Heroes of Might and Magic Community
visiting hero! Register | Today's Posts | Games | Search! | FAQ/Rules | AvatarList | MemberList | Profile


Age of Heroes Headlines:  
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
6 Aug 2016: Troubled Heroes VII Expansion Release - read more
26 Apr 2016: Heroes VII XPack - Trial by Fire - Coming out in June! - read more
17 Apr 2016: Global Alternative Creatures MOD for H7 after 1.8 Patch! - read more
7 Mar 2016: Romero launches a Piano Sonata Album Kickstarter! - read more
19 Feb 2016: Heroes 5.5 RC6, Heroes VII patch 1.7 are out! - read more
13 Jan 2016: Horn of the Abyss 1.4 Available for Download! - read more
17 Dec 2015: Heroes 5.5 update, 1.6 out for H7 - read more
23 Nov 2015: H7 1.4 & 1.5 patches Released - read more
31 Oct 2015: First H7 patches are out, End of DoC development - read more
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
[X] Remove Ads
LOGIN:     Username:     Password:         [ Register ]
New Server | HOMM1: info forum | HOMM2: info forum | HOMM3: info forum | HOMM4: info forum | HOMM5: info forum | MMH6: wiki forum | MMH7: wiki forum
Heroes Community > Turban Tribunal > Thread: Maybe we should consider changing the maximum post limit outside VW?
Thread: Maybe we should consider changing the maximum post limit outside VW? This thread is 4 pages long: 1 2 3 4 · «PREV / NEXT»
william
william


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
posted February 21, 2010 10:56 PM

Quote:
What Binabik said

____________
~Ticking away the moments that
make up a dull day, Fritter and
waste the hours in an off-hand
way~

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
JollyJoker
JollyJoker


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
posted February 21, 2010 11:14 PM

Quote:
I agree that we should change the maximum post count. Maybe it should be changed to 10, or maybe even 5 posts per day. That would go a long way toward both reducing all the spam and reducing the arguments in OSM.

It would make people consider if they really have something to say, or if they are just posting out of boredom.

Anyone who thinks that 20 posts per day is not enough should consider more closely the difference between a forum  and a chat room. If they still think it's not enough, then maybe they are in the wrong place.



I'm all for that: 10 posts a day +1 post per red star. Ok?

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Elvin
Elvin


Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Tastes like chicken
posted February 21, 2010 11:26 PM

That would be cool if not for some people enjoying more than one subforums. How about we only do that in osm
____________
"It's amazing somebody didn't see him in the parking lot and just immediately drive over him multiple times on the spot in an act of spontaneous compassion and heroism."
-Blizzardboy

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Binabik
Binabik


Responsible
Legendary Hero
posted February 22, 2010 12:14 AM

OSM should be 2-3 posts per day per thread regardless of how many stars someone has. And after someone posts there should be a 15-30 minute delay before anyone can post. There are some logistical problems with that, but I like the idea.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
baklava
baklava


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
posted February 22, 2010 01:38 AM

Quote:
worth reading by who?

Pigeons.

Oh yes I can post things like "pigeons" because I got rid of that pesky post limit on time (back in the day) and I consider this my hard earned pension.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Mytical
Mytical


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
posted February 22, 2010 08:14 AM

As somebody who at one time constantly ran into the limit (when even posts in the VW counted) I can sympathize.  However, some of the others are right.  Raising the limit would allow some others to abuse the system.  I do try to look around and see who is doing good adding to the community and reward them in the tavern, glade, or OSM when I can..but it is not an easy thing.  You will get there, eventually.  At least you have unlimted spam opportunites in the VW..just make sure you wait to post in the VW until all 20 posts are used up, should help a bit.
____________
Message received.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
Darkshadow
Darkshadow


Legendary Hero
Cerise Princess
posted February 22, 2010 09:49 AM

Quote:
OSM should be 2-3 posts per day per thread regardless of how many stars someone has. And after someone posts there should be a 15-30 minute delay before anyone can post. There are some logistical problems with that, but I like the idea.



Actually this is a pretty solid idea, something that should have been placed like a year ago.
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
JollyJoker
JollyJoker


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
posted February 22, 2010 10:53 AM

Great idea. It did occur to everyone that there may be something like half a dozen threads or so active at any one time, so that would mean you couldn't even post in all active threads, right?

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Darkshadow
Darkshadow


Legendary Hero
Cerise Princess
posted February 22, 2010 12:57 PM

Quote:
Great idea. It did occur to everyone that there may be something like half a dozen threads or so active at any one time, so that would mean you couldn't even post in all active threads, right?


