Full Version: One Word Posts
Since when has adding "This is not a one word post" after a one word post become acceptable?
It has never been permitted. I'd always take the same action as if it was a normal one-word post.
I still report those posts even if they have that this is not a one word post phrase attached. I treat them the same as the one worded posts because it adds nothing of value to the post, and it's basically the same as a one word post.
QUOTE (finisterra @ May 12 2009, 05:28 PM) 
It has never been permitted. I'd always take the same action as if it was a normal one-word post.
I have seen the same people do it over and over again without any "Reason for edit:" edits. Either you're the only one taking action or those people are oblivious to the warnings they've been getting.
QUOTE (Gillis @ May 12 2009, 08:12 PM)
QUOTE (finisterra @ May 12 2009, 05:28 PM)
It has never been permitted. I'd always take the same action as if it was a normal one-word post.
I have seen the same people do it over and over again without any "Reason for edit:" edits. Either you're the only one taking action or those people are oblivious to the warnings they've been getting.
Maybe they aren't getting reported. I'm sure that if a mod saw a report about one of those posts, he'd either edit them or PM/warn the person.
I just feel unfair if someone one-posts that isn't spam, it gets reported. It needs to be changed.
When one word comunicates all that needs to be said, why get a warn?
QUOTE (Mutt @ May 12 2009, 06:38 PM)
When one word comunicates all that needs to be said, why get a warn?
That's how I feel.
If they are spammy posts, then, why not?
But, if they are perfectly sane, understandable, one-word posts, then why get a warn?
doesn't
edit: see what i did there?
really though, everyone else pretty much covered it, i just had a huge impulse to do that
edit: see what i did there?
really though, everyone else pretty much covered it, i just had a huge impulse to do that
I'd still report it and treat it as a 1 word post.
@Cake: It isn't that hard to write more than 1 word but I guess it would be okay.
I.E.
Are you a member in RuneScape?
No.
It still adds.
@Cake: It isn't that hard to write more than 1 word but I guess it would be okay.
I.E.
Are you a member in RuneScape?
No.
It still adds.
QUOTE (Fake @ May 12 2009, 10:08 PM)
I'd still report it and treat it as a 1 word post.
@Cake: It isn't that hard to write more than 1 word but I guess it would be okay.
I.E.
Are you a member in RuneScape?
No.
It still adds.
@Cake: It isn't that hard to write more than 1 word but I guess it would be okay.
I.E.
Are you a member in RuneScape?
No.
It still adds.
Yes it still technically adds to the conversation, but think how much better the topic would be if you explained why you're not a member, if you want to become a member, etc. One word replies are never good replies.
QUOTE (lilshu @ May 12 2009, 10:16 PM)
QUOTE (Fake @ May 12 2009, 10:08 PM)
I'd still report it and treat it as a 1 word post.
@Cake: It isn't that hard to write more than 1 word but I guess it would be okay.
I.E.
Are you a member in RuneScape?
No.
It still adds.
@Cake: It isn't that hard to write more than 1 word but I guess it would be okay.
I.E.
Are you a member in RuneScape?
No.
It still adds.
One word replies are never good replies.
Understood.
See what I did there?
QUOTE (Mutt @ May 12 2009, 06:38 PM)
When one word comunicates all that needs to be said, why get a warn?
This is not only about that. I've seen people say "
(not a one smiley post)" in General Chat.
QUOTE (Gillis @ May 12 2009, 10:23 PM)
QUOTE (Mutt @ May 12 2009, 06:38 PM)
When one word comunicates all that needs to be said, why get a warn?
This is not only about that. I've seen people say "
(not a one smiley post)" in General Chat.Well if someone posts that it has nothing to do with the topic and is still considered spam so it should be dubbed as a one word post. But I'm still on whether a one word post it accepted or not. I believe it should be as long as it contributes.
QUOTE (lilshu @ May 12 2009, 07:16 PM)
QUOTE (Fake @ May 12 2009, 10:08 PM)
I'd still report it and treat it as a 1 word post.
@Cake: It isn't that hard to write more than 1 word but I guess it would be okay.
I.E.
Are you a member in RuneScape?
No.
It still adds.
@Cake: It isn't that hard to write more than 1 word but I guess it would be okay.
I.E.
Are you a member in RuneScape?
No.
It still adds.
Yes it still technically adds to the conversation, but think how much better the topic would be if you explained why you're not a member, if you want to become a member, etc. One word replies are never good replies.
True.
See what I did there?
Very, very true.
It would be a lot nicer, but, they shouldn't get warned for it. I mean, unless it is total spam, the post should go warnless. It should be noted in a mod's logs, or something, so they keep track whether this guy keeps on doing this, or whether this is a one-time thing... Or something...
Is this really a big deal?
QUOTE (Ramon @ May 12 2009, 08:16 PM)
Is this really a big deal?
Maybe
Gillis thought it was
Ask him
Whenever I feel the one word does not contribute to the topic, and especially more when a user adds "This is not a one word post", I report the topic. Although I don't follow up on all the reports I submit, every single one-word post I recall reporting has been handled as spam. I see Finisterra editing posts so I know he's doing his job. I haven't seen much activity from the other green goblins lately but I can hope they are also acting accordingly.
To answer the OP's original question, from what I've seen, it's never been acceptable.
To answer the OP's original question, from what I've seen, it's never been acceptable.
QUOTE (Day @ May 12 2009, 09:24 PM)
QUOTE (Ramon @ May 12 2009, 08:16 PM)
Is this really a big deal?
Maybe
Gillis thought it was
Ask him
To be honest, this post was more useless than a one word post that answers a question. He was asking me because I was the one that presented the problem.
It makes me more mad when people say the "this is not a one word post" than when they don't. It shows that they know that they're breaking the rules and are trying to avoid being warned.
QUOTE (Gillis @ May 13 2009, 08:22 AM)
QUOTE (Day @ May 12 2009, 09:24 PM)
QUOTE (Ramon @ May 12 2009, 08:16 PM)
Is this really a big deal?
Maybe
Gillis thought it was
Ask him
To be honest, this post was more useless than a one word post that answers a question. He was asking me because I was the one that presented the problem.
It makes me more mad when people say the "this is not a one word post" than when they don't. It shows that they know that they're breaking the rules and are trying to avoid being warned.
It's like censor evasion, followed by a message to not warn the poster.
~Razorlike
~Razorlike
Just remember this, life isn't fair. The rules are there to be followed, if you don't follow them you get punished. The reasoning behind not using one worded posts is logical, why is it such a big deal? I'd report any post that is basically a one word post, their isn't exactly many exceptions. Is it really that much of a grey area ?
I do think some moderators are a little lax with that rule, but of course they may not see the posts. I for one am guilty myself of seeing a rulebreaking post like this but leaving it.
? I do think some moderators are a little lax with that rule, but of course they may not see the posts. I for one am guilty myself of seeing a rulebreaking post like this but leaving it.
Personally its a good rule, places like the scape lounge it isnt enforced i beleive but i shouldnt see why a fuss should occur say in polls and surveys when someone can answer something in one word like.
