# do we really need post counts?



## sithious (May 21, 2002)

... quite honestly, i am starting to get a bit annoyed with some people posting useless stuff just to get their post counts up, talking about post counts all the time and posting stuff about post counts just to get their post counts up...

i suggest we do away with them, they're totally irrelevant anyway ... (the post counts, not the people ... )

what do you think?


----------



## earector (May 21, 2002)

Hmm. Is this poll about post counts really just a ploy to get your post counts up?


----------



## sithious (May 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by earector _
> *Hmm. Is this poll about post counts really just a ploy to get your post counts up? *



d'oh! i saw that one coming a mile away. nope, it isn't. i'm serious. 

btw, if you're going to vote that post counts are important, would you mind explaining why? i really don't get it, so i'd be interested in your views ... thanks.


----------



## JohnnyV (May 21, 2002)

Pointless waste of time (however I still like to know how much I have posted). Maybe we could remove them from everything but the user profile, if you want to see the persons post count, just click their profile button


----------



## edX (May 21, 2002)

ok, i voted they are irrellevant.  but i am still not sure i want them done away with. they have become an arbitrary designation by which we acknowledge members contributions to the site. I would be more in favor of suspending (not permanently banishing) those people who can't seem to find anything meaningful to post about but how many posts they have.

and obviously, i have long since been recognised, so it is for the sake of others that i take this position. I also don't think certain members are going to get any recognition when they reach the magic number simply because nobody cares for their posts. it has never been about how many, but about the quality of contributions some people have made. and all good members of this site will reach that number eventually. that's because they are important regular contributors. I would agrgue that this simple recognition is just one of the things that makes this a community and not just a web site.


----------



## .dev.lqd (May 21, 2002)

I feel the occasional twinge of jealousy when I see the little congrats threads... but it's nothing serious (I mean... it's a frickin' web forum).

I've been around as long a lot of the big hitters (some longer)... I just try to keep my mouth shut unless I have something to add.

Honestly I'd be fine with ditching post counts... but this is a very trivial thing.


----------



## nkuvu (May 21, 2002)

Yeah, what Ed said.


----------



## edX (May 21, 2002)

well, i also agree with .dev's basic idea as well. there are plenty of important members of our community like him, who are not racing towards 1000 posts, who also deserve to be acknowledged. And i admire people like him who simply do what they do and don't go trying to gain some attention for the sake of attention - which is basically what some of the new speed posters appear to be doing. 

on the other hand, i have to wonder how much of a part of the community have some members been, who have been registered for over a year, and have less than 100 or even 200 posts. There are more than enough people with problems for anyone to get 10-20 posts a month just directing them to other threads where the answers are. Just sitting and watching to see what happens is not really being a member of the crew. 

on the other hand there are people like .dev who seem to speak volumes when they do speak - meaning they say things that make me think, or i see them working with someone to clear up a difficult tech problem. I know these people by name and not by post count. i certainly consider them my peers and often my betters. They often know far more than i do about some problem.

so i guess i am just rambling in circles at this point because i don't know the answer. but i do think this current nonsnese with pointless posting will run its course and we will be discussing some other issue before long. I also think it is up to people who have been here for awhile to lead by example and not be afraid to slap the offenders on the wrist next time they interrupt your thread with their meaningless mush and demonstration of counting ability. I think we are pretty nice people for the most part, but sometimes rudeness needs to be countered with truthfulness.


----------



## tismey (May 22, 2002)

I voted irrelevant, but there is a definite upside to seeing how many times people have posted, and that's in the case of the occasional troll we get. When someone starts posting random rubbish, or flaming, and they've only got 6 posts it's a lot easier to ignore them...


----------



## AdmiralAK (May 22, 2002)

Post counts are irrelevent if the contect cant be assimilated (or people are unwilling to assimilate it -- i.e. not read it).


enough borg talk, 

Admiral


----------



## bookem (May 22, 2002)

Ed Spruiell:

That's spot on.  you obviously think about what you're saying before you say it.  I agree with it all.

BTW,  I think I've been registerred for just about a year, and it's me who stirred it all up by posting a completely pointless post in Herve's Bar & Grill',  which as I understand it is the place for such nonsense, or does nonsense now have to be meaningful as to not get banned form this forum?


----------



## tismey (May 22, 2002)

no, mate - not at all. Meaningless is fine. In fact, Herve's is named after the king of the meaningless post. Meaninglessness makes the world go around. The problem is posting simply to get a bigger number under your name, or posting about the number of posts.


----------



## Matrix Agent (May 22, 2002)

I've been here for quite a while also. I voted yes, they are important, but only in a limited context. Having a post count up until about 50, and then a transition to full "member" status would be nice. At the time, post count would dissapear.

