|
On July 27 2011 21:10 Squigly wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2011 21:02 zatic wrote:On July 27 2011 20:25 ondik wrote:
Now for my little personal rant - if this thread was created by a normal user, there wouldn't have been 4 pages of "yea, totally!" but for 4 pages of "what's this doing in strategy section" "this belongs to blogs" "yea, sure, let's have more walls of text!".
What is your point? His point is that this is a pointless thread. Youve voiced your opinion which your entitled to. The vast majority of people apparently flat out disagree with you. This thread therefore serves no purpose and should be closed as it would be if a randomer made it
The thread serves the purpose of letting the community know the opinion of a/the forum moderator... not "a randomer". Since people disagree with the opinion (at lest the vocal majority) there should be no follow up. If a large majority of the community agreed with the opinion it could have resulted in a guideline change at some point. Seems poignant to me..
+ Show Spoiler +not trying to kiss ass, I disagreed a with op a few posts ago
|
|
|
Zurich15324 Posts
On July 27 2011 21:10 Squigly wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2011 21:02 zatic wrote:On July 27 2011 20:25 ondik wrote:
Now for my little personal rant - if this thread was created by a normal user, there wouldn't have been 4 pages of "yea, totally!" but for 4 pages of "what's this doing in strategy section" "this belongs to blogs" "yea, sure, let's have more walls of text!".
What is your point? His point is that this is a pointless thread. Youve voiced your opinion which your entitled to. The vast majority of people apparently flat out disagree with you. This thread therefore serves no purpose and should be closed as it would be if a randomer made it
Why does it serve no purpose? Rhetorical question since if anything it has shown that the majority of people like the spoilered-up guides, so there is your point.
And I don't believe that was what ondik was getting at.
|
On July 27 2011 21:25 DusTerr wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2011 21:10 Squigly wrote:On July 27 2011 21:02 zatic wrote:On July 27 2011 20:25 ondik wrote:
Now for my little personal rant - if this thread was created by a normal user, there wouldn't have been 4 pages of "yea, totally!" but for 4 pages of "what's this doing in strategy section" "this belongs to blogs" "yea, sure, let's have more walls of text!".
What is your point? His point is that this is a pointless thread. Youve voiced your opinion which your entitled to. The vast majority of people apparently flat out disagree with you. This thread therefore serves no purpose and should be closed as it would be if a randomer made it The thread serves the purpose of letting the community know the opinion of a/the forum moderator... not "a randomer". Since people disagree with the opinion (at lest the vocal majority). If a large majority of the community agreed with the opinion it could have resulted in a guideline change at some point. Seems poignant to me.. + Show Spoiler +not trying to kiss ass, I disagreed a with op a few posts ago
I dont think you understood either my point, or the guy who i was defending. Sure this was a fine thread to post. But now its been decided that nothing will come of it. Even zatic says hes not gonna enforce anything. Its just a self proclaimed whine thread.
I have no issue with the thread being made, i have issue with it not being closed/moved as its clogging up the strat forum with an utterly pointless thread.
If you disagree fair enough. However, i would like to know then what purpose this serves.
EDIT: zatic posted while i did. It served a purpose, now we know we like spoilered guides. Go thread. However now thats sorted, no more point.
EDIT: Yea actually, i think onik was just complaining about double standards of the thread quality allowed. O well my point still stands
|
On July 27 2011 21:02 zatic wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2011 20:25 ondik wrote:
Now for my little personal rant - if this thread was created by a normal user, there wouldn't have been 4 pages of "yea, totally!" but for 4 pages of "what's this doing in strategy section" "this belongs to blogs" "yea, sure, let's have more walls of text!".
What is your point?
I think the point of the quoted part is pretty clear? In my opinion there's just too many bandwagoners who will, without second thought, agree with anything a mod or respected member of this community says.
And as for the unqouted part - I don't get the purpose of this thread. If it's an opinion from user's point of view (what I feel it is), I guess it should be in blogs. If it's an official command from a mod, it should be in the "purple" threads with a clear message/order.
Anyway, I hope you don't take this personally, I don't have anything against you or other mods, I admire what you all do for our community.
|
On July 27 2011 21:41 ondik wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2011 21:02 zatic wrote:On July 27 2011 20:25 ondik wrote:
Now for my little personal rant - if this thread was created by a normal user, there wouldn't have been 4 pages of "yea, totally!" but for 4 pages of "what's this doing in strategy section" "this belongs to blogs" "yea, sure, let's have more walls of text!".
What is your point? I think the point of the quoted part is pretty clear? In my opinion there's just too many bandwagoners who will, without second thought, agree with anything a mod or respected member of this community says. And as for the unqouted part - I don't get the purpose of this thread. If it's an opinion from user's point of view (what I feel it is), I guess it should be in blogs. If it's an official command from a mod, it should be in the "purple" threads with a clear message/order. Anyway, I hope you don't take this personally, I don't have anything against you or other mods, I admire what you all do for our community.
While i do agree with most of this. You do realise that most people completely disagree with zatic here right?
|
That's funny, I read like 3-4 comments on every page and almost all of them were agreeing with OP, now I read all of them and I feel really fucking stupid.
