Page 1 of 2
Short, "non-quality" posts?
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2004 11:25 am
by ColdFront77
There hasn't been mention of this as of late (as far as I know), but thought I'd revisit the issue:
Short, non-quality (type) posts can be important for at least acknowledging someone or more than one member.
What do you think?
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2004 12:36 pm
by GalvestonDuck
Agreed.
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2004 12:38 pm
by Miss Mary
Ditto Duck - like my Bonnie TS thread. Now that was silly to start but necessary too!
Mary
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2004 12:48 pm
by CaptinCrunch
acknowledging someone or more than one member is important, it brings us closer together as a forum family and makes friends.
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2004 12:52 pm
by bfez1
Acknowledging a post is the right thing to do.
When I post I get "upset" when no one acknowledges it. You feel totally ignored!
Left out of the loop.
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2004 1:05 pm
by stormraiser
Agreed
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2004 1:08 pm
by j
yup
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2004 1:47 pm
by ColdFront77
Then, this "quality over quantity" approach isn't true in this regard.
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2004 1:55 pm
by chadtm80
Yes
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2004 1:55 pm
by chadtm80
I agree
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2004 1:59 pm
by Josephine96
LOL.. Oh K?
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2004 2:05 pm
by GalvestonDuck
ColdFront77 wrote:Then, this "quality over quantity" approach isn't true in this regard.
In this regard (acknowledging a poster or agreeing/disagreeing with what they said), yes, it's not true. However, when the thread turns into a CHAT with posters just replying back and forth with a bunch of short, nonsensical stuff -- replying just for the sake of replying -- then "quality over quantity" becomes an issue.
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2004 2:05 pm
by j
ditto
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2004 2:07 pm
by ColdFront77
chadtm80 wrote:Yes
chadtm80 wrote:I agree
... ...
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2004 2:09 pm
by ColdFront77
GalvestonDuck wrote:ColdFront77 wrote:Then, this "quality over quantity" approach isn't true in this regard.
In this regard (acknowledging a poster or agreeing/disagreeing with what they said), yes, it's not true. However, when the thread turns into a CHAT with posters just replying back and forth with a bunch of short, nonsensical stuff -- replying just for the sake of replying -- then "quality over quantity" becomes an issue.
Yes indeed... that is the "other regard."
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2004 4:59 pm
by Kiko
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2004 7:02 pm
by weatherlover427
No.
It's not true.
But in all fairness; members who post 1-4 words (at the bare minimum) to reply to a prior post really can't be adding anything to the discussion IMHO. Sure they may think they are trying to add some valuable content; but in all fairness, it's not helping the discussion at all.
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2004 7:05 pm
by ColdFront77
Really, Joshua? You have made a lot of few word posts, outside the "old Fun and Games forum."
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2004 7:15 pm
by weatherlover427
I am trying to change my ways; as I realized that what I was doing is/was bad. I know that my habits in the old games forum were bad; that's why I drastically cut my posting there the past few months (except for the 500 post burst to get me past 30,000). Post count is not as big of a factor to me now as it used to be; that's another reason why I am posting less and less these days.
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2004 7:43 pm
by ColdFront77
How are we supposed to make a response to someone, while not having more than say, five words?
