Post Count?

[mike_v_s]

Why not just eliminate post counts altogether? There really is no legitimate reason to have them in the first place except just for fun (and it seems like they're not just for fun if posts in such and such a sub-forum no longer count). People shouldn't weigh the validity of the posts of others based on post count (and it seems they don't here, mainly because post counts aren't as easily visable).

Furthermore, there still is post count padding in other sub-forums. In the Basses section, there're countless posts just saying "nice bass" and "+1" and other things along those lines. If the intention is to eliminate post-count padding, it would seem far more beneficial to simply eliminate post counts altogether.

Also, intentional or not, there is somewhat of a social hierarchy (illusory or otherwise) created by post counts in such and such a sub-forum, but not others. Regardless of the clearly good intentions, there is still the implication (although I'm sure unintentional) that those who frequent off-topic are in a sense sub-class posters compared to those who don't.

My personal view of this site (perhaps this is incorrect, or at least out of alignment with the intention of the site) is that Talkbass is not just a place for discussion about Bass (although that is undoubtedly part of it), but a place to have discussions with people like us- people who play bass, thus making Off-Topic and all other sub-forums equally "legitimate" and aligned with the intention of the site.

For the sake of clarification, I'm not making this post out of being "butthurt" (lacking a better word) because I'm a frequenter of OT- otherwise I wouldn't advocate eliminating the post count altogether. It just seems as though a far more effective way to accomplish the goals of the administration while causing fewer negative after-affects would be to eliminate post counts altogether.

Pretty much.

Mike

 

[MakiSupaStar]

Yeah Disreali pretty much said what I was trying to say earlier. Personally, I would rather see post count eliminated instead of what we have right now. It eliminates that new social heirarchy we're talking about.

 

[Disraeli Gears]

^^^ Dude, really well written. Are you a professional writer??^^^


Maybe the program could be modified to list post counts for all the categories in talk bass. That way people can see who is posting where. This would be very interesting data.

No, but I'm a high school senior in AP English .

Anyway, thank you

 

[vene-nemesis]

Pretty much.

Mike

I see what you did there .

 

[pigsonthewing]

The moderators think that when we post in the stereotype thread that we're only doing it to increase post-count, but I really don't care what my post-count is, I just like the stereotype thread.

Until we speak again, I leave you with this:

 

[pigsonthewing]

^ Not something you should tell people.

 

[john turner]

Why not just eliminate post counts altogether? There really is no legitimate reason to have them in the first place except just for fun (and it seems like they're not just for fun if posts in such and such a sub-forum no longer count). People shouldn't weigh the validity of the posts of others based on post count (and it seems they don't here, mainly because post counts aren't as easily visable).

they shouldn't, but they do. folks come to a forum and participate, and they take the number of posts someone else has, along with how long they've been a member, whether they have an avatar or not, how they post, what their grammar is like, etc., as not only a measure of how valid what that other person has to say is, but also what kind of forum they are participating in.

like i said, all that shouldn't matter, but it does. a guy being a jerk with 200 posts is going to carry a lot less weight than a guy doing the same thing with 10k. that being said, we've tried to minimize that by not displaying post counts next to posts. we used to, but we hid it for that reason, among others.

Furthermore, there still is post count padding in other sub-forums. In the Basses section, there're countless posts just saying "nice bass" and "+1" and other things along those lines. If the intention is to eliminate post-count padding, it would seem far more beneficial to simply eliminate post counts altogether.

i think it's all a matter of degrees. folks adding their affirmation about a particular topic or thread (i.e. the 'other forum' post count padding you mentioned, like "nice bass" or even the seemingly ubiquitous "+1") is -nothing- like what goes on in some of the off topic threads.

there have been many 1000+ post-long threads consisting of nothing but back-and-forth ping-ponging with no real contribution to, or even attempt at, any kind of real discussion in OT. that kind of thing just does not happen outside of OT, while it's not that uncommon here - and ultimately, that's ok. OT is for just that kind of silliness, among other things. that silliness is just not going to get the perceived reward of a high post count, and the perceived benefits that brings to one's standing in the community.

non-OT forums are moderated for content, and as such, the majority of the posts in those forums are going to be contextually relevant to the sub-forum topic, which incidentally ties directly into tb's mandate to provide a forum for bass and music oriented discussion among like-minded individuals. OT posts need no "contextual relevance" since there's neither required context nor sub-forum-mandated topicality to provide said context.