Pepsi Vs Coke
Coke, it may not be constructive but i dont see why it should be punished.
Pepsi Vs Coke
Coke, it may not be constructive but i dont see why it should be punished.
QUOTE (Ice @ May 13 2009, 05:43 PM)
Personally its a good rule, places like the scape lounge it isnt enforced i beleive but i shouldnt see why a fuss should occur say in polls and surveys when someone can answer something in one word like.
Pepsi Vs Coke
Coke, it may not be constructive but i dont see why it should be punished.
Pepsi Vs Coke
Coke, it may not be constructive but i dont see why it should be punished.
Being a discussion board, you should elaborate on your answer. If Sal just wanted to know this or that, he'd send out a survey. Instead, he allows you to express and explain your reasons, so you should take advantage of it.
QUOTE (Gillis @ May 12 2009, 10:23 PM)
QUOTE (Mutt @ May 12 2009, 06:38 PM)
When one word comunicates all that needs to be said, why get a warn?
This is not only about that. I've seen people say "
(not a one smiley post)" in General Chat.Yeah i've seen that pop up more times this past month then the whole time i've been here.
Very annoying when people do that, i'm going to start reporting them for that.
QUOTE (Ramon @ May 12 2009, 08:16 PM)
Is this really a big deal?
Yes.
I think the rule should be changed
See that is just filler there. Why not have one word posts?
No
----- You see this is what i would have done if I was someone who posted only one word. You have no idea what I mean. I could be saying No this rule should be changed, no it should stay, or even no you guys are all dumb for arguing about this. Really though this rule should stay, because all you really have to do is just restate whatever you are responding to and make it into a sentence. This hole post so far has only taken me about a minute. One sentence should not be hard at all for anyone to do, unless, as my friend would say it, you are a mentally deficiant goon. Many people who post one word are just trying to raise their post count because they want to be cool. Honestly people just take the extra 20 or so seconds to make a scentence instead of just one word.
~PS - I do not think you guys are all dumb, or mentally deficiant goons, I was just trying to make a point
----- You see this is what i would have done if I was someone who posted only one word. You have no idea what I mean. I could be saying No this rule should be changed, no it should stay, or even no you guys are all dumb for arguing about this. Really though this rule should stay, because all you really have to do is just restate whatever you are responding to and make it into a sentence. This hole post so far has only taken me about a minute. One sentence should not be hard at all for anyone to do, unless, as my friend would say it, you are a mentally deficiant goon. Many people who post one word are just trying to raise their post count because they want to be cool. Honestly people just take the extra 20 or so seconds to make a scentence instead of just one word.
~PS - I do not think you guys are all dumb, or mentally deficiant goons, I was just trying to make a point
The problem with this rules it more a scoop rule if anything else. Just because not all one word posts are spammy, it still creates the rule because sadly, mostly they are. however the fact we haeva no spam rule which already covers this is slightly odd, its like the suggestion board, you must elaborate, but you can't psot these topcis anyway just in case you didn't read the other rule. Now I don't no about you, but msot of the time you read all the rules or none of them...
So surely if someone does read the rules, do not spam covers spammy one word psots, so a rule agaisnt one word posting is unneeded
So surely if someone does read the rules, do not spam covers spammy one word psots, so a rule agaisnt one word posting is unneeded
I once was warned for editing out a reply I posted after deciding it was too aggressive perhaps, because it was edited to just a "Sorry" or something, don't remember now. I was told it was spam even though it was clearly not intentional. I think perhaps mods get too warn-hungry sometimes and jump on people, whereas other times they let things pass. It's too objective.
QUOTE (Thomas154321 @ May 14 2009, 07:47 PM)
I once was warned for editing out a reply I posted after deciding it was too aggressive perhaps, because it was edited to just a "Sorry" or something, don't remember now. I was told it was spam even though it was clearly not intentional. I think perhaps mods get too warn-hungry sometimes and jump on people, whereas other times they let things pass. It's too objective.
QUOTE (Forum Rules)
Warn logs are to be private, between the member and the staff. Do not share your warn logs with other members of the forum.
*cough*
Looking at your warning log, I don't see what you refer to unless it's the case you were warned for posting just "
" in which you should have seen that coming, I wouldn't say you're on solid ground when you claim certain mods warn-hungry (not saying that we are or are not) with what you base your accusation on. This entire thread can usually be summed up into the word "context". Context tend to decide what is acceptable and what's not. I don't think the forum should be too surprised to see the One Word Post rule revised in the future from some arguements brought up here, but there'll still be a line to draw.
A direct and concise answer that don't need to add much beyond the simple answer would be allowed whereas something random or a plain smiley would not be accepted. In the end, it'll all boil down to the context of the post in question to the topic it was posted in. I can understand people saying "No, this isn't a one word post" if they properly answer. However, I do believe there are certain places where one should not allow one word posts and that's basically in every section where you get post count increase by making a post, mostly because these subforums tend to be discussion/submission/assistance related and as such require a heavy input beyond simplicity.
So I'm all in favour of one word posting on polls or direct questions with a simple one-word reply summing up an opinion, but I'd strike down on it being used in a debate or any serious thread.
^@ Yuanrang
Correctly answered the question.
But why?
Yuanrang was right, It's alright for polls, but not for debates.
QUOTE
Do you have a car?
Yes.
Yes.
Correctly answered the question.
QUOTE
There is a rule against presidents staying for more than one term. Should it be revised?
No.
No.
But why?
Yuanrang was right, It's alright for polls, but not for debates.
QUOTE (Mutt @ May 14 2009, 08:14 PM)
^@ Yuanrang
Correctly answered the question.
QUOTE
Do you have a car?
Yes.
Yes.
Correctly answered the question.
What's the point in posting that?
A better response would be "No, because I like being green." or "Yes, as I need it in my job." or stuff like that.
QUOTE (finisterra @ May 14 2009, 10:11 PM)
QUOTE (Mutt @ May 14 2009, 08:14 PM)
^@ Yuanrang
Correctly answered the question.
QUOTE
Do you have a car?
Yes.
Yes.
Correctly answered the question.
What's the point in posting that?
A better response would be "No, because I like being green." or "Yes, as I need it in my job." or stuff like that.
He didn't ask you why you have one or not, he just asked you if you have one.
. But I guess I could just say: Okay.
QUOTE (Yuanrang)
QUOTE (Forum Rules)
Warn logs are to be private, between the member and the staff. Do not share your warn logs with other members of the forum.
*cough*
Looking at your warning log, I don't see what you refer to unless it's the case you were warned for posting just "
" in which you should have seen that coming, I wouldn't say you're on solid ground when you claim certain mods warn-hungry (not saying that we are or are not) with what you base your accusation on. I find your statement highly ironic.
QUOTE (finisterra @ May 14 2009, 07:11 PM)
QUOTE (Mutt @ May 14 2009, 08:14 PM)
^@ Yuanrang
Correctly answered the question.
QUOTE
Do you have a car?
Yes.
Yes.