Cases like the current "what is love" thread dragging on with 5 pages of petty discussion wouldn't hopefully happen.
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
ohforfsake
ohforfsake


Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
posted February 22, 2010 01:23 PM

Quote:
OSM should be 2-3 posts per day per thread regardless of how many stars someone has. And after someone posts there should be a 15-30 minute delay before anyone can post. There are some logistical problems with that, but I like the idea.



I understand you like the OSM to contain few non debating posts, because it generally cluster the threads in question. I think it is the wrong approach though. Eventhough not everyone will agree with me, I at least think most people debates because they've a point to share and when a point is not argumented properly, it does not seem logical or valid, then one asks for further documentation and tries to explain the problems of the previous arguments. Which leads to a debate.

A system of non-linear threads, where people can continue out of paths linked in the thread and debate there is something I think would do a lot of good in both preventing clustering, but not preventing people the opportunity to learn from eachother.

Any random digit as a maximum of posts makes no sense, there can always be a situation where someone could have something more to add, which someone else, that have still one post left could not.

Even if you let the maximum post count be a variable of amount of active threads you'll still run into these problems.

The whole, if we allow some to do it, then others will abuse it, is not a very good argument in my opinion. It is like saying, if we put you out of prison, then we have to put someone else out of prison, and this someone else is dangerous.

I think the analogy is justified, because just as a prison is limiting freedom in exchange for security, so is the maximum post count limiting freedom to post in exchange for security against spam.

Maybe a system without all the qp's, where people gets a limit depending on how serious they post themselves, which at all time is up for questioning?

Quote:
Quote:
We can't expect super great serious content in every post

Can't we?

I am talking in the views of someone else than the poster. Unless you can make a definition of serious good posts that everyone can agree upon and thereby make it a guide line of posting, then you'll always have some who likes some content which others find to be spam.


Quote:
When I saw that it's not much I often caught myself thinking something along the lines of "Actually that was said before with another wording so there's no point wasting a post on it." or "It's not that important at the moment, maybe I should let the discussion continue a bit before I enter." or "naah, that's not funny, that's just plain lame, I'm not wasting my post limit on that.".

I believe I already do that, yes I don't check my current limit, but I only post if I want to, not when I feel like it, and that is what should be important.

Quote:
So the post limit encourage people to write posts that contribute something good to the community (that's what I meant by "posts worth reading") and I think it's a lesson all the newcomers should learn before they go on posting sprees.

But did you not just change the problem of defining worth into defining good? Likewise I don't think we can define something good for the community as an objective measure that everyone would agree upon.
So I think we should keep it in the eyes of the poster, not the readers, if the poster believe they've something serious to contribute with, I see no reason why not.
____________
Living time backwards

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
angelito
angelito


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
posted February 22, 2010 03:12 PM

You first have to give before you recieve, that's the trick.

1. Contribute
2. Recieve +QP
3. Contribute more
4. Recieve more +QP
5. Prevent yourself from recieving -QP
6. Get rid of posting limit

Easy formula, counts for all members the same
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
ohforfsake
ohforfsake


Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
posted February 22, 2010 03:18 PM

The problem with that formula is that it becomes dependent of the moderators and not the users. I think we all agree it should be dependent of the user right?
____________
Living time backwards

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
william
william


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
posted February 22, 2010 03:32 PM
Edited by william at 15:33, 22 Feb 2010.

No, it should be depandant on the moderator. Having it dependant on the user would be chaos. Maybe instead of talking about getting rod of the post limit or whatever, maybe try to contribute in better ways to get a QP or two and have it removed?
____________
~Ticking away the moments that
make up a dull day, Fritter and
waste the hours in an off-hand
way~

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
ohforfsake
ohforfsake


Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
posted February 22, 2010 03:51 PM
Edited by ohforfsake at 15:52, 22 Feb 2010.

I think you misunderstand what I mean by dependent.

The point is, the measure of who shall get to have no limit is subjective to the moderator of the time. In general it becomes rather random. It should not be dependent on someone who might or might not be interested in a given topic if a given user should be allowed to post more than other users. Especially at a time where the limit in itself seems rather unecessary. It should be about if the poster believes they've something serious to add that there's no reason to limit them.

I just don't think it is a good idea to combine the subjective qp system, with the posting limit. Anyway I am not saying remove it, just place it higher, as I still think the limit in itself can be good, it is just way to low set.

Edit: Likewise, why should it be that I am allowed to answer user A in a given thread because I wrote something completely independent of that thread in another thread at a other random time? Whereas if I had never wrote that, which have nothing to do with the subject I want to answer user A on, I'd not be allowed to answer user A.
____________
Living time backwards

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
VokialBG
VokialBG


Honorable
Legendary Hero
First in line
posted February 22, 2010 03:59 PM
Edited by VokialBG at 16:01, 22 Feb 2010.

