Remove post counts

[Bloodveld]

I fully understand the argument against having post counts, but I agree with ^this guy:

 

I was proud when I got 500 posts....I don't want it removed.

 

 

 

For me personally, I try not to spam. I try to write only meaningful posts. My post count is a record of personal achievement. I don't use it to judge myself against anyone else.

This is one of the main reasons why I like post count.

 

 

 

Guys, I think that the discussion is over, unless anyone would like to argue the points I posted on the previous page.

 

 

 

Mandatory IQ tests on signup? :P

 

 

 

I have an IQ of 139, according to this test. Bet it's not as high as Bloodvelds \ ^^^^

Bleh, I thought I could get higher.

 

 

^^ Is that score good? I have no idea how they rate those kind of things.

[beesafree]

to keep everyone happy have an option to show or not show your post count...

 

 

 

That would have worked nicely, but no one thought of it. :(

 

 

 

No it wouldn't work at all I don't think. If you had that option, then the people who want to spam to make their post count high are going to check to show their post count.

 

 

 

but the people that are spaming (who?) are spamming either for competition or to feel good...most people who want to feel good like to earn it the proper way, so most of the time it's competion, supose i wanted to be have more post counts than GhostRanger ( :roll: ) i would leave my post count on, and if you choose to keep it off, it elimanates the competition...

 

 

 

only 140 on the iq test.... :wall:

[beesafree]

 

^^ Is that score good? I have no idea how they rate those kind of things.

 

 

 

letsee

 

 

 

75 = ....Mentally challenged

 

95 = average american

 

100 = average

 

125 = above average

 

133 = genius

 

150 = super genius

 

192 = WTHOMGBBQ!?! :shock:

 

 

 

hmm...but then again bloodveld has been known to be an editor...O,o

[jackalope14]

to keep everyone happy have an option to show or not show your post count...

 

 

 

That would have worked nicely, but no one thought of it. :(

 

 

 

No it wouldn't work at all I don't think. If you had that option, then the people who want to spam to make their post count high are going to check to show their post count.

 

 

 

but the people that are spaming (who?) are spamming either for competition or to feel good...most people who want to feel good like to earn it the proper way, so most of the time it's competion, supose i wanted to be have more post counts than GhostRanger ( :roll: ) i would leave my post count on, and if you choose to keep it off, it elimanates the competition...

 

 

 

only 140 on the iq test.... :wall:

 

 

 

People dont necessarily just want to beat another person in post counts, but they want to get their post count to what they consider high because they think it will get them more respect.

 

 

 

BTW. I voted to keep post counts.

[beesafree]

hmm...i rate them on time joined....

 

 

 

like you joined a year before me...

[jackalope14]

hmm...i rate them on time joined....

 

 

 

like you joined a year before me...

 

 

 

Yea thats probably better than rating them on their post count. But even better yet, how bout we rate people on the quality of their posts! :)

[Bloodveld]

 

^^ Is that score good? I have no idea how they rate those kind of things.

 

 

 

letsee

 

 

 

75 = ....Mentally challenged

 

95 = average american

 

100 = average

 

125 = above average

 

133 = genius

 

150 = super genius

 

192 = WTHOMGBBQ!?! :shock:

 

 

 

hmm...but then again bloodveld has been known to be an editor...O,o

 

:shock: I don't believe it. I bet it's like golf, lowest score, right? :? You can tell me the truth.

[nightshade53]

I knew it! There was a mistake first time round. That website got my test results mixed up with someone elses :wall: . Here is my correct IQ:

 

 

 

 

Enough of this spammng now BTW =;

 

 

 

w00t!! I have something useful to add to this thread!! :shock:

 

As you may know we can now instantaneously and easily check out the RS high score stats of other forum members. If the post count were removed, then I would use this to check out other people and use this as a rough guide on how to treat their posts. Of course, this is not really reliable as adding an RSN is optional and some users of the forum may not even have an RS account :-s

 

 

 

hmm...i rate them on time joined....

 

 

 

like you joined a year before me...