Correctly answered the question.
What's the point in posting that?
A better response would be "No, because I like being green." or "Yes, as I need it in my job." or stuff like that.
Some of us are minimalists and prefer to talk in black and white and not waste your time with trivial details that you will forget anyway. And if your doing this to regulate potential content, then why not warn on the basis of stupidity or even saying something illogical. It wouldn't work. What your asking for is everyone be a great poster, when some people prefer to just tell what the topic creator wants to know.
I think that having "No- this is not a one word post" is a way to skip the censor and also makes other members wonder what the member who posted this is trying to say. It is much better to put in a little explanation after everything you say to make sure that other people know what you are trying to say.
QUOTE (Ramon @ May 15 2009, 05:04 AM)
QUOTE (Yuanrang)
QUOTE (Forum Rules)
Warn logs are to be private, between the member and the staff. Do not share your warn logs with other members of the forum.
*cough*
Looking at your warning log, I don't see what you refer to unless it's the case you were warned for posting just "
" in which you should have seen that coming, I wouldn't say you're on solid ground when you claim certain mods warn-hungry (not saying that we are or are not) with what you base your accusation on. I find your statement highly ironic.
Really? I shared my warning log with the rest of the forum? I wasn't aware of that, here I was thinking that I didn't have a Warning Log while being a moderator. Odd.
Joking sarcasm aside, I'll respond back on this since I notice it's not just you reacting on it but also Agent F which reported me for it, so it's maybe for the best if I explain this a bit.
The first thing I want to point out is that I did not enter this topic, choose a random member in this thread and decide to share someone's warning log out of the blue. That'd be a direct case of blatant abuse.
This brings me to my second point: Then why did I share Thomas' warning log?
Quite frankly, it was because he brought his warning log as a direct foundation of his arguement. That's bad in itself to some degree, but the worst part is that he's not being right about what he's saying. If he really was speaking the truth, I would have pointed out the rules to him still, but I wouldn't have openly shared a minor snippet of his Warning Log (because it was minor) and point out that he wasn't saying how things where.
You see, and this is where you should pay attention Agent F, this is a topic which have a direct influence on the forum. It's a feedback/suggestion topic and as such, might easily influence policy changes and interpretations of the existing rules. It's an important topic and who's tell if Thomas is right or wrong? Certainly not the forum members, you can't even see the warning notations, so who then? The Staff.
The moment he decided to make his warning log into a tool in a public debate is when I have a right to step in and intervene so things go properly and that the tread still have a core of truth to it where people can argue with each other on equal footing. I'm here to ensure that the forum is properly running and that things run as it should, just like any other member of the Staff. I, as the rest of the Staff, have the ability and right if necessary to take action in cases that require it. I deemed this to be a required case.
No, I am not above the rules nor do I consider myself to be. However, when you're a moderator or an administrator, certain rules directly interfere with our duties and tasks. There was a time when the Forum Rules was split into multiple posts, yet I see no one reporting Salmoneus for doing so. It was necessary. We've bumped topics when we didn't have a nifty bump feature, we've posted multiple topics and even cross-posted them in various areas, simply because it's what we have to do to do our job.
I am not above the rules, but I do answer to a different set of rules to you forum members as well, and that's primarily the moderating guidelines the Staff has set on itself and I also answer to the collective will of the Staff in the Mod Forum.
I realize that you two have no knowledge of that so it's really no big deal, though I do wish to point out one thing for you Agent F. You said:
Do more reading and a lot less posting, Yuan. Cmon, man. You're better than this.
Yes, I'm better then that but you're not. I have done this since 2006 when I was first appointed to be a moderator. I know moderators before me as well as other moderators during the 3 years I've been one have also done it, as well as me never having recieved a single correction or had it brought up in any shape, form or connection from other members of the Staff. That's never, not a single time. I do this often when cases like this spawn when someone try to use their warning log as an arguement, so people should have noticed by now and brought it up to me if I really was wrong in this, but I haven't.
So maybe it's time for you Agent F to realize that you might be wrong in this and let the matter lie. I've put the report of yours on review status so every moderator moderating the report center will notice this thread. If I'm wrong in this, and you're right, you'll have moderators replying against me and proving me wrong. If not? Then you're wrong and yes, I simply was better at knowing moderator guidelines then you.
QUOTE (Po22 @ May 15 2009, 05:58 AM)
QUOTE (finisterra @ May 14 2009, 07:11 PM)
QUOTE (Mutt @ May 14 2009, 08:14 PM)
^@ Yuanrang
Correctly answered the question.
QUOTE
Do you have a car?
Yes.
Yes.
Correctly answered the question.
What's the point in posting that?
A better response would be "No, because I like being green." or "Yes, as I need it in my job." or stuff like that.
Some of us are minimalists and prefer to talk in black and white and not waste your time with trivial details that you will forget anyway. And if your doing this to regulate potential content, then why not warn on the basis of stupidity or even saying something illogical. It wouldn't work. What your asking for is everyone be a great poster, when some people prefer to just tell what the topic creator wants to know.
If someone asks if you have a car, there is a reason behind it.
Also, a forum is used to express and share opinions. One word posts aren't adding to anything, since there is always a reason why the other person asked a yes/no or a simple to answer question.
Ultimately, if you are a minimalist, don't post in topics where you can be minimalistic.
~Razorlike
Also, a forum is used to express and share opinions. One word posts aren't adding to anything, since there is always a reason why the other person asked a yes/no or a simple to answer question.
Ultimately, if you are a minimalist, don't post in topics where you can be minimalistic.
~Razorlike
It's all about location, if someone asks "do you have a car?". He could use that to start a discussion about if we should drive cars etc... But he can also ask it to get information to help the person with something else.
First topic: Do you have a car?
Sec: Yes, it's needed.
Third: No ~ bad one word post
First topic: How do you get to work?
Sec: by bus, there isn't another option for me
Third: Don't you have a car?
Fourth: No. ~ is this really so bad as above?
First topic: Do you have a car?
Sec: Yes, it's needed.
Third: No ~ bad one word post
First topic: How do you get to work?
Sec: by bus, there isn't another option for me
Third: Don't you have a car?
Fourth: No. ~ is this really so bad as above?
Is there a need to be so condescending down to the last sarcastic smiley face, Yuanrang? Your post is riddled with a sense of superiority that drips off the page whether it be well warranted or not. I'm going to go ahead and cut out the parts that are not really relevant to me or do not interest me.
First off:
Even though you are joking, I would assume that the rule applies reflexively; however, there is no definite mention of this, and thus I don't think you can assume either.
I understand and empathize with your situation, but the examples you give are all done out of convenience and do not affect someone else's supposed privacy. Once you cross the line of pulling out someone's information that is supposedly private between said person and moderator, a precedent is set which implies that moderators can share warn logs at their own digression. Is this really a good thing? After this rule is loop holed, which one's next?