Oh well..
|
Zurich15324 Posts
On July 27 2011 21:44 Squigly wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2011 21:41 ondik wrote:On July 27 2011 21:02 zatic wrote:On July 27 2011 20:25 ondik wrote:
Now for my little personal rant - if this thread was created by a normal user, there wouldn't have been 4 pages of "yea, totally!" but for 4 pages of "what's this doing in strategy section" "this belongs to blogs" "yea, sure, let's have more walls of text!".
What is your point? I think the point of the quoted part is pretty clear? In my opinion there's just too many bandwagoners who will, without second thought, agree with anything a mod or respected member of this community says. And as for the unqouted part - I don't get the purpose of this thread. If it's an opinion from user's point of view (what I feel it is), I guess it should be in blogs. If it's an official command from a mod, it should be in the "purple" threads with a clear message/order. Anyway, I hope you don't take this personally, I don't have anything against you or other mods, I admire what you all do for our community. While i do agree with most of this. You do realise that most people completely disagree with zatic here right?
That's why I was asking what his point is. I am counting 16 in favor, 27 disagreeing, the rest partially agreeing/disagreeing or somewhat in between. How this is a case of mod-bandwagoning (which certainly is happening from time to time and is a problem) I don't see.
ondik: No, this thread is not simply the opinion of a user's point of view. Had this thread turned out that most people dislike the spoilers in guides it may have very well been edited into the guidelines.
|
+ Show Spoiler +You forgot to mention that Terran's hands are tired from executing exhausting stutter step micro and Protoss from placing force fields. Zergs aren't the only one!
Agreed, though I would say there are definitely some cases where spoilers are alright.
|
Definitely disagree. Spoilers can be overused, but overall I find they make it easier to look up the specific section I'm interested in.
|
This is just going to start a damn meam in posting and commenting, untill TL starts banning people for useing to my spoiler tags like they do for all cap  .
|
On July 27 2011 22:00 zatic wrote:
Had this thread turned out that most people dislike the spoilers in guides it may have very well been edited into the guidelines.
Why not add a poll to the OP? Counting the "Agree" and "Disagree" posts works as well, but seems to be more work than needed.
|
United States8476 Posts
I'd like to see a poll as well, as I have 2 big guides currently formatted this way.
|
Don't agree at all,
+ Show Spoiler +threads ranting about spoiler tags seem like a topic a mod would close not open
|
I personally like the spoiler tags since I can treat them like a table of contents to go straight to the section I want.
|
Do not agree at all. Spoilers make the guides easier to read, especially if you are on your smartphone (no excessive scrolling needed if you use spoilers).
|
On August 02 2011 03:48 meadbert wrote:
I personally like the spoiler tags since I can treat them like a table of contents to go straight to the section I want.
Spoiler tags are super annoying to me. Yay I have to click a bunch of random stuff instead of using the mouse wheel.
|
On July 27 2011 02:27 gosuMalicE wrote:
Disagree, that is generally only true on forums populated by lazy 12 year olds/mentally retarded highschool dropouts that cant be bothered to read more then a sentence or two at a time. (You know the sites where people bitch when you don't put a tl;dr on every post longer then 4 lines)
Congratulations for successfully stereotyping every single person who doesn't like to read walls of text. It is a widely accepted fact that people dislike big walls of plain text. No 12 year olds, retards or dropouts involved. Ask professional presenters or authors. The spoiler tags act as a contents page so you can find what you are looking for quickly. The complaints in this thread seem to come from the stance that you have to click too much to read it. Firstly, as somebody else pointed out this is ironic coming from a Starcraft player. Secondly, those clicks are so quick that it seems narrow-minded to bitch about that. It is just such a tiny problem.
On July 27 2011 02:27 gosuMalicE wrote:The posting standards in TL OP's is usually expected to be much higher and people expect long well written guides when they click on a guide thread, as you cant really explain anything about a strategy with only a few lines.
What does using spoiler tags have to do with "long well written guides"? If the OP uses Spoiler tags for a strategy that is in total about 4 lines long, yes that is stupid. But for the ideal guide Spoiler tags are useful.
On July 27 2011 02:19 Squigly wrote:
I like to read TL from my phone, and my shitty phone browser has to reload the page every single time I click a spoiler. For a lot of these guides, that's a huge amount of wasted time for no reason.
Your problem is your shitty phone browser if it has to reload the page. Not people using Spoiler tags.
On July 27 2011 02:19 Squigly wrote:Also, to people complaining about walls of text, maybe you should get off the internet and read a damn book. Seriously, learn how to have an attention span of over 30 seconds.
Also, to people complaining about reloading the page, maybe you should get off the internet and read a damn book while you wait. Seriously, learn how to have an attention span of over 30 seconds. You hypocrite.
On July 27 2011 06:41 zatic wrote:
Every single one of our front page news is larger than most guides posted on this forum. Are you people seriously suggesting it would be better to put them all into 12 spoiler tags? You for rela?
No, because as someone else pointed out, guide =/= news. Your news is colourful, bordered etc and the text is elegantly written with tons of little pictures. Strategy guides are not bordered, have little colour and are dry and clinically written by their very nature, with the only pictures being units involved and screenshots of how the strategy works.
|
|
|
Dude, fuck yes. Solid thread, this has been needed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