 

 

 

Yea thats probably better than rating them on their post count. But even better yet, how bout we rate people on the quality of their posts! :)

 

 

 

I have been on forums where there is a [+] and a [-] button in the top right hand corner of each post (like where the [!] button is on this forum). This was a system to rate the quality of posts, like you said. Everytime someone clicked the [+] their Ice cubes (??) increased, and [-] had the opposite effect. This system could very easily be abused though.:-k

 

 

 

Holy Conundrum, Batman!!

 

 

 

I voted to keep them BTW.

[beesafree]

hmmm odd, your numbers are bloodvelds in reverse

 

 

 

edit: they got my score mixed up too

 

 

 

[Bloodveld]

Stop the spamming guys.

 

 

 

 

 

Does anyone want to counter the points I brought up here?

 

http://forum.tip.it/viewtopic.php?p=3321686#3321686

[drk_killer]

As I cannot read 14 pages of post i am not sure if this has been mentioned but, what if you have to write a certain number of characters say 20 or so it would help with the spammers who write a few words.

[megakiller32]

only runehq nubs want them removed :P

[Geordiequeen]

Ok, Personally i think it doesn't bother me whether we have them or not. Post Counts to me personally don't mean anything as i look at the quality of the post but then again it is nice to see how long a person has been posting for.

 

I agree some people spam to get their post count higher but there is a solution. You have said the moderators have enough to do and don't need all the extra work. You could either hire more moderators or you could make a new sort of moderator who's job is to clear up spam.

 

Anyway, Like i said i personally don't mind either way.

 

 

 

Geordiequeen

[jetlee111]

personaly i voted for the keep it in the profile option. cuz you whant to get rid of spammers but, what about those users that have earned it? most new peoople that like to spam just do it because it shows the p count on the topics. well i had a really succesful site about another game a drag game, it was kinda like this one and we had the same problem. what we did is who ever spammed we gave 1 warning and onyl 1 if the person insisted in spaming we ip banned it for a period of time, and that method did work ALOT cuz sometime the person just make another acc and keeps spaming if you ban him the normal way. but when you got a forum as active and big as this one there is not a 100% sure way to deal with spammers. but the keep the count in profile way will help and at the same time will not affect those who have dedicated to the well being of this site.

[the_tallest1]

First off thank you Bloodveld for a well written post that gives a well formed avenue for debate. It's the quality of post that we should indeed expect and see more of from someone with a rather large post count. (That wasn't meant with sarcasm.)

 

 

 

You obviously haven't contributed as much to this forum as a 2k post counter has. A low post count doesn't show how long someone has been here, it shows how much they've contributed. Now, there are sometimes exceptions to this, but the majority of the time people with high post counts have contributed considerably.

 

 

 

It'd be nice to think that the quality of one's posts increases as time passes and post count grows but I haven't found that to be the case for everyone. Sure people who have a larger post count than I have contributed more but I would question the quality. This isn't to say I write great awe inspiring posts but more to say that contributing more isn't the same as contributing well. I've noticed there's more than one person with a substantial post count who goes through the forums and adds to each and every topic it seems. And after reading through the posts I can't see how it was that much of a contribution, not to say they are doing it for post count but trying to say that the count equals quality is a bit of a stretch to me.

 

 

 

Often I'll see a post by someone with a large post count who I've never seen in the boards I frequent. Even then this isn't a reason to assume anything about this poster. If I'm really curious I'll go take a look through their posts they've written to get a feel for what they tend to write. This is far more indicative than any number will be.

 

 

 

Yes, post count can sometimes encourage spamming, but it doesn't create it. I'm 100% positive that without post count, spammers will still spam.

 

 

 

I couldn't agree more. There will always be spam but the fact that there's a reward for it will inspire some. The blatant spammers are taken care of soon enough and don't last. It's the ones who contribute the minimum that this might affect. Needless to say it would be an interesting little social experiment to run and see the results on spamminess in general. I'm not saying it would eliminate it, nor would I imagine most others would either.