Let us be honest here. If you were to seriously consider your position here on the forums, as one of the oldest if not the oldest moderators, you would probably agree that few people dare to disagree with you. One would be hard pressed to find anyone as ethereally respected and with less authority than you; including some admins. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that other moderators neglect their duty or follow veteran influence blindly; however, I am saying that in any challenge that you pose, in this case the report by Agent F, few are going to contest you whether moderator or not. Thus, I do not think that an open report holds much substance as it should, and should determine if Agent F is justified in his report. However, that being said, I'm sure many of you will contest this, but it is something worth contemplating.
First off:
QUOTE (Yuanrang @ May 15 2009, 01:51 AM)
Really? I shared my warning log with the rest of the forum? I wasn't aware of that, here I was thinking that I didn't have a Warning Log while being a moderator. Odd.
Even though you are joking, I would assume that the rule applies reflexively; however, there is no definite mention of this, and thus I don't think you can assume either.
QUOTE (Yuanrang @ May 15 2009, 01:51 AM)
There was a time when the Forum Rules was split into multiple posts, yet I see no one reporting Salmoneus for doing so. It was necessary. We've bumped topics when we didn't have a nifty bump feature, we've posted multiple topics and even cross-posted them in various areas, simply because it's what we have to do to do our job.
I understand and empathize with your situation, but the examples you give are all done out of convenience and do not affect someone else's supposed privacy. Once you cross the line of pulling out someone's information that is supposedly private between said person and moderator, a precedent is set which implies that moderators can share warn logs at their own digression. Is this really a good thing? After this rule is loop holed, which one's next?
QUOTE (Yuanrang @ May 15 2009, 01:51 AM)
I've put the report of yours on review status so every moderator moderating the report center will notice this thread. If I'm wrong in this, and you're right, you'll have moderators replying against me and proving me wrong. If not? Then you're wrong and yes, I simply was better at knowing moderator guidelines then you.
Let us be honest here. If you were to seriously consider your position here on the forums, as one of the oldest if not the oldest moderators, you would probably agree that few people dare to disagree with you. One would be hard pressed to find anyone as ethereally respected and with less authority than you; including some admins. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that other moderators neglect their duty or follow veteran influence blindly; however, I am saying that in any challenge that you pose, in this case the report by Agent F, few are going to contest you whether moderator or not. Thus, I do not think that an open report holds much substance as it should, and should determine if Agent F is justified in his report. However, that being said, I'm sure many of you will contest this, but it is something worth contemplating.
QUOTE (Day @ May 13 2009, 04:24 AM)
QUOTE (Ramon @ May 12 2009, 08:16 PM)
Is this really a big deal?
Maybe
Gillis thought it was
Ask him
I find this less useful than someone saying "I think I get it.. Does it happen like this" and me replying "Yeah." Imo, some one word's should be allowed while more multiple words shouldn't.
QUOTE
Let us be honest here. If you were to seriously consider your position here on the forums, as one of the oldest if not the oldest moderators, you would probably agree that few people dare to disagree with you. One would be hard pressed to find anyone as ethereally respected and with less authority than you; including some admins. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that other moderators neglect their duty or follow veteran influence blindly; however, I am saying that in any challenge that you pose, in this case the report by Agent F, few are going to contest you whether moderator or not.
I think you must have some serious misconceptions about the bias of moderators here. If we were to disagree with him, or something he had done, he would be the first person to know. If he had done something wrong, every moderator who thought he had done something wrong would openly disagree with him.
QUOTE (lilshu @ May 15 2009, 05:11 PM)
QUOTE
Let us be honest here. If you were to seriously consider your position here on the forums, as one of the oldest if not the oldest moderators, you would probably agree that few people dare to disagree with you. One would be hard pressed to find anyone as ethereally respected and with less authority than you; including some admins. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that other moderators neglect their duty or follow veteran influence blindly; however, I am saying that in any challenge that you pose, in this case the report by Agent F, few are going to contest you whether moderator or not.
I think you must have some serious misconceptions about the bias of moderators here. If we were to disagree with him, or something he had done, he would be the first person to know. If he had done something wrong, every moderator who thought he had done something wrong would openly disagree with him.
I think bias is too strong of a word in this situation, and I know from first hand experience that the moderating team are no mental pushovers; however, I do think whether it be consciously or not, Yuan's influence has a far reach even if he's not aware of it.
The following spoiler contain a general response about my stance in this thread and an extensive reply. If walls of text are of interest to you, click. If not, run.
I've always been the type of person I've been ever since I joined, am I meant to change just because I was chosen to handle responsibilities and power? You criticise me with irony, I defend myself with sarcasm. Condescending? In ways where it's intending to be as a direct response, yes it was a condescending post mostly aimed at Agent F which, in turn had reported my post with a condescending lecture note about the rules. That part of my second post was a direct rebuttal to him.
In fact, barring my first sarcastic reply to you and that rebuttal, I was pretty much rather polite and explained why you two weren't really right when you think I'm doing the same and I tried my best to explain that in a fairly understandable manner. The midpart directed to Agent F was a pointer because of something he said I was wrong about in his report, and as such, it was a pointer to him why he was being wrong so he could pay attention to the answer. That part, believe it or not, was of polite intent.
I do not consider myself above anyone in the sense that I'm superior. I might be arrogant of nature, I concur. I might also have an elitist view of "the good old days", I'm willing to admit that as well, but I do not think my member group in any way make me a better person or a better forumer then you. I do believe it brings me additional responsibilities, though I don't think it makes me special. I follow the same ruleset as any other member on this forum. I follow the extra guidelines for the Staff and clauses there. I always consult and respect the Staff in matters as this (which is why the report were under review and now exist as a notepad discussion in the report center), and I'm open to the fact that I'm wrong. I asked the Staff to say I was wrong if they felt like that here in this topic, publically, for all to see and if that happen, I'll accept that.
As lilshu pointed out, as courteous as us Mods 'n' Admins are to each other, we're not afraid to confront each other if we do something wrong and all of us like to review ourselves. I like that, they're sharp people, they know when something's wrong and they know it shouldn't be hidden.
An act might not accurately reflect true nature. Arrogance, sarcasm, condescending nature, stoic behaviour and multiple other ways of acting is effective in certain situations. I think that I'm one of those Mods that don't really fear using them as long as it's within acceptable frames. It serve a purpose and as several other people have stated through-out the years, the Staff aren't babysitters, we're here to see things running properly. If me being rude (as you seem to see it?) bring a point out to those that I'm directing myself to, then it serve its purpose. I have my friends here, I'm not out to make any more of them. I don't have time for it. However, if my behaviour make you read this post in its entire state, thinking about it enough (since I'm assuming you're reading this in the intent to reply to it) and my stance on the matter itself, I can also convey my message and make you consider it. I don't really care if you dislike me as a person, I'm not here to be liked by everyone nor do I try that, but I'm here to be around my friends, relax now and then with topics that interest me and also help the forum as a whole.
Dislike me and my attitude, though it made you think over my stance on the discussion, didn't it?
Thus I act in the way I've seen moderators before me and also being a moderator in my time, have done. I'm not the only one doing this, nor am I the first. I act as I've seen others act and I do my best to be professional about it, there's no rule either way so I can't quite claim to be right and back it up directly, which is why I invited the rest of the Staff to voice their disagreement with me if they were of another opinion. In this thread, just to underline that.