Quote:
The problem with that formula is that it becomes dependent of the moderators and not the users. I think we all agree it should be dependent of the user right?


If HC was a state, the state theory would say that it's absolute monarchy, no democracy there (and here). And... it seems to work pretty well (here).

On the basic problem: what Binabik said. He just posted what I wanted
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
ohforfsake
ohforfsake


Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
posted February 22, 2010 04:09 PM
Edited by ohforfsake at 16:12, 22 Feb 2010.

I don't know it is a bit off topic, but I would say it is a dictatorship.

Basicly Val owns this site, what he says goes, no matter if it against the rules or not.

Then Val have given power to moderators to use power in his place, for a better community of course. The fact that this power in questionable in the feedback threads are one of the things that make this place so wonderful, but in the end it is always up to the moderator to decide unless Val says something, which means it is basicly a dictatorship.

Not that I have a problem with that, this place is Vals property and he can do with it as he please, after all he's the one paying for it.

I'd only have a problem if Val stopped caring, because that could in some distant future lead to the same abuse as I have seen other places. Not that I think this is very relevant to debate in this thread.

I think you're maybe also misunderstanding what I mean by dependent. In the past you'd much easier get qp's, meaning the barrier was not of much concern as you'd quickly get enough qp's if you were here long enough, unless you were really unlucky. That would in some peoples eye make qp's of today seem worth more than back then, but if qp's are worth more, then it does not make any sense to let the rewards be the same.

I still say that it should not be dependent of qp's that you have a given post limit. I mean what does it matter if Elvin give me a qp for a grand thread about horses in regards to whether or not I can give a (to me) serious answer to Mvass when he says the moon is made of cheese?

Quote:
And think about your posting, limit, for frig's sake - wait until you can address a couple of posts in one answer, don't waste a poste for each one separately!

Yeah, thanks, I'll do that.
____________
Living time backwards

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
JollyJoker
JollyJoker


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
posted February 22, 2010 04:09 PM
Edited by JollyJoker at 16:11, 22 Feb 2010.

If the so called problem of the OSM was only due to those people with a posting limit - myself, ohfor, Elodin... - it would be limited anyway, now, wouldn't it?

However, there are those without limit who contribute as well - and they don't have any limit, and I think, QP or not, no limit leads to lots of thoughtless posts - it can't be right to be able to spam the OSM like the VW, or can it?

So, if you ask me, the problem with the OSM, if there is any at all, is not due to the fact that the 20 posts limit is too high, but that SOME can post what and how much they want, without having to take care of anything, and that includes discussing moderators.

Personally I had no problem with something like a reduced post limit for the OSM, 10, whatever - but it should be for EVERYONE then, QP or not, moderator or not.

@ Ohforf

And think about your posting, limit, for frig's sake - wait until you can address a couple of posts in one answer, don't waste a poste for each one separately!

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
angelito
angelito


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
posted February 22, 2010 07:36 PM
Edited by angelito at 19:38, 22 Feb 2010.

Quote:
The problem with that formula is that it becomes dependent of the moderators and not the users. I think we all agree it should be dependent of the user right?
Ever heard of the so called "Feedback" threads of any subfora here on HC? Those threads have several meanings. One of them is: Make suggestions of +qp-worthy posts and turn a Mod's attention towards it. Because often a Mod overreads a post or just doesn't find it that good cause he may have lost the main idea behind a thread due to tons of quote wars.

So yes, +QPs depend on Moderators AND members. It's just that only a handfull of members use this feature!
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Shares
Shares


Supreme Hero
I am. Thusly I am.
posted February 22, 2010 07:43 PM

The proplem with QP's are that they are awarded to posts. Not users. I could be an ass all over HCand then I can post ONE good post and get a QP. On the other hand, I could be quite nice, but never really get that one really good post. Still, I could be a great member.
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
TheDeath
TheDeath


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
posted February 22, 2010 07:44 PM

Quote:
And think about your posting, limit, for frig's sake - wait until you can address a couple of posts in one answer, don't waste a poste for each one separately!
Thus quote wars are born.

Multiple points need multiple answers, to be specific. No one wants to read a novel when going to a forum, unless it's educational. But I'm talking about DEBATES. (unlike, e.g: Corribus' Quantum thread).

I find the whole limit to your post pretty retarded. No wonder there aren't many forums with it. If you consider them all immature I think you're being a little arrogant, there are certain forums I'm at that are much more mature than HC in the discussions. (actually I know of none with such limits, but of course, I don't want to claim that there are none, I could be wrong).
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Jump To: « Prev Thread . . . Next Thread » This thread is 4 pages long: 1 2 3 4 · «PREV / NEXT»
Post New Poll    Post New Topic    Post New Reply

Page compiled in 0.0559 seconds