 

 

 

Now, I never just post "+1" and leave it at that, if someone has a really good post I might post +1 and then state why he's right or why I agree with him, but I've never posted before just for the sake of post count.

 

 

 

I wish more people followed your example. This is the very reason why some boards don't count toward your post total. Simple three word responses shouldn't be considered a substantive post. If someone feels the need to respond it should at least be with a complete thought out reply.

 

 

 

Now, your argument in this states that post count does not show how trustworthy someone is, but consider this: Who is more likely to post a keylogger? Someone with 2k posts, or someone with 2? The person with 2 is probably just going to make another account, while the person with 2k has shown that he's spent considerable time here, and people more then likely know him.

 

 

 

I'll grant you that it's more probable that the one with the higher post count wouldn't post something of that nature. However since we are dealing with people via the internet even the amount of time you have "known" someone doesn't mean much sometimes. My point was more to use common sense and don't let a count number make you assume something about someone. That's the crux of all this I think, people assuming things based on a number.

 

 

 

I don't really care to delve back into the issue of the poll being valid as it's a moot point now. Debating it ad nauseam doesn't really help because it's not likely to be change whereas focusing on debating the post count is productive since it's currently being considered.

 

 

 

I've read quite a few posts stating the reasons they would want the count removed but I can't recall any with good reasons to keep it. This isn't to say they're not there but that sifting through this many pages of posts makes the brain hazy. So why do the people who have high post counts, yet don't seem to care about them want them to appear by their name? If it's not about the "prestige" but rather that it can be used to inform the general user about a poster's contribution then why couldn't this be accomplished through the user profile. The information is still available if it's needed for a judgement call on the author but out of the way so it's not something seen solely for reputation.

 

 

 

As a side note I found it funny that after Bloodveld's post we had a string of fairly off topic posts that didn't contribute to the topic at hand. Not all of those were written by people with post counts under 100 either. Not really a debating point, just a humorous observation. :)

[gonzlar]

Stop the spamming guys.

 

 

 

 

 

Does anyone want to counter the points I brought up here?

 

http://forum.tip.it/viewtopic.php?p=3321686#3321686

 

 

 

I find it humorous when a post that's complete spam asks people to stop spamming. If people wanted to counter your points they would have already.

 

 

 

And as for your post count rebuttal against mine I find it hard to see how a post count deems how much time you spend on here. Just because some people post around 30 posts a day of "I agree with this one!" or "I think this..." posts doesn't relegate how long one has been here for. More to the point why would one care how long someone has been on these forums. This isn't a pissing contest here...

[Faux]

Activity would definitely go down so I voted no.

 

 

 

Just add a reputation system so that people would think twice about being stupid.

[Bloodveld]

You obviously haven't contributed as much to this forum as a 2k post counter has. A low post count doesn't show how long someone has been here, it shows how much they've contributed. Now, there are sometimes exceptions to this, but the majority of the time people with high post counts have contributed considerably.

 

 

 

It'd be nice to think that the quality of one's posts increases as time passes and post count grows but I haven't found that to be the case for everyone. Sure people who have a larger post count than I have contributed more but I would question the quality. This isn't to say I write great awe inspiring posts but more to say that contributing more isn't the same as contributing well. I've noticed there's more than one person with a substantial post count who goes through the forums and adds to each and every topic it seems. And after reading through the posts I can't see how it was that much of a contribution, not to say they are doing it for post count but trying to say that the count equals quality is a bit of a stretch to me.

It's true that not every high post counter is a good member, but not every low post counter is bad either. Saying that all high post counters are these wonderful people is just as bad as saying each low post counter is some low down dirty swine. In every community there are some bad eggs, and tif is certainly one of them.

 

 

 

Certainly you understand this. (Also, I ment no offence by the "You obviously haven't contributed as much to this forum as a 2k post counter has." comment. 'Just trying to prove a point)

 

 

 

Yes, post count can sometimes encourage spamming, but it doesn't create it. I'm 100% positive that without post count, spammers will still spam.