Aye, but that's certain normal actions that's required us to break rules though but I can't discuss directly, but there's a few other cases we might indulge ourselves on (even though I can't go into detail since they're confined to the Mod Board) such as making Multiple Accounts (in extreme circumstances related to Moderating, IIRC once), Misleading Content (certain fun forum hunts come to mind), Advertising (yes, it's been done in official posts pointing to other fansites) and so on and so on.
My point is, the forum rules exist for everyone, but they might occasionally be a hinder when it comes to forum moderating and conveying official messages from the Staff and, as such, we can bend them if it's of a positive influence. I do believe that, by directing myself directly to someone who share a warning log, I can point out to people around that such post isn't really truthful as to the real reason these notations is in the warning log in question, I also indicate that a moderator have seen the post so it doesn't have to be moderated and it also help to inform the one sharing the post wrong that he has mistaken the notation in question.
It all serve a purpose in one way or another. I would never openly go up to someone randomly and share logs like that, that's wrong. I personally think that Thomas was trying to advocate that the Rules and moderational methods regarding such should be changed and I've already agreed on that earlier in the thread.
Aye, let's be honest. I'm one of the Great Old Ones (H.P Lovecraft
), and I know that might carry around a certain weight. However, who better to know me then those who's spent their time debating and discussing directly with me in the Moderator Board then? The Staff (I include retired ones in this since they discuss and debate a lot too) know me professionally and quite a few know me on a friendly basis as a person. As you already said earlier, they know their stuff, they're good at arguing and they're certainly not any lightweight themselves. I find it a bit hard to think that someone would avoid disagreeing with me directly considering they're pretty much too strong willed to be intimidated (since I'm not their superior ) and also that they'd disagree in private in the mod board and not publically.
It might stop members from doing it, of course. I dislike that, people tend to be hesitant to disagree with people with a certain sense of power and authority and I think that's wrong. We're all free to voice our rights around here. Hell, I basically became a DM and a Mod (I assume this, I don't quite know) because I was active in discussing things with people and having heated discussions about the forum. I've made a living of being a guy debating things around here in my own unique way, I haven't changed. I doubt people would run in fear just as long as I voice my voice if they know me.
I want to be disagreed with, why do you think I make an effort in being a bit 'aggressive 'n' rude'? As you can see, I'm quite capable of being nice, polite and respecting the opinion of others. However, I've learned that attitude can spawn discussions to be far more direct, constructive and extensive as long as there's personal motivation hence the occasional act to serve my intentions and views.
Whenever I enter a discussion as this, I pretty much want to be disagreed with since I'm quite fond of discussing my views and opinions, as I think you can see.
I'm quite aware of it, which is why I try to stick to the matter at hand as well and take time voicing my opinion or simply defending my view or actions. I don't like slacking with things like this, nor do I deliberately try to cause issues. I started out initially to make the debating members of this thread aware that Thomas wasn't quite as truthful as he seemed to be, thus trying to make people aware that his experiences might not reflect the general way things work and such and questioned that post's relevance to the topic, it only sidetracked halfway when I was being criticized for it by multiple members.
Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.
[Close]
Spoiler: Click to Toggle the Spoiler.
QUOTE (Ramon)
Is there a need to be so condescending down to the last sarcastic smiley face, Yuanrang? Your post is riddled with a sense of superiority that drips off the page whether it be well warranted or not. I'm going to go ahead and cut out the parts that are not really relevant to me or do not interest me.
I've always been the type of person I've been ever since I joined, am I meant to change just because I was chosen to handle responsibilities and power? You criticise me with irony, I defend myself with sarcasm. Condescending? In ways where it's intending to be as a direct response, yes it was a condescending post mostly aimed at Agent F which, in turn had reported my post with a condescending lecture note about the rules. That part of my second post was a direct rebuttal to him.
In fact, barring my first sarcastic reply to you and that rebuttal, I was pretty much rather polite and explained why you two weren't really right when you think I'm doing the same and I tried my best to explain that in a fairly understandable manner. The midpart directed to Agent F was a pointer because of something he said I was wrong about in his report, and as such, it was a pointer to him why he was being wrong so he could pay attention to the answer. That part, believe it or not, was of polite intent.
I do not consider myself above anyone in the sense that I'm superior. I might be arrogant of nature, I concur. I might also have an elitist view of "the good old days", I'm willing to admit that as well, but I do not think my member group in any way make me a better person or a better forumer then you. I do believe it brings me additional responsibilities, though I don't think it makes me special. I follow the same ruleset as any other member on this forum. I follow the extra guidelines for the Staff and clauses there. I always consult and respect the Staff in matters as this (which is why the report were under review and now exist as a notepad discussion in the report center), and I'm open to the fact that I'm wrong. I asked the Staff to say I was wrong if they felt like that here in this topic, publically, for all to see and if that happen, I'll accept that.
As lilshu pointed out, as courteous as us Mods 'n' Admins are to each other, we're not afraid to confront each other if we do something wrong and all of us like to review ourselves. I like that, they're sharp people, they know when something's wrong and they know it shouldn't be hidden.
An act might not accurately reflect true nature. Arrogance, sarcasm, condescending nature, stoic behaviour and multiple other ways of acting is effective in certain situations. I think that I'm one of those Mods that don't really fear using them as long as it's within acceptable frames. It serve a purpose and as several other people have stated through-out the years, the Staff aren't babysitters, we're here to see things running properly. If me being rude (as you seem to see it?) bring a point out to those that I'm directing myself to, then it serve its purpose. I have my friends here, I'm not out to make any more of them. I don't have time for it. However, if my behaviour make you read this post in its entire state, thinking about it enough (since I'm assuming you're reading this in the intent to reply to it) and my stance on the matter itself, I can also convey my message and make you consider it. I don't really care if you dislike me as a person, I'm not here to be liked by everyone nor do I try that, but I'm here to be around my friends, relax now and then with topics that interest me and also help the forum as a whole.
Dislike me and my attitude, though it made you think over my stance on the discussion, didn't it?
QUOTE (Ramon)
Even though you are joking, I would assume that the rule applies reflexively; however, there is no definite mention of this, and thus I don't think you can assume either.
Thus I act in the way I've seen moderators before me and also being a moderator in my time, have done. I'm not the only one doing this, nor am I the first. I act as I've seen others act and I do my best to be professional about it, there's no rule either way so I can't quite claim to be right and back it up directly, which is why I invited the rest of the Staff to voice their disagreement with me if they were of another opinion. In this thread, just to underline that.
QUOTE (Ramon)
I understand and empathize with your situation, but the examples you give are all done out of convenience and do not affect someone else's supposed privacy. Once you cross the line of pulling out someone's information that is supposedly private between said person and moderator, a precedent is set which implies that moderators can share warn logs at their own digression. Is this really a good thing? After this rule is loop holed, which one's next?