Also, intentional or not, there is somewhat of a social hierarchy (illusory or otherwise) created by post counts in such and such a sub-forum, but not others. Regardless of the clearly good intentions, there is still the implication (although I'm sure unintentional) that those who frequent off-topic are in a sense sub-class posters compared to those who don't.

no, there's no implications about the quality or relevance of the -posters- who frequent OT, there's a very specific and intentional statement about the perceived value of the -posts- in OT, at least in how they apply to the forum's perceived mandate (bass discussion.) if there wasn't, it would be "talkstuff.com".

there's a very big difference between those two, so please don't confuse them. while i can't speak for any of the other admins or mods, i know -i- am sure, beyond all doubt, that every one of the OT posters have some very valid things to add to the ON-TOPIC sections of talkbass, and frankly many of them have already shown they do. i'm also sure these on-topic contributions would carry a bit more relevance and weight with their fellow tb'ers than the state of their man card, for instance, or their opinion of snuggies .

My personal view of this site (perhaps this is incorrect, or at least out of alignment with the intention of the site) is that Talkbass is not just a place for discussion about Bass (although that is undoubtedly part of it), but a place to have discussions with people like us- people who play bass, thus making Off-Topic and all other sub-forums equally "legitimate" and aligned with the intention of the site.

talkbass is -primarily- about bass discussion with other bassists. that's not just "part" of it, that's the -main part-. as i said earlier, off topic is an essential part of talkbass, at least in some of our eyes (mine included) but it most certainly is not at the same level as the music related sub-forums.

again, that's not making any value judgement on the folks who only participate here - like i said earlier, i have no doubt that -everyone- who participates here at talkbass has a lot of valid TOPICAL things to share. i just don't think that OT is a hotspot for that to happen.

For the sake of clarification, I'm not making this post out of being "butthurt" (lacking a better word) because I'm a frequenter of OT- otherwise I wouldn't advocate eliminating the post count altogether. It just seems as though a far more effective way to accomplish the goals of the administration while causing fewer negative after-affects would be to eliminate post counts altogether.

what negative after-effects? the OT regs complaining? at least they have something valid to post about for a change. (ba-dum bump) .
edit : and or the humor-impaired, that's ----^ a joke .

 

[Disraeli Gears]

they shouldn't, but they do. folks come to a forum and participate, and they take the number of posts someone else has, along with how long they've been a member, whether they have an avatar or not, how they post, what their grammar is like, etc., as not only a measure of how valid what that other person has to say is, but also what kind of forum they are participating in.

like i said, all that shouldn't matter, but it does. a guy being a jerk with 200 posts is going to carry a lot less weight than a guy doing the same thing with 10k. that being said, we've tried to minimize that by not displaying post counts next to posts. we used to, but we hid it for that reason, among others.

This is exactly what I'm saying- why not just eliminate post counts altogether?

i think it's all a matter of degrees. folks adding their affirmation about a particular topic or thread (i.e. the 'other forum' post count padding you mentioned, like "nice bass" or even the seemingly ubiquitous "+1") is -nothing- like what goes on in some of the off topic threads.

there have been many 1000+ post-long threads consisting of nothing but back-and-forth ping-ponging with no real contribution to, or even attempt at, any kind of real discussion in OT. that kind of thing just does not happen outside of OT, while it's not that uncommon here - and ultimately, that's ok. OT is for just that kind of silliness, among other things. that silliness is just not going to get the perceived reward of a high post count, and the perceived benefits that brings to one's standing in the community.