The only reason I ever feel the need to look up a post count is to see whether or not a person is new, or a lurker.

I'm not sure if VBullitin could do this, but i think purtting everyone on the same playing field after 50 posts is a very proposition.


----------



## edX (May 22, 2002)

bookem - i think you give yourself far too much credit here.  it was not your post that is the topic of debate here. in fact no single post by anyone would qualify.  I think Tismey's explanation of the value of so called meaningless or pointless posts pretty much covered it. It is the obsession with counting posts as material for posting that is the issue. I would rather see Herve's B&G have only one post per day and that post was completely random and based upon no other post, than to see it filled with 30 posts of people counting what number post they are on.

Of course i must take some responsibility for all of this. It was I who created the entire concept of a congrats thread - never dreaming it would escalate in any way, much less to this. Even then it wasn't i who first noticed the Admiral's post count, it was Alexandert in a tech thread. I just took his joking about it and ran with it. I was so new to the site that the thread was originally in this forum and Admin let us quietly remain here for a couple of months. Few people saw it or cared. Then the big reorganization around the time of MWSF, put the thread where it really belonged and the rest is history. 

btw bookem - thanks for the kind words about my post. nice to get that kind of feedback every now and then


----------



## AdmiralAK (May 22, 2002)

lol 
Ed had the congrats thread in teh site news
After the reorganization (before the BIG---or even teh small bar and grille) hehe.  Too many congrats threads, and the name is basically kinda misleading cause if anyone read the thread they know that we just talk candidly in there, just like in the B&G....except we named it the Admiral and Ed show


----------



## xaqintosh (May 22, 2002)

I really think that having post counts is somewhat irrelevant. Rather, we should have a little thing in its place that go's from "junior member"(0-50) and then member, and senior member, etc. But the post count should be in the user profile if people _really_ want to see it.

 BTW, How's my avatar?


----------



## .dev.lqd (May 22, 2002)

The real issue is that we'd like some way to quantify seniority and contribution... which isn't something that can automatically be done without it becoming very tiresome or exceedingly academic.

In the end... perhaps some system involving user interaction to ratify/validate posts as valid/good or something like that would work... but I doubt anyone finds the issue worth the effort to implement something like that.

What I could do with is people being less dimwitted about what they post in the name of their post-count. This -could- be remedied by simply getting rid of it... 

So-- we expend a lot of effort to reimplement some kind of accumulated seniority status, expend a little effort to get rid of a bother, or expend no effort and say to hell with it 

(I personally favor the third)


----------



## BlingBling 3k12 (May 23, 2002)

I think that they are relevant. Except for maybe 50 posts of mine, some of them have been very significant!

They should be kept...

It's just sad that people like xoot and others have to turn it into a game... that ruins the whole purpose...

actually, until xoot started his crazy posts, i didn't really think about them much...

sorry to put the burden on you xoot, but you're the main person i think of..

DON'T ABUSE YOUR POST COUNT PEOPLE!


----------



## nkuvu (May 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by BlingBling 3k12 _
> *I think that they are relevant. Except for maybe 50 posts of mine, some of them have been very significant!*


But how does the number of posts reflect the quality of your posts?  The answer: it doesn't.  At all.

I agree with .dev.lqd (BTW, did you post on the origins of your name, .dev.lqd?).  We need an arbitrary "Quality-O-Meter".


----------



## BlingBling 3k12 (May 23, 2002)

I meant that in saying that some people have huge post counts but have put forth little effort to their contribution here...

Oh well, I still think that they are relevant, but please don't go overboard and try to think because you have a huge post count that you are superior in one way or another.


----------



## .dev.lqd (May 23, 2002)

I used to plays Tribes when I lived in a special interest floor called Computer Science House (less about computer science and more about getting access to lots of technology and freedom to explore its use... ). We'd play a lot together under /dev/... names... usually /dev/our username under the house's systems.

.lqd comes from liqwid, which is a name I went by way back in the day when I found out liquid.com was already taken... but then I never registered liqwid (or ANY domain). Liqwid shortened to lqd (because it was 31337) and then the dots appeared because I couldn't use /dev/lqd as my username on a lot of boards...


Back to the topic... like I said... we could probably do it if users could ratify posts that were relevent... like quality points or something.

I personally don't want to ask admin or his elves to implement this though... they do quite enough and have quite enough on their hands already. Like I said... it doesn't really matter. If they're irrelevent... let them be


----------



## rinse (May 23, 2002)

we could add a "karma" like system to have other users rate your posts and build some sort of credibility that way....

take a look at the forums at www.mediadinosaur.com/boards.php ...i hacked PhpBB to do just that. I call it "The Jaded Quotient" in keeping with my sites theme.