Aye, but that's certain normal actions that's required us to break rules though but I can't discuss directly, but there's a few other cases we might indulge ourselves on (even though I can't go into detail since they're confined to the Mod Board) such as making Multiple Accounts (in extreme circumstances related to Moderating, IIRC once), Misleading Content (certain fun forum hunts come to mind
), Advertising (yes, it's been done in official posts pointing to other fansites) and so on and so on. My point is, the forum rules exist for everyone, but they might occasionally be a hinder when it comes to forum moderating and conveying official messages from the Staff and, as such, we can bend them if it's of a positive influence. I do believe that, by directing myself directly to someone who share a warning log, I can point out to people around that such post isn't really truthful as to the real reason these notations is in the warning log in question, I also indicate that a moderator have seen the post so it doesn't have to be moderated and it also help to inform the one sharing the post wrong that he has mistaken the notation in question.
It all serve a purpose in one way or another. I would never openly go up to someone randomly and share logs like that, that's wrong. I personally think that Thomas was trying to advocate that the Rules and moderational methods regarding such should be changed and I've already agreed on that earlier in the thread.
QUOTE (Ramon)
Let us be honest here. If you were to seriously consider your position here on the forums, as one of the oldest if not the oldest moderators, you would probably agree that few people dare to disagree with you. One would be hard pressed to find anyone as ethereally respected and with less authority than you; including some admins. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that other moderators neglect their duty or follow veteran influence blindly; however, I am saying that in any challenge that you pose, in this case the report by Agent F, few are going to contest you whether moderator or not. Thus, I do not think that an open report holds much substance as it should, and should determine if Agent F is justified in his report. However, that being said, I'm sure many of you will contest this, but it is something worth contemplating.
Aye, let's be honest. I'm one of the Great Old Ones (H.P Lovecraft
), and I know that might carry around a certain weight. However, who better to know me then those who's spent their time debating and discussing directly with me in the Moderator Board then? The Staff (I include retired ones in this since they discuss and debate a lot too) know me professionally and quite a few know me on a friendly basis as a person. As you already said earlier, they know their stuff, they're good at arguing and they're certainly not any lightweight themselves. I find it a bit hard to think that someone would avoid disagreeing with me directly considering they're pretty much too strong willed to be intimidated (since I'm not their superior ) and also that they'd disagree in private in the mod board and not publically. It might stop members from doing it, of course. I dislike that, people tend to be hesitant to disagree with people with a certain sense of power and authority and I think that's wrong. We're all free to voice our rights around here. Hell, I basically became a DM and a Mod (I assume this, I don't quite know) because I was active in discussing things with people and having heated discussions about the forum. I've made a living of being a guy debating things around here in my own unique way, I haven't changed. I doubt people would run in fear just as long as I voice my voice if they know me.
I want to be disagreed with, why do you think I make an effort in being a bit 'aggressive 'n' rude'? As you can see, I'm quite capable of being nice, polite and respecting the opinion of others. However, I've learned that attitude can spawn discussions to be far more direct, constructive and extensive as long as there's personal motivation hence the occasional act to serve my intentions and views.
Whenever I enter a discussion as this, I pretty much want to be disagreed with since I'm quite fond of discussing my views and opinions, as I think you can see.
QUOTE
Yuan's influence has a far reach even if he's not aware of it.
I'm quite aware of it, which is why I try to stick to the matter at hand as well and take time voicing my opinion or simply defending my view or actions. I don't like slacking with things like this, nor do I deliberately try to cause issues. I started out initially to make the debating members of this thread aware that Thomas wasn't quite as truthful as he seemed to be, thus trying to make people aware that his experiences might not reflect the general way things work and such and questioned that post's relevance to the topic, it only sidetracked halfway when I was being criticized for it by multiple members.
Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.
[Close]
Ugh, you're right, that is a major wall of sophism. There are a lot of parts that didn't seem important to me, so I cut them out.
I do not consider myself above anyone in the sense that I'm superior. I might be arrogant of nature, I concur. I might also have an elitist view of "the good old days", I'm willing to admit that as well, but I do not think my member group in any way make me a better person or a better forumer then you. I do believe it brings me additional responsibilities, though I don't think it makes me special. I follow the same ruleset as any other member on this forum. I follow the extra guidelines for the Staff and clauses there. I always consult and respect the Staff in matters as this (which is why the report were under review and now exist as a notepad discussion in the report center), and I'm open to the fact that I'm wrong. I asked the Staff to say I was wrong if they felt like that here in this topic, publically, for all to see and if that happen, I'll accept that.
As lilshu pointed out, as courteous as us Mods 'n' Admins are to each other, we're not afraid to confront each other if we do something wrong and all of us like to review ourselves. I like that, they're sharp people, they know when something's wrong and they know it shouldn't be hidden.
Don't get me wrong, I didn't think that your derisive tone was due to your position. It was a question of general personality; not moderator arrogance.
So you intentionally provoke others? From what I can tell, you were more concerned with one upping Agent F rather than expanding upon others' responses with your "arrogant nature".
Oh, don't think that I think you care.
It was more the humongous wall of text.
I act as I've seen others act and I do my best to be professional about it, there's no rule either way so I can't quite claim to be right and back it up directly, which is why I invited the rest of the Staff to voice their disagreement with me if they were of another opinion. In this thread, just to underline that.
As I earlier stated, I don't think the open warn review is objective enough. Ironically enough, that matter is highly subjective. However, what you're saying is that "It's ok, because the other mods can discuss it" which I already openly disagreed with. Thus, as long as your post is directed as me, it does not hold much salt.
Aye, but that's certain normal actions that's required us to break rules though but I can't discuss directly, but there's a few other cases we might indulge ourselves on (even though I can't go into detail since they're confined to the Mod Board) such as making Multiple Accounts (in extreme circumstances related to Moderating, IIRC once), Misleading Content (certain fun forum hunts come to mind), Advertising (yes, it's been done in official posts pointing to other fansites) and so on and so on.
Although I don't know what exact privileges and exceptions apply to moderators, I'm assuming that all examples you stated are acceptable to admins/moderators due to agreement of a higher authority. Your action against Thomas, on the other hand, was probably not previously authorized, and I say "probably" very lightly.
That's quite agreeable.
Relevance?
However, who better to know me then those who's spent their time debating and discussing directly with me in the Moderator Board then? The Staff (I include retired ones in this since they discuss and debate a lot too) know me professionally and quite a few know me on a friendly basis as a person.
As far as I can tell, few current moderators are from your "old days"; if your discussion is in the Mod Board, Retired Mods don't hold much relevance in your argument.
I'm not saying that moderators are going to avoid disagreeing with you, but like I already said, someone with more experience holds sway to opinions. Chances are, no huge visible impact will occur, but very slight changes of mentality come across. Once again, this is highly subjective, and I don't think it's really answerable.
I started out initially to make the debating members of this thread aware that Thomas wasn't quite as truthful as he seemed to be, thus trying to make people aware that his experiences might not reflect the general way things work and such and questioned that post's relevance to the topic, it only sidetracked halfway when I was being criticized for it by multiple members.