I agree that it is (was?) to a much greater extent in OT, but as it stands the problem still exists. Again, if it's the goal to eliminate post-count padding, why not just eliminate post counts altogether? Not to mention the fact that if people really have such a conscious desire to pad their post count, we will likely see an increase in post count padding posts in other sections.

non-OT forums are moderated for content, and as such, the majority of the posts in those forums are going to be contextually relevant to the sub-forum topic, which incidentally ties directly into tb's mandate to provide a forum for bass and music oriented discussion among like-minded individuals. OT posts need no "contextual relevance" since there's neither required context nor sub-forum-mandated topicality to provide said context.

As I said before, I see Talkbass as a place to have discussion about music -and- other topics with other bassists, making OT just as contextually relevant as any other sub-forum. But it seems we disagree here, which is fine.

no, there's no implications about the quality or relevance of the -posters- who frequent OT, there's a very specific and intentional statement about the perceived value of the -posts- in OT, at least in how they apply to the forum's perceived mandate (bass discussion.) if there wasn't, it would be "talkstuff.com".

Communication is just as much about the percieved message as it is the intended one (perhaps even more). I have no doubt that there was no intention to create this hierarchy among the forumgoers, but the implication is still there- I was not the first to bring up this point, so clearly other forumers have percieved this aswell, and thus the implication is present. Again, I'm definitely not suspicious of malicious intent; I'll be the first to say that the administration here is very good, but the implication was there. And why even go there when just eliminating post counts altogether would eliminate the problem far more effectively?

there's a very big difference between those two, so please don't confuse them. while i can't speak for any of the other admins or mods, i know -i- am sure, beyond all doubt, that every one of the OT posters have some very valid things to add to the ON-TOPIC sections of talkbass, and frankly many of them have already shown they do. i'm also sure these on-topic contributions would carry a bit more relevance and weight with their fellow tb'ers than the state of their man card, for instance, or their opinion of snuggies .

I've already stated my opinion on the purpose of the forum, and thus I would say that just as discussion of our instruments may be more relevant than discussing oppinions on snuggies (side note, I tried one today. It was mildly disappointing ), but at the same time discussion of current events are more relevant (even contextually, at least in the way I would view the purpose of the forum) than "+1" posts or "WHICH BASE IS BEST 4 METAL!?!?!?!?!!111" threads.

talkbass is -primarily- about bass discussion with other bassists. that's not just "part" of it, that's the -main part-. as i said earlier, off topic is an essential part of talkbass, at least in some of our eyes (mine included) but it most certainly is not at the same level as the music related sub-forums.

again, that's not making any value judgement on the folks who only participate here - like i said earlier, i have no doubt that -everyone- who participates here at talkbass has a lot of valid TOPICAL things to share. i just don't think that OT is a hotspot for that to happen.

I guess this one just goes back to our differing views of the purpose of the forum. Not much to say here aside from that.

what negative after-effects? the OT regs complaining? at least they have something valid to post about for a change. (ba-dum bump) .
edit : and or the humor-impaired, that's ----^ a joke .

 

[Bruce Lindfield]

^^^

Maybe the program could be modified to list post counts for all the categories in talk bass. That way people can see who is posting where. This would be very interesting data.

You can already do that with a search - very easy!

This is what I was saying about post counts being useful tools for site admin...?

 

[Bruce Lindfield]

they shouldn't, but they do. folks come to a forum and participate, and they take the number of posts someone else has, along with how long they've been a member, whether they have an avatar or not, how they post, what their grammar is like, etc., as not only a measure of how valid what that other person has to say is, but also what kind of forum they are participating in.

Exactly!!

That's what I was saying - so post counts encourage loyalty to a forum - if you come here and see that there are people who have stuck around, then it makes you think the forum is worth frequenting!

If it's full of people that haven't been around long - just zinging short messages - then you tend to think - oh well, I shan't bother with this, as it probably won't be here when I come back!

