 04:39 oo_xerox wrote: And for the people asking the inscription date, thats the same thing, if the thing TL.net is trying to avoid is the elitism and missjudging, then you guys are just changing the factors, but we all know since 3rd grade that it doesnt change the result. "PvT imba" "ROFL a 2010 member, so typical" See? same thing Words cannot express how true this is. Changing it from one thing to another doesn't actually fix the problem, it just rewords it. Just the notion that you're automatically good at Starcraft if you post on forums a lot is completely laughable, and that's putting it nicely. It's just sad when you come to a "forum" and think, "Well I can't be validated in Starcraft until I raise my post count, so I guess I'll just go post in the movie threads until I'm considered a legitimate Starcraft player." Excuse me while I roll my eyes. Edit: the second part wasn't directed at you oo_xerox No one is saying that 100% of new posters are bad players, why do people have to see things so black and white. In my opinion it usually is helpful personally, i there's a correlation between bad advice and low postcounts. Not 100%, but a correlation definitely. | ||
Challe
Afghanistan58 Posts
| ||
Roblin
Sweden948 Posts
| ||
sporkify
United States31 Posts
Or we could use icons to signify time as a member and keep post number. Or keep icons the same and put date joined. Right now, the icon and post counts are kinda redundant. (yes, the icons also are limited by time joined, but I doubt that they are the limiting factor.) | ||
Trifid
United States23 Posts
| ||
Whole
United States6046 Posts
The discrimination posts in that thread are the reason why I think it should be removed. It almost derailed the thread before a mod intervened. We wouldn't have this garbage with post count not being showed. | ||
shimpoe
88 Posts
It's good to see at least some people being warned for that behavior, but it's still hilarious that there are certain people who believe it doesn't exist. | ||
NicksonReyes
Philippines4431 Posts
Sorry | ||
Two_DoWn
United States13684 Posts
| ||
DemiSe
883 Posts
It's about quality rather than quantity --> I might "enjoy" a comment from a member with low post-count rather than a guy with more than 1000 posts. I don't think people read the post-count and base their decision wheter or not they are going to read the post. EDIT: After a bit of thinking I rather incorporate some ranking system based on posts so people can see who's a veteran and not. Or just keep the post-count. (wink wink) | ||
grobo
Japan6199 Posts
On June 19 2010 08:17 Craton wrote: Keep it as is. It's a useful reference when looking at questionable posts. I agree with this, now i'm not saying that a person with a higher postcount is always the better poster (we all know for a fact that it's not true) but it's a good way to know if someone is a decent poster or not. | ||
Vhalin.rsgaming
United States18 Posts
My answer: Post Count - Removed and Join Date - Removed for they really don't have any importance to the forums if you want to see your statistics go to the Profile button to see your post and get your brief moment of satisfaction. If I had to pick between the two I would say Join Date would have more importance than Post Count because plain and simple any one can post a million times a day whether or not they have something important to say is another thing. | ||
MindRush
Romania916 Posts
On June 14 2010 22:22 Titusmaster6 wrote: I agree that post count and join date would be an improvement on what we have now. couldn't agree more with you | ||
wiesel
Germany727 Posts
If someone wants to look down on a post based on post count, join date he will always find a reason. You can still just click in the profile. For me post count doesn't mean anything. | ||
CraftyStars
Canada47 Posts
| ||
Seltsam
United States343 Posts
I've seen a lot of people with perfectly valid opinions be dismissed simply because they have a relatively low post count. Frankly, I feel appalled whenever I see it happen, and it could easily be remedied by either dropping post count entirely, or leaving it in the profile exclusively. A post should be judged on its own merits, and not on the arbitrary value that post count supposedly affirms. In essence, I think I'm trying to say that we should drop the post count entirely because quality is more important that quantity, but there are those who would be quick to judge based purely on the latter. I feel the same about join dates. Even if someone never played Brood War, that doesn't mean they can't have any sort of insight in terms of Starcraft 2. On top of that, there are those who played Brood War, but joined the forums rather recently. I know I am one of those people. I was pretty young when Brood War came out,and