 

 

 

I couldn't agree more. There will always be spam but the fact that there's a reward for it will inspire some. The blatant spammers are taken care of soon enough and don't last. It's the ones who contribute the minimum that this might affect. Needless to say it would be an interesting little social experiment to run and see the results on spamminess in general. I'm not saying it would eliminate it, nor would I imagine most others would either.

An experiment would be an excellent idea, but I never suggested it for one reason; once it's been changed, you can bet that it won't be changed back. As you probably can tell, more then one mod is against post counts, and they'll find an excuse not to re-add it.

 

 

 

Now, I never just post "+1" and leave it at that, if someone has a really good post I might post +1 and then state why he's right or why I agree with him, but I've never posted before just for the sake of post count.

 

 

 

I wish more people followed your example. This is the very reason why some boards don't count toward your post total. Simple three word responses shouldn't be considered a substantive post. If someone feels the need to respond it should at least be with a complete thought out reply.

I would suggest adding a mod that prevents posts from being posted if they have less characters then a preset amount, but there is two main problems with this:

 

1) Spammers will simply make their spam longer.

 

and

 

2) There are times when just 3 or 4 words is enough to completely shift the favor of an argument.

 

I would be willing to compromise and add this mod if post count were to remain, though.

 

 

 

Now, your argument in this states that post count does not show how trustworthy someone is, but consider this: Who is more likely to post a keylogger? Someone with 2k posts, or someone with 2? The person with 2 is probably just going to make another account, while the person with 2k has shown that he's spent considerable time here, and people more then likely know him.

 

 

 

I'll grant you that it's more probable that the one with the higher post count wouldn't post something of that nature. However since we are dealing with people via the internet even the amount of time you have "known" someone doesn't mean much sometimes. My point was more to use common sense and don't let a count number make you assume something about someone. That's the crux of all this I think, people assuming things based on a number.

Like I said, there will always be bad eggs, but usually a higher post count can show some level of trustworthiness. What everyone is forgetting about high post counters is that everyone of their posts is logged. The higher your post count is, the more of your personality is shown to the general public. If someone with 2k posts posts a link, by then people will usually have a sense of this person's character, and his trustworthiness, hense have a good idea if the link is safe or not.

 

 

 

I've read quite a few posts stating the reasons they would want the count removed but I can't recall any with good reasons to keep it.

Simply put, there hasn't been any reason for us pro-post counters (this argument is a grammatical nightmare :lol:) to post any reasons. We're winning, aren't we? If we weren't, then I can assure you that there would be plenty more pro-post count posts on this topic, with a good deal of them having good points.

 

 

 

As a side note I found it funny that after Bloodveld's post we had a string of fairly off topic posts that didn't contribute to the topic at hand. Not all of those were written by people with post counts under 100 either. Not really a debating point, just a humorous observation. :)

+1 ;)

 

 

 

Also, I would like to say that I'm very happy that you've posted on this thread, it's been ages since I've had a good debate. :D

 

 

 

Stop the spamming guys.

 

 

 

 

 

Does anyone want to counter the points I brought up here?

 

http://forum.tip.it/viewtopic.php?p=3321686#3321686

 

 

 

I find it humorous when a post that's complete spam asks people to stop spamming. If people wanted to counter your points they would have already.

 

 

 

And as for your post count rebuttal against mine I find it hard to see how a post count deems how much time you spend on here. Just because some people post around 30 posts a day of "I agree with this one!" or "I think this..." posts doesn't relegate how long one has been here for. More to the point why would one care how long someone has been on these forums. This isn't a pissing contest here...

Stop whining. :roll: The point of that post was to stop the spamming and possibly create more debate, which it accomplished. Obviously you're angry at me for one-upping you, which is not surprising.

 

 

 

Your counter to my post is basicially saying that there are certain high post counters who always post spam. I would like to add to that DUH, but removing post count will, if anything, make them spam more. Crazy you say? Well, if they are spamming to get a higher post count, then they are looking to be more well known, so people will reconize them by their large post count. Well, consider this: without high post count, how are they going to get well known? By posting even more. Topics will be flooded by spammers just so people notice them. Is this really what you want?