Having a core of long-standing members gives the forum validity and a feeling that it is worthwhile - we recognise characters who have been here a long time and it feels like home.

If I don't know whether people have "invested" a lot in the site why should I care about it - why not just post rubbish?

I see a lot of sites descending into anarchy as they have no hierarchy of valued posters - newcomers can just come in and rubbish the site as nobody has any time invested in it and won't stand up and defend it..?

Whereas TB has survived due to a core of longstanding members who are there to defend it and support it - people need to know this and respect it - or it will disappear ...

 

[mike_v_s]

Exactly!!

That's what I was saying - so post counts encourage loyalty to a forum - if you come here and see that there are people who have stuck around, then it makes you think the forum is worth frequenting!

If it's full of people that haven't been around long - just zinging short messages - then you tend to think - oh well, I shan't bother with this, as it probably won't be here when I come back!

Having a core of long-standing members gives the forum validity and a feeling that it is worthwhile - we recognise characters who have been here a long time and it feels like home.

If I don't know whether people have "invested" a lot in the site why should I care about it - why not just post rubbish?

I see a lot of sites descending into anarchy as they have no hierarchy of valued posters - newcomers can just come in and rubbish the site as nobody has any time invested in it and won't stand up and defend it..?

Whereas TB has survived due to a core of longstanding members who are there to defend it and support it - people need to know this and respect it - or it will disappear ...

Translation: I'm Bruce Lindquist and not only do I validate your existence here, but I also validate the existence of Talkbass.

If you don't mind me saying so, I think you might be giving a bit more credit to the date in the right hand corner than most everyone else here.

Mike

 

[XtreO]

I like postcount. It is an excellent tool for comparing forum members and whether their opinion is worth my time or should be steamrolled with noncoherent arguments. Post count is simply a solid way to quickly find out if the member frequents the forums or not, and thus is a member of high integrity or an average bum.

For instance, Member 1 is of the opinion that the LoMenzo HyperDrive provides a thin, screechy wailing noise. Member 2 thinks it is by and large a great pedal; versatile and durable. Member 1 happens to have 243 posts, while Member 2 is sporting a postcount of a whopping 3066. I'd be forced to conclude Member 2 is correct, while Member 1's opinion is not worth investigating.




No srsly I dont give a ****. I feel obliged to add this because I am sure someone will take me seriously.

 

[HollowBassman]

I've seen it on cops a thousand times(not really, but humor me); people staying with, and supporting their significant other after being slapped right in the face.

I'm curious whether the OT regulars are gonna react the same when it comes time to renew supporting memberships.

 

[LilRay]

Since I only post in OT, I guess I add nothing of any value to TB.

I hope they still value the $20 I pay every year to help them out.

-Mike

Entertainment..... pfft.



Get with the program boys.....



Internet = serius business.

If this is "bass" or "music based" discussion forum why not ELIMINATE OT alltogether?

I hardly have posted in OT, however I'll admit "most" of my posts in the other forums haven't been "quality" or educationally benificial to others. Most of the time I'm being jocular with other TB'ers trying to get a laugh.

We're talking for the most part "average folks" musicians not Rhoades Scholars.

If the goal is to increase TB information quality or to make TB a more viable entity there are several things that "could" be eliminated;

All +1 posts.
All smiley emotions
Nice____ posts
Check out my new_______ posts
The entirety of OT. etc

Things that would be considered "valuable" are legitimately of no value to most. I don't care what a youngster uses to get "their sound" or what anyone else thinks about the music I like.

Bottom line to me, either eliminate everything that isn't "quality" or let everything stand as it was. IF YOU ELIMINATE EVERYTHING THAT "SHOULD" BE, YOU WILL DECREASE SITE TRAFFIC AND ULTIMATELY TALKBASS WILL FAIL

I'm sure the TB administrators wouldn't "refuse" supporting membership dollars from someone who has 50,000 posts
(49,000 of which are deemed to not be quality), WOULD THEY?