didn't take it very seriously. Then college took up all of my time. Now, I play Starcraft 2, and I am old enough to be able to look at it with the focused eye the game requires. I signed up to the forums to help broaden my outlook on the game, and hopefully spread ideas of my own that might help out others. Joining later doesn't somehow make me unable or less able to contribute valid and constructive ideas on the game. So I say just lose everything. It would make it almost impossible to judge a post based on anything other than the post's own merit. On June 20 2010 00:50 infinity2k9 wrote: No one is saying that 100% of new posters are bad players, why do people have to see things so black and white. In my opinion it usually is helpful personally, i there's a correlation between bad advice and low postcounts. Not 100%, but a correlation definitely. I agree. There is a correlation. However, correlation does not necessarily imply causation. People tend to assume it does, though (I am not trying to imply that you do), and that leads to a lot of silly prejudices, which then could potentially lead to the dismissal of a decent idea or valid opinion for no real reason. I think it's more important that every decent idea gets heard than to have an arbitrary benchmark of insight, intellect, knowledge, or validity that ultimately means nothing. | ||
Jackal03
Brazil7469 Posts
| ||
infuzer
Sweden30 Posts
| ||
Tien
Russian Federation4447 Posts
Discrimination is a RIGHT!!!!! I voted keep as is. | ||
Lovin
Denmark812 Posts
| ||
Fyrewolf
United States1533 Posts
I always knew about SCLegacy back in the day, especially after they started doing pimpest plays, but I was ignorant of this amazing website for many many years, but my ignorance of web surfing is only because if I'm on the internet, I'm more likely playing Starcraft than surfing. Somebody mentioned the map balance thread, which could have been a great discussion had it not gone derailed. I would like to share a quote from it concerning famous names and post counts, as of two days ago. On June 20 2010 00:36 -Desu- wrote: Lets check some statistics: The number of post count of the individuals below: TheLittleOne - 54 Tarson - 56 qxc - 98 HuK - 191 Mondragon - 0 Lucifron - 0 Gretorp - 343 DIMAGA - 4 It would be interesting if anyone who makes an issue of post count can be challenged to actually play some games against the member. No way to enforce it, but it would tell a lot more about the player's knowledge then something as arbitrary as how often they open their internet mouth. Some people can't even close their regular mouths enough, let alone their anonymous internet one. | ||
Pyrrhuloxia
United States6700 Posts
| ||
Dracid
United States280 Posts
On June 22 2010 15:23 Pyrrhuloxia wrote: No need for change. Ah, the irony. See, simply voting in the poll already shares your opinion on the matter. Apparently that's not enough though, and you decided to contribute a one line post telling us what you voted, without any explanation or reasoning for why you think there's no need for change though. I don't really follow usernames enough to know your posting habits aside from this thread, but if this post is any indication for your 4000+ other posts... Note that I don't mean to single you out, but you just happen to be the latest poster. Jackal03 for instance somehow has an even less substantial post a little higher up on the page, and he's got 3500+ posts. Anyhow, I don't think there's anything essentially wrong with displaying a user's post count, but forum seniority/elitism does get tiring at times so I voted for postcounts to be removed. Fewer measures of e-penis => more value given to the actual content within someone's posts => profit. | ||
igLeX
Canada140 Posts
On June 14 2010 21:18 shalafi wrote: Sincerely, the join date is more useful to classify people. I see myself looking at join dates all the time. "This HAS to be a post sc2 user"->check->95% of the times I'm right. But some of the best users only have a few of posts (MDT anyone?), while some posters made over 1000 since the start of the beta. So about the post count... I don't care. I agree with this. There have been some people putting up posts that have been very good that have come from sc2 beta but there has been an overwhelming amount of people that post complete nonsense and pretend to know what they're talking about, and this really helps identify them. PS: If you put post count only into the profile people are still going to check it and it'll just be more hassle -.- | ||
DeckTech
Netherlands26 Posts