You brought up a report by Agent F into this topic which held no visible relevance to the topic, and as far as I can tell, most of your initial response was directed at him, a response to something that wasn't even in the topic. I'm sure a PM would have been acceptable. This is really a totally different matter, and doesn't concern the overall argument, however.
I think that I've successfully derailed the real point of this topic enough, but it wouldn't be fair to you to leave our "debate"; PM me if you have further remarks.
There are a lot of parts that didn't seem important to me, so I cut them out.QUOTE (Yuanrang @ May 16 2009, 08:19 PM)
QUOTE (Ramon)
Is there a need to be so condescending down to the last sarcastic smiley face, Yuanrang? Your post is riddled with a sense of superiority that drips off the page whether it be well warranted or not. I'm going to go ahead and cut out the parts that are not really relevant to me or do not interest me.
I do not consider myself above anyone in the sense that I'm superior. I might be arrogant of nature, I concur. I might also have an elitist view of "the good old days", I'm willing to admit that as well, but I do not think my member group in any way make me a better person or a better forumer then you. I do believe it brings me additional responsibilities, though I don't think it makes me special. I follow the same ruleset as any other member on this forum. I follow the extra guidelines for the Staff and clauses there. I always consult and respect the Staff in matters as this (which is why the report were under review and now exist as a notepad discussion in the report center), and I'm open to the fact that I'm wrong. I asked the Staff to say I was wrong if they felt like that here in this topic, publically, for all to see and if that happen, I'll accept that.
As lilshu pointed out, as courteous as us Mods 'n' Admins are to each other, we're not afraid to confront each other if we do something wrong and all of us like to review ourselves. I like that, they're sharp people, they know when something's wrong and they know it shouldn't be hidden.
Don't get me wrong, I didn't think that your derisive tone was due to your position. It was a question of general personality; not moderator arrogance.
QUOTE (Yuanrang @ May 16 2009, 08:19 PM)
An act might not accurately reflect true nature. Arrogance, sarcasm, condescending nature, stoic behaviour and multiple other ways of acting is effective in certain situations. I think that I'm one of those Mods that don't really fear using them as long as it's within acceptable frames.
So you intentionally provoke others?
From what I can tell, you were more concerned with one upping Agent F rather than expanding upon others' responses with your "arrogant nature".QUOTE (Yuanrang @ May 16 2009, 08:19 PM)
I don't really care if you dislike me as a person
Oh, don't think that I think you care.
QUOTE (Yuanrang @ May 16 2009, 08:19 PM)
Dislike me and my attitude, though it made you think over my stance on the discussion, didn't it?
It was more the humongous wall of text.
QUOTE (Yuanrang @ May 16 2009, 08:19 PM)
QUOTE (Ramon)
Even though you are joking, I would assume that the rule applies reflexively; however, there is no definite mention of this, and thus I don't think you can assume either.
I act as I've seen others act and I do my best to be professional about it, there's no rule either way so I can't quite claim to be right and back it up directly, which is why I invited the rest of the Staff to voice their disagreement with me if they were of another opinion. In this thread, just to underline that.
As I earlier stated, I don't think the open warn review is objective enough. Ironically enough, that matter is highly subjective. However, what you're saying is that "It's ok, because the other mods can discuss it" which I already openly disagreed with. Thus, as long as your post is directed as me, it does not hold much salt.
QUOTE (Yuanrang @ May 16 2009, 08:19 PM)
QUOTE (Ramon)
I understand and empathize with your situation, but the examples you give are all done out of convenience and do not affect someone else's supposed privacy. Once you cross the line of pulling out someone's information that is supposedly private between said person and moderator, a precedent is set which implies that moderators can share warn logs at their own digression. Is this really a good thing? After this rule is loop holed, which one's next?
Aye, but that's certain normal actions that's required us to break rules though but I can't discuss directly, but there's a few other cases we might indulge ourselves on (even though I can't go into detail since they're confined to the Mod Board) such as making Multiple Accounts (in extreme circumstances related to Moderating, IIRC once), Misleading Content (certain fun forum hunts come to mind
), Advertising (yes, it's been done in official posts pointing to other fansites) and so on and so on. Although I don't know what exact privileges and exceptions apply to moderators, I'm assuming that all examples you stated are acceptable to admins/moderators due to agreement of a higher authority. Your action against Thomas, on the other hand, was probably not previously authorized, and I say "probably" very lightly.
QUOTE (Yuanrang @ May 16 2009, 08:19 PM)
My point is, the forum rules exist for everyone, but they might occasionally be a hinder when it comes to forum moderating and conveying official messages from the Staff and, as such, we can bend them if it's of a positive influence.
That's quite agreeable.
QUOTE (Yuanrang @ May 16 2009, 08:19 PM)
I personally think that Thomas was trying to advocate that the Rules and moderational methods regarding such should be changed and I've already agreed on that earlier in the thread.
Relevance?
QUOTE (Yuanrang @ May 16 2009, 08:19 PM)
QUOTE (Ramon)
Let us be honest here. If you were to seriously consider your position here on the forums, as one of the oldest if not the oldest moderators, you would probably agree that few people dare to disagree with you. One would be hard pressed to find anyone as ethereally respected and with less authority than you; including some admins. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that other moderators neglect their duty or follow veteran influence blindly; however, I am saying that in any challenge that you pose, in this case the report by Agent F, few are going to contest you whether moderator or not. Thus, I do not think that an open report holds much substance as it should, and should determine if Agent F is justified in his report. However, that being said, I'm sure many of you will contest this, but it is something worth contemplating.
However, who better to know me then those who's spent their time debating and discussing directly with me in the Moderator Board then? The Staff (I include retired ones in this since they discuss and debate a lot too) know me professionally and quite a few know me on a friendly basis as a person.
As far as I can tell, few current moderators are from your "old days"; if your discussion is in the Mod Board, Retired Mods don't hold much relevance in your argument.
QUOTE (Yuanrang @ May 16 2009, 08:19 PM)
As you already said earlier, they know their stuff, they're good at arguing and they're certainly not any lightweight themselves. I find it a bit hard to think that someone would avoid disagreeing with me directly considering they're pretty much too strong willed to be intimidated (since I'm not their superior ) and also that they'd disagree in private in the mod board and not publically.
) and also that they'd disagree in private in the mod board and not publically.I'm not saying that moderators are going to avoid disagreeing with you, but like I already said, someone with more experience holds sway to opinions. Chances are, no huge visible impact will occur, but very slight changes of mentality come across. Once again, this is highly subjective, and I don't think it's really answerable.
QUOTE (Yuanrang @ May 16 2009, 08:19 PM)
QUOTE
Yuan's influence has a far reach even if he's not aware of it.
I started out initially to make the debating members of this thread aware that Thomas wasn't quite as truthful as he seemed to be, thus trying to make people aware that his experiences might not reflect the general way things work and such and questioned that post's relevance to the topic, it only sidetracked halfway when I was being criticized for it by multiple members.