----------



## Izzy (May 23, 2002)

The "karma" type system is interesting...I've never thought about that before...

I'm thinking that it's ok the way we got it here now though, everyone pretty much knows who the people are who post like crazy for no reason and those who post when they have something to say.  Just in spending a few days on the boards a person should be able to figure that one out.  I've never been bothered by people upping their post count, and I personally haven't seen much of it.  I usually only read the threads that really peak my interest anyways...sorry if that came out the wrong way, LOL.  

After all, this is just a bulletin board where we can come and hang out, while helping each other when needed.  Just like in real life social circles there will be people who talk more and people who talk less, it really reflects our personalities and makes the boards as fun as they are.  I've had a blast getting to know some of you through your posts and the way you interact with everyone.  Interesting too, because it's something that you never really think about when you start out posting...


----------



## Ricky (May 23, 2002)

I voted that post counts matter as well, but only for the sake of how many members are actually experienced in the ways of discussion and debate, as well as not offending anyone.  The karma system is interesting, but I doubt very many people would use it..  if there was some way to enforce rating a member it would be good.

The karma system could also be affected by your rating and post count; if you have a great rating and high post count your rating could impact someone a whole lot more than someone else who has a high post count but low rating, or low post count and low rating could.

That system could be implemented so that people who rated other people would be able to based on experience, not opinion.

Just my two cents.


----------



## rezba (May 24, 2002)

guys (are they any girls ? Did they all vote at wdw_poll ),

I don't post a lot, and, as nor english neither computing are native tongues for me, I still have to think a lot before posting. May be this avoid me posting for nothing. I hope.

But I'm a scientist. So, I would bypass by my world before answering.

In my professional world, us standards academics have bring, for 20 years, a common tool to gauge notoriety, and, that's idiot, performance.

we call it bibliometrics. My job is searching, and publishing on what I've found. Most of what I've been published interest 100, sometimes 200 people around the world. It doesn't bother me. My community knows me, and it's fine like that.
So, what is bibliometrics ? It means that, the more you are quoted, the more what you say is supposed to be relevant.
In a famous book, _Small world_ , david Lodge found an interesting way to pervert bibliometrics. One of his heroes is a swell, unknown english academic. To improve his bibliometrics gauges, he decide to write a foolish paper firing one of its most known colleague. The attend result was, of course, that the paper was fired in return, proportionately to the reputation of the target.
The swell guy became very quoted, he had his promotion...

That's silly post count.

I used to participate to a MacNN french tech site. They are all very proud of their post number. Most of all, they are proud of their title, because post number give them a status (junior, member, habit member, elite member), and also stars upon their name... Only few of them are reallyrelevant, the others post a lot in pointless forums (they have a lot of).

I prefer being here, even as an alien, never worrying about my post number.

I respect the gurus techs here because of their answers, not because of their post count. I've never take a look at the post count number of testuser or simX or twenty others, because the quality of their writing was sufficient to make me sure they were giving me a good track to solve my problem. Post number come after, like a kind of confirmation.

This community is one of the best because post doesn't really count. And because anyone can choose his own way to present himself to the others.

If hiding post number is the only way to avoid 90% of the useless post in "serious" forums, let's do it.
But a good discussion about responsibility will surely helps too.


----------



## Erix (May 25, 2002)

> _Originally posted by sithious _
> *...what do you think? *



No we don't. Specially for 2 or 3 months. Look at my counter. Shame!  

Erix.


----------



## googolplex (May 28, 2002)

I think they matter in some ways. I think that most people realize that it doesn't make a difference when talking to the person on here, and the people who don't show that and we can see that. Its like normal life the people who are obsessed with these kinds of things show through.

People who post about posting to get 1000 posts aren't going to have much recognition and other people will see that.

I don't really see the problem.


----------



## nkuvu (May 28, 2002)

> _Originally posted by googolplex _
> *People who post about posting to get 1000 posts aren't going to have much recognition and other people will see that.
> 
> I don't really see the problem. *


The main problem I see with posting about post counts to improve your post count is the signal to noise ratio.  Look at the B&G thread when there were, uh, some un-named members posting about post counts...


----------



## simX (May 28, 2002)

To be serious, I think it's kind of ironic how many times the debate about post counts have come up, especially in response to xoot's posts.

Personally, I like post count meters just because they are a relatively good gauge of how reliable a member can be, but there ARE a number of exceptions.

I think we should do something like the karma rating... something like the EV boards.  But I don't know how it would work.  I'd like something like that, though.