At the one side there are the people who discriminate (if there are really people who do that). In my opinion it is there choice to read the comments they want to read. If they feel that a new member doesn't have any interesting to say, it is there misfortune if they miss valuable information because it came from a new member. At the other side there are the new members. If you want to have a good site, it is important that people feel welcome and that their opinion counts. If they are left out because they are new, the site will loose potential members and will become venerable to competitive sites. So, maybe the real poll should be: 1 for the older members, do you discriminate on how many posts a member has. 2 for the newer members, do you feel welcome on the site, and do you feel that your opinion counts to others | ||
NaturalHacks
New Zealand77 Posts
the easiest way I could think of doing this is have a sc2 bot that people can add as a friend from tl on starcraft and it reads there profile and updates there profile, or just a snapshot of profile summary, or something sent to someone who sorts em. although this would be difficult to do, doesn't matter anyway! no one will listen to me because my post count is low lol. this forum does seem to be filled with quite a few useless comments and spam displaying post count can only encourage that, not to mention tournaments with minimum post counts to enter... wow. on a side note the date of join is just another discriminatory factor, although it could be used to judge how long someone has been a member of the community a lot of people such as my-self enjoyed just lurking the threads to gain knowledge without needlessly posting garbage, I actually made an account recently because I wanted to enter some sc2 tournaments, once I saw some tournaments have a minimum post amount I have been frantically trying to find places to post that aren't complete garbage but still.i also joined because I wanted to share the map I made, although so many other people made maps I feel like I would somehow contribute negatively by posting my map because my post count is low it might actually be taken offensively. | ||
Ghardo
Germany1685 Posts
i think one shouldn't value the contents of the post in context of the post count (see charliemurphy, sry dude), so removing it could also be a better way to not become too much like "ha i got twice as many posts as you so you're twice as wrong!" - but given the first argument, no. in profile or as usual, i don't care | ||
FitzChivalry
France5 Posts
And so you answer the question of the poll^^ | ||
Seltsam
United States343 Posts
It also strikes me as odd that a lot of the people voting to keep post count want to keep it so that they can tell people to stfu and gtfo because their post count is low. And then of course there are those who just don't care. But I wonder: if you eliminated everyone who use post count as a measure of intellect or ability, would the vote count look the same? My bet is that it would likely not. | ||
Two_DoWn
United States13684 Posts
On June 20 2010 00:36 -Desu- wrote: Lets check some statistics: The number of post count of the individuals below: TheLittleOne - 54 Tarson - 56 qxc - 98 HuK - 191 Mondragon - 0 Lucifron - 0 Gretorp - 343 DIMAGA - 4 False. Mondy has one from a happy birthday thread earlier this year. | ||
trackd00r
Chile284 Posts
I've seen people who have 1k posts already and joined this year. Post count doesn't mean many thing, and keeping it as it is won't hurt anyone, except those people who 1a2a3a for 10k just with 1 liners lolol | ||
| ||
ESL Pro Tour
Spring 2024 - EU Playoffs D1
HeRoMaRinE vs LamboLIVE!
Clem vs Bly
ESL.tv3479
RotterdaM1490
ComeBackTV 1246
TaKeTV 425
IndyStarCraft 386
CosmosSc2 129
SteadfastSC106
BRAT_OK 95
3DClanTV 74
[ Submit Event ] |
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War GuemChi 25680 Dota 2Hyuk 1483 BeSt 532 Stork 255 firebathero 195 Rush 178 Backho 38 Barracks 23 Dewaltoss 16 zelot 11 [ Show more ] Counter-Strike Other Games gofns23017 Liquid`RaSZi1702 hiko1623 Beastyqt1359 crisheroes769 ceh9626 Hui .545 shoxiejesuss316 B2W.Neo261 Lowko255 ToD238 NuckleDu144 Mew2King129 Liquid`VortiX113 mouzStarbuck73 Trikslyr62 KnowMe62 nookyyy 56 XaKoH 22 Organizations
StarCraft 2 • MindelVK 16 StarCraft: Brood War• IndyKCrew • Poblha • Migwel • aXEnki • Laughngamez YouTube • intothetv • LaughNgamez Trovo • Gussbus • Kozan League of Legends Other Games |
ESL Pro Tour
World Team League
ESL Pro Tour
Reynor vs MaNa
GunGFuBanDa vs Spirit
Elazer vs Krystianer
SKillous vs MaxPax
Big Brain Bouts
Korean StarCraft League
Afreeca Starleague
hero vs Soulkey
AfreecaTV Pro Series
Reynor vs Cure
ESL Pro Tour
World Team League
ESL Pro Tour
[ Show More ] BSL
Zhanhun vs DragOn
Dewalt vs Sziky
CSO Cup
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
ESL Pro Tour
World Team League
ESL Pro Tour
BSL
Gypsy vs Bonyth
Mihu vs XiaoShuai
ESL Open Cup
ESL Open Cup
ESL Open Cup
ESL Pro Tour
|
|