Post count is irrelevant. I don't see the problem in "count padding". Anybody that can complete a rational thought can determine for themselves the professionals with practical information to share. The argument of increasing site "quality" hasn't much merit IMO. What's the real objective?


God Bless, Ray

 

[Bryan R. Tyler]

This is exactly what I'm saying- why not just eliminate post counts altogether?

I like my post count. I honestly try to make nearly all of my posts helpful and count for something, so when I see my count, it makes me happy to know that I've spent a lot of time trying to help others.

 

[Joe Gress]

I like my post count. I honestly try to make nearly all of my posts helpful and count for something, so when I see my count, it makes me happy to know that I've spent a lot of time trying to help others.

Hmm. Now I can say that anything after the first 10,000 posts are acctually helpful.

 

[Bryan R. Tyler]

Hey, sometimes things take time Seriously though, I started lurking TB in late 2001 and joined in mid-2002. At that point, I'd been playing for six years, yet had very little to offer in terms of information on gear, setup, theory, etc. I spent way more time in OT in those early years because of it. The past seven years with TalkBass expanded my knowledge and experience exponentially- there's no way I'd be where I am now in terms on technical knowledge, gear experience, and even my playing if not for TB. I think OT is a great place for people to get comfortable with TB when they can't add much to the other forums. That being said, I also think that the OT posts count for less as far as being helpful in a musical context, and this is a musician's board.

 

[tplyons]

I like my post count. I honestly try to make nearly all of my posts helpful and count for something, so when I see my count, it makes me happy to know that I've spent a lot of time trying to help others.

Same. I like to think that 80-90% of my 18,000 something posts are helpful to someone. I started lurking here in 2001, finally registering in 2003 to post a few questions. You can see how much I have grown as a person and a player in the past six years and 18,000 posts. I went from fetching information, to finally helping others out.

I wouldn't call post counts irrelevant. One can look at the top ten posters here and be able to tell who has contributed greatly to this site. Out of the top ten members, I would entirely trust the bass related opinions of at least nine of those members. Those who have been here long enough 20,000 posts over at least four years certainly have enough experience to have valid opinions.

For the record, I am no longer in the top ten.

 

[warwick.hoy]

As previously mentioned,...I find postcounts useful when I'm approached by a potential buyer via the classifieds. I'm way more comfortable accepting paypal from a TBer with history as opposed to someone with only a handful of posts. It seems that buyers and sellers on the classifieds take their reputation very seriously. Someone that has ~1000 posts doesn't want to be known as a fraudulent seller/buyer. Someone with little to no history could care less if they bone a regular. So to an extent post counts can be a useful gauge. How that figures into OT posts I'm not sure. I think that I'd take a buyer seriously even if all 1000 if his/her posts where in OT.

OT is essential to talkbass. I think that for the most part just about everything bass related has been talked about on this site and every question has been asked or is at least searchable. It is difficult to really come up with any poignancy and a lot of the gear related discussion is sharing of knowledge that for the most part has been common knowledge to the experts on this site for a long time. To that end a lot of the gear related subforums is really just product research.

Finding out about the new pedal builder on the block,...or the changes to Fender's lineup is certainly relevant discussion but I'd hardly say that it is more or less of a contribution (in the grander scheme of things) than discussions on current affairs,...expressions of condolences to fallen heroes,...etc. Yes this is a bass discussion forum, but above being bassists the other thing that all of us have in common is that we are human.

 

[geeza]

I believe it was said earlier that all nonsense/multi-part threads get deleted at some point (correct me if I'm wrong).
My personal count was in the 2-3000 neighborhood until Big Brother, for whatever reason, got a bug up their bum about a certain multi-part thread and directed the Admins to delete them after they were locked. Now my count hovers around 7-800.
That being the case, my question is this: How can people who spend most/all their time in OT, where all nonsense threads are allegedly deleted have post counts in the 10's of thousands? Shouldn't those people's counts go down every time a thread is deleted?