----------



## AdmiralAK (May 29, 2002)

Maybe we can have an ESRB like rating for members 

It can go from rotten tomato (bad,...really bad!) to heart of gold  lol


----------



## xaqintosh (May 29, 2002)

I nominate Admiral as the official Karma-O-Meter, he gets to judge which posts are good and which aren't!


----------



## AdmiralAK (May 29, 2002)

no no no 
such powers cannot befall on one person only 
lets make a committe


----------



## xaqintosh (May 29, 2002)

all right, who do you suggest?


----------



## edX (May 30, 2002)

everyone

but you know, the original problem has pretty much gone away - either because of this thread or because of some direct words to the offenders or both. 

let's face it, there will always be people acting idioticly on the site from time to time. nothing we can do will change that. the best we can do is try to set them straight. if that doesn't work, admin seems to have no problems getting rid of the real jerks. so why don't we just do what .dev.lqd sugessted awhile back - nothing.


----------



## twyg (May 30, 2002)

Here here to that Ed.

There should be no "good" or "bad" posts, no grammar checkers, nor spell checks. It would be a wonderful thing if people put thought into their posts, and ensured that they were well phrased as well as proofread. Unfortunately to some, that is not the case, nor do I feel it ever should be the set rule. Some of the "junk" posts are handled just as the should be. They are ignored. When a small child has a fit, and no one notices, the child realizes it gets no reaction, and thusly ends the tantrum. To have a committee for "good" and "bad" posts is to "de-characterize" the boards. After all, would you mark Hervé's posts as "bad" or "good"? Would you mark ~~NeYo~~'s posts "good" or "bad"? You really couldn't, Hervé is grasping the English language, so he's not perfect, but he certainly adds character. ~~NeYo~~ may drive those of us who pay careful attention to grammar nuts, but his posts are just as relevant as the next. To put a cap on anyone over another is to defeat the purpose of personality. It could be said that there are those who have put "junk" on these boards. I've also seen those people reprimanded. I assure you they've been reprimanded behind the scenes as well. There's no need to pull "dirty laundry" into the public all the time. 

Ed's got a very valid point. There will always be those who rattle the cage, but let them. Ignore them, if it becomes too much, well, that's why moderators are here.

Don't let the little stuff get your knickers in a twist, alright?


----------



## nkuvu (May 30, 2002)

> _Originally posted by twyg _
> *Don't let the little stuff get your knickers in a twist, alright?*


That's good advice for all of life...


----------



## xaqintosh (May 30, 2002)

[size=-2]**XAQ officially sneaks out of this discussion so as to avoid possible future embarrassments**[/size]


----------



## xoot (Jun 1, 2002)

So, no congrats threads?


----------



## Ricky (Jun 25, 2002)

But I want a congrats thread when I reach 1,000..

Oh well.  I hope I'll get one, at least.  It would be nice.


----------



## wdw_ (Jul 3, 2002)

> _Originally posted by ricky _
> *  But I want a congrats thread when I reach 1,000..
> 
> Oh well.  I hope I'll get one, at least.  It would be nice.   *


Yeah, me too. I have 987 posts right now; well I guess it's 988 now. I was looking forward to a congrats thread.


----------



## ksv (Jul 3, 2002)

> _Originally posted by wdw_ _
> *
> Yeah, me too. I have 987 posts right now; well I guess it's 988 now. I was looking forward to a congrats thread. *



Eh, why not? I think it's a cool tradition, it has become a part of MacOSX.com's personality


----------



## wdw_ (Jul 3, 2002)

What do you mean?


----------



## ksv (Jul 3, 2002)

> _Originally posted by wdw_ _
> *What do you mean? *



Why stop the congrats thread tradition?


----------



## wdw_ (Jul 3, 2002)

It's just alot hared to make congrats threads if you can't tell how many posts at a glance.


----------



## xoot (Jul 3, 2002)

Well, the post counts are gone now. For good. So, i'll guess you'll have to try a little harder to make a congrats thread. 

And, this is not a personal shock to me. (Insert  here)


----------



## xaqintosh (Jul 3, 2002)

I think they are now in the user profile


----------



## xoot (Jul 3, 2002)

I know, I know.

Why not change the tradition altogether? If you've been here one month, make a congrats thread. It's easy! And it could be seen at one glance.


----------



## xaqintosh (Jul 3, 2002)

that's stupid someone could be here one month and then not contribute at all except one post and still get a congrats thread. I think thatthe "junior/senior/etc. member" text should be included along with the custom user text.


----------



## Ricky (Jul 11, 2002)

Well, this sucks.  :\  Not surprised that they're gone, though, because everyone was making such a stink about them...

I guess we won't have any more post count problems though.  I was looking forward to a congrats thread, but such is the price to pay...


----------