 

 

 

And thank you for your 90% flame post, it has allowed me to one-up you, once again. ^_^

 

 

 

~Bloodveld

[needa]

i think this might be my first post in months. seems to me that a lot of good points are being brought up (bet that hasnt been said yet). but one thing is for sure... i along with many others use the post count for credibility. when im clicking links and such around forums, i will only click on those with a high post count. i figure i can trust them. even though the probability of something getting through my systems defenses are slim to none... i still consider a high post count to be a "safe practice"

 

 

 

join date doesnt matter. to prove a point... look at mine along witht he number of posts ive made. it isnt important for me to talk because i come on here for information... i rarely give it.

 

 

 

just my 16.5 cents anyways.

 

-needajoint

[Bloodveld]

i think this might be my first post in months. seems to me that a lot of good points are being brought up (bet that hasnt been said yet). but one thing is for sure... i along with many others use the post count for credibility. when im clicking links and such around forums, i will only click on those with a high post count. i figure i can trust them. even though the probability of something getting through my systems defenses are slim to none... i still consider a high post count to be a "safe practice"

 

 

 

join date doesnt matter. to prove a point... look at mine along witht he number of posts ive made. it isnt important for me to talk because i come on here for information... i rarely give it.

 

 

 

just my 16.5 cents anyways.

 

-needajoint

Excellent point. One thing that I would like to add is that someone could create 6 or 7 accounts now, wait 4 years, then post keyloggers one by one. Join date does nothing to show trustworthiness. High quality posts, on the other hand, do.

 

 

 

EDIT: Reply already Zim-boy, I've got to go soon. :P

 

Off topic: My gf really loves invader zim. :shock:

 

EDIT2: I'll be back tomorrow.

[the_tallest1]

It'd be nice to think that the quality of one's posts increases as time passes and post count grows but I haven't found that to be the case for everyone. Sure people who have a larger post count than I have contributed more but I would question the quality. This isn't to say I write great awe inspiring posts but more to say that contributing more isn't the same as contributing well. I've noticed there's more than one person with a substantial post count who goes through the forums and adds to each and every topic it seems. And after reading through the posts I can't see how it was that much of a contribution, not to say they are doing it for post count but trying to say that the count equals quality is a bit of a stretch to me.

 

 

 

It's true that not every high post counter is a good member, but not every low post counter is bad either. Saying that all high post counters are these wonderful people is just as bad as saying each low post counter is some low down dirty swine. In every community there are some bad eggs, and tif is certainly one of them.

 

 

 

Certainly you understand this. (Also, I ment no offence by the "You obviously haven't contributed as much to this forum as a 2k post counter has." comment. 'Just trying to prove a point)

 

 

 

I'll agree there are both kinds in both groups, which is my main reason for not seeing the full practicality of the counts. I look at them more with mild interest than as a deciding factor. Either way for me a judgement call of the post's merit always is taken first before I look at the count. I'm not saying it isn't handy but I'd prefer to use my own judgement. This could just be a difference in how two people go about things as opposed to the absolute use the count.

 

 

 

As for the comment regarding my own count, no offense taken. :wink:

 

 

 

I wish more people followed your example. This is the very reason why some boards don't count toward your post total. Simple three word responses shouldn't be considered a substantive post. If someone feels the need to respond it should at least be with a complete thought out reply.

 

 

 

I would suggest adding a mod that prevents posts from being posted if they have less characters then a preset amount, but there is two main problems with this:

 

1) Spammers will simply make their spam longer.

 

and

 

2) There are times when just 3 or 4 words is enough to completely shift the favor of an argument.

 

I would be willing to compromise and add this mod if post count were to remain, though.