You brought up a report by Agent F into this topic which held no visible relevance to the topic, and as far as I can tell, most of your initial response was directed at him, a response to something that wasn't even in the topic. I'm sure a PM would have been acceptable. This is really a totally different matter, and doesn't concern the overall argument, however.
I think that I've successfully derailed the real point of this topic enough, but it wouldn't be fair to you to leave our "debate"; PM me if you have further remarks.
QUOTE (Agent F @ May 13 2009, 11:00 PM)
QUOTE (Ice @ May 13 2009, 05:43 PM)
Personally its a good rule, places like the scape lounge it isnt enforced i beleive but i shouldnt see why a fuss should occur say in polls and surveys when someone can answer something in one word like.
Pepsi Vs Coke
Coke, it may not be constructive but i dont see why it should be punished.
Pepsi Vs Coke
Coke, it may not be constructive but i dont see why it should be punished.
Being a discussion board, you should elaborate on your answer. If Sal just wanted to know this or that, he'd send out a survey. Instead, he allows you to express and explain your reasons, so you should take advantage of it.
"Polls and Surveys"
In a way one-word posts are a pain. Yuan gave an example they could/can be used when answering a poll: Do you have a car? Yes. Yet it seems to me that would be a spam answer; a poll has that option: tick the appropriate box Yes or No. To add a Yes/No in an answer to that particular poll is superfluous, and therefore could/should receive a warn.
I cannot find one reason that would justify a one word post, minimalistic attitude or not. By nature a simple yes, no, maybe or any other variation on it, adds to a discussion, question or even polls.
So that would leave the 'fun'-part of the forum: the Scape Lounge. There it has a place: numerous games revolve on just that.
@ Ramon and Yuan: It seems this is getting a tad personal, and adds little to the one word question. However interesting it is to read, I think it deserves its own thread or PM maybe?
I cannot find one reason that would justify a one word post, minimalistic attitude or not. By nature a simple yes, no, maybe or any other variation on it, adds to a discussion, question or even polls.
So that would leave the 'fun'-part of the forum: the Scape Lounge. There it has a place: numerous games revolve on just that.
@ Ramon and Yuan: It seems this is getting a tad personal, and adds little to the one word question. However interesting it is to read, I think it deserves its own thread
or PM maybe?
QUOTE (Ramon @ May 17 2009, 05:38 AM)
I think that I've successfully derailed the real point of this topic enough, but it wouldn't be fair to you to leave our "debate"; PM me if you have further remarks.
QUOTE (Simple013 @ May 17 2009, 12:41 PM)
In a way one-word posts are a pain. Yuan gave an example they could/can be used when answering a poll: Do you have a car? Yes. Yet it seems to me that would be a spam answer; a poll has that option: tick the appropriate box Yes or No. To add a Yes/No in an answer to that particular poll is superfluous, and therefore could/should receive a warn.
I cannot find one reason that would justify a one word post, minimalistic attitude or not. By nature a simple yes, no, maybe or any other variation on it, adds to a discussion, question or even polls.
So that would leave the 'fun'-part of the forum: the Scape Lounge. There it has a place: numerous games revolve on just that.
@ Ramon and Yuan: It seems this is getting a tad personal, and adds little to the one word question. However interesting it is to read, I think it deserves its own thread or PM maybe?
I cannot find one reason that would justify a one word post, minimalistic attitude or not. By nature a simple yes, no, maybe or any other variation on it, adds to a discussion, question or even polls.
So that would leave the 'fun'-part of the forum: the Scape Lounge. There it has a place: numerous games revolve on just that.
@ Ramon and Yuan: It seems this is getting a tad personal, and adds little to the one word question. However interesting it is to read, I think it deserves its own thread
or PM maybe?So does Ramon. ;p
QUOTE (Ice @ May 17 2009, 04:57 AM)
QUOTE (Agent F @ May 13 2009, 11:00 PM)
QUOTE (Ice @ May 13 2009, 05:43 PM)
Personally its a good rule, places like the scape lounge it isnt enforced i beleive but i shouldnt see why a fuss should occur say in polls and surveys when someone can answer something in one word like.
Pepsi Vs Coke
Coke, it may not be constructive but i dont see why it should be punished.
Pepsi Vs Coke
Coke, it may not be constructive but i dont see why it should be punished.
Being a discussion board, you should elaborate on your answer. If Sal just wanted to know this or that, he'd send out a survey. Instead, he allows you to express and explain your reasons, so you should take advantage of it.
"Polls and Surveys"
Surveys are typically answered anonymously, including the site poll here at Sal's Realm. You don't post just to give the option you choose because the poll results are what's important. Polls are for statistical analysis. "One hundred people like Coke over Pepsi", not "Sam likes Coke more than Pepsi." If you are to make your response personal by posting a reply, you should give a reasoning why you choose one option over another. "Sam likes Coke more than Pepsi because the flavor is more pleasing and Pepsi is also not available in the vending machines at my educational institute/job and restaurants where I eat."
QUOTE (Simple013 @ May 17 2009, 08:41 AM)
In a way one-word posts are a pain. Yuan gave an example they could/can be used when answering a poll: Do you have a car? Yes. Yet it seems to me that would be a spam answer; a poll has that option: tick the appropriate box Yes or No. To add a Yes/No in an answer to that particular poll is superfluous, and therefore could/should receive a warn.
I cannot find one reason that would justify a one word post, minimalistic attitude or not. By nature a simple yes, no, maybe or any other variation on it, adds to a discussion, question or even polls.
So that would leave the 'fun'-part of the forum: the Scape Lounge. There it has a place: numerous games revolve on just that.
@ Ramon and Yuan: It seems this is getting a tad personal, and adds little to the one word question. However interesting it is to read, I think it deserves its own thread or PM maybe?
I cannot find one reason that would justify a one word post, minimalistic attitude or not. By nature a simple yes, no, maybe or any other variation on it, adds to a discussion, question or even polls.
So that would leave the 'fun'-part of the forum: the Scape Lounge. There it has a place: numerous games revolve on just that.
@ Ramon and Yuan: It seems this is getting a tad personal, and adds little to the one word question. However interesting it is to read, I think it deserves its own thread
or PM maybe?I can think of an occasional reason that wouldn't be spam, such as confirming activity in a Mafia thread or replying "Antidisestablishmentarianism" to a thread that asks what the longest word in the English language is. However, generally it's wrong to post a one-word post no matter what, and saying "This is not a one-word post" doesn't make it any better.
QUOTE (Fake @ May 12 2009, 09:08 PM)
I'd still report it and treat it as a 1 word post.
@Cake: It isn't that hard to write more than 1 word but I guess it would be okay.
I.E.
Are you a member in RuneScape?
No.
It still adds.
@Cake: It isn't that hard to write more than 1 word but I guess it would be okay.
I.E.
Are you a member in RuneScape?
No.
It still adds.
But it's not hard to make something more contructive. Watch this.
Are you a virgin?
Yes
That can easily be changed to...
Are you a virgin?
Yes but I have sex with my hand almost every night
See how much more that adds to the topic?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.