 

 

 

I'll try and refrain from much discussion about mods to the forums since I'm personally not that knowledgeable about them and also because it won't be me that would end up having to do the work on them. While it wasn't my intent to propose a word minimum with that comment I agree it wouldn't do much other than to encourage longer spam. I would be curious of the logistics of having locked threads not count toward the post count. (Yes this topic does lend itself to grammatical nightmares. :wall: ) The replies to poorly written rants telling them they're poorly written as well as people posting that someone spammed or posted in the wrong forum add greatly to the post count of some. Locked threads not counting would remove part of this.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'll grant you that it's more probable that the one with the higher post count wouldn't post something of that nature. However since we are dealing with people via the internet even the amount of time you have "known" someone doesn't mean much sometimes. My point was more to use common sense and don't let a count number make you assume something about someone. That's the crux of all this I think, people assuming things based on a number.

 

 

 

Like I said, there will always be bad eggs, but usually a higher post count can show some level of trustworthiness. What everyone is forgetting about high post counters is that everyone of their posts is logged. The higher your post count is, the more of your personality is shown to the general public. If someone with 2k posts posts a link, by then people will usually have a sense of this person's character, and his trustworthiness, hense have a good idea if the link is safe or not.

 

 

 

I like that comment, it was well said. This is the manner I use to determine my opinion on someone by looking through past posts to see how they write etc. I hadn't really thought of one being indicative of the other, but then again I just prefer to go straight to the old posts.

 

 

 

Simply put, there hasn't been any reason for us pro-post counters (this argument is a grammatical nightmare :lol: ) to post any reasons. We're winning, aren't we? If we weren't, then I can assure you that there would be plenty more pro-post count posts on this topic, with a good deal of them having good points.

 

 

 

I wouldn't even attempt to argue that this poll is truly representative of all Tip.It users. Besides it could be argued it's like the updates on RS. You only ever hear how bad people hate them because the ones that like them keep quiet. I could say only the people who would be mad that the counts were taken down would vote here while those that are merely ambivalent wouldn't bother. Impossible to know either way though. :P I'll stick to not using the poll as concrete evidence.

 

 

 

+1 :wink:

 

 

 

OMG SPAM!! :P

 

 

 

I'm pleased to have a decent and more importantly civil discussion about something that doesn't devolve into "shut up you stupid noob". They do take time to draft however, I'm sure thats why people seldom seem to write them. #-o I didn't go through this post with a fine-toothed comb since I'm in hurry. Overlook any glaring errors.

 

 

 

Btw, good eye on the Zim thing. Somewhat of a give away with the avatar and what not though. Not sure I care for Zim-boy however. :-k

[hc2995]

yes please remove it, it encourages spam and many users just post retarted stuff to get there post count up, its no good remove it!

[bobby1167]

yes please remove it, it encourages spam and many users just post retarted stuff to get there post count up, its no good remove it!

 

 

 

Well how would removing it help the Forums?

 

 

 

I find it fun to have all these different ranks, if its get too out of hand..Take action, Theres always the "!" in the corner of everyones post

 

 

 

(+1 on Bloodveld's and Tallest's post :P )

[D. V. Devnull]

yes please remove it, it encourages spam and many users just post retarted stuff to get there post count up, its no good remove it!

 

 

 

You're still not getting it, are you? People use many different factors from their own working methods in determining how much weight they can put on a given post as being good and usable. Sometimes this includes rank title, post count, and join date. If we remove any of it, we risk hurting at least one-third or more of the Tip.It Forum Community, and I'd hate to think the breakdown that would happen next. Can't even use the RSN line because as someone mentioned, not everyone has one.

 

 

 

If we're gonna get rid of the spammers, we need to be aggressive at finding them, reporting them, having their posts deleted or made to not count in some fashion. But we shouldn't penalize someone else in the process. That IS the master problem with dumping the post counts, simply put. We'd penalize tons of people by doing that who don't deserve to be penalized.

 

 

 

And btw, you need to watch your language. People frown on those that use the word "retarted"... it just goes to show a lacking of IQ on the poster's part.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[EDIT]

[viperspeed3]

i dont know if someone has put this yet, but maybe put a limit on how many words or letters they need in their posts for it to count? :D