Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Peter · Jul 19, 2004, 07:33 AM

well?

dreilly1 · Jul 19, 2004, 07:37 AM

Then I'll have to post another 100 +1 posts in the other forums (you know, the ones that are useful) in order to get another crack at gorickey? I don't think so.

gorickey · Jul 19, 2004, 08:16 AM

Originally posted by dreilly1:
Then I'll have to post another 100 +1 posts in the other forums (you know, the ones that are useful) in order to get another crack at gorickey? I don't think so.

You need more crack?

Yikes.

dreilly1 · 08:50 AM

Originally posted by gorickey:
You need more crack?

Yikes.

Maybe I should rename myself gostraw?

Added:

gorickey · Jul 19, 2004, 08:48 AM

Originally posted by dreilly1:
Maybe I should rename myself gostraw?

Or...

gococaineaddictgivenwaytoomanychancesandhasfailedm iserably.

dreilly1 · Jul 19, 2004, 08:56 AM

Originally posted by gorickey:
Or...

gococaineaddictgivenwaytoomanychancesandhasfailedm iserably.

, but

at the same time.

Anyway, what was this thread about again?
Oh yeah, if we needed 1k posts before we could post in the lounge, then I would still be able to derail topics in the Feedback forum.

Peter · Jul 19, 2004, 08:57 AM

Originally posted by dreilly1:
Then I'll have to post another 100 +1 posts in the other forums (you know, the ones that are useful) in order to get another crack at gorickey? I don't think so.

pssst. take a hint.

dreilly1 · Jul 19, 2004, 09:10 AM

In all seriousness, post count is not the defining statistic of whether or not someone will behave themselves and not abuse the forums. A thousand posts is quite a bit, and some intelligent people will never get there, because they have better things to do. Other people who have lots and lots of posts seem to be as dumb as a post at times.

If the mods are going to put limits on lounge posting (which I don't necessarily agree with), I think they should make it time-based. Give a new account a brewing period of a month or two before it could post in the lounge. (Or, better yet, only let a new account post a set number of times a day). Chances are, by the time the PC trolls can post in the lounge, they will have lost the password.

An exception will have to be made for *68 usernames, of course. Because I look forward to seeing Ca$h's new name in the lounge every month or so...

I don't think there should be any sort of limit, though, because if you want to play with the Internet, you ought to be able to fend off a troll or two.

gorickey · Jul 19, 2004, 09:14 AM

Originally posted by dreilly1:
Anyway, what was this thread about again?

The fact that if we needed 1k posts before we could post in the Louge then nothing would really change...

Demonhood · Jul 19, 2004, 09:46 AM

you can't just say "well????"
give us a good reason why you think this would be a good idea.
on second thought, we're not going to implement such a thing. it'd cut off far too many users. and that's just not friendly.

Randman · Jul 19, 2004, 10:24 AM

How about only people with 5,000+ posts? I'm sure Peter would agree to that as much as he would 1,000+ (and he'd be halfway there).

Demonhood · Jul 19, 2004, 11:15 AM

i could always make lounge posts not count again. and then most of you would be down to a dozen posts or so.

then Peter and his +1 would be firing blanks.

gorickey · Jul 19, 2004, 11:25 AM

Originally posted by Demonhood:
i could always make lounge posts not count again.

That would be great actually...

Go for it.

dreilly1 · Jul 19, 2004, 12:15 PM

Or, you could make everyone's post count a random number that refreshes daily. Give us all a chance to be "king of nothingness".

gorickey · Jul 19, 2004, 12:39 PM

Originally posted by dreilly1:
Or, you could make everyone's post count a random number that refreshes daily.

Speaking of, my post count just went down by over 200...awesome!

Database burp?

dreilly1 · Jul 19, 2004, 12:48 PM

Originally posted by gorickey:
Speaking of, my post count just went down by over 200...awesome!

Database burp?

Yeah, they deleted all the posts in which gorickey does not refer to himself in the third person...

gorickey · Jul 19, 2004, 01:05 PM

Originally posted by dreilly1:
Yeah, they deleted all the posts in which gorickey does not refer to himself in the third person...

So I (gorickey) should have much less if that were the case...it would just be easier if I were stuck at "#24"...

Zimphire · Jul 19, 2004, 01:21 PM

Originally posted by dreilly1:
Or, you could make everyone's post count a random number that refreshes daily. Give us all a chance to be "king of nothingness".

You would never be able to! It's something I made up personally.

Zimphire · Jul 19, 2004, 01:22 PM

Oops, double post count.

sideus · Jul 19, 2004, 07:34 PM

I say you need 10000+ to post in the feedback forum.

scaught · Jul 19, 2004, 11:21 PM

Originally posted by gorickey:
That would be great actually...

Go for it.

i think you were around for it.

it wasnt pretty. people got all dumb about it.

i say get rid of the damned post counts ENTIRELY.

Peter · Jul 20, 2004, 02:50 AM

Originally posted by Demonhood:
you can't just say "well????"
give us a good reason why you think this would be a good idea.
on second thought, we're not going to implement such a thing. it'd cut off far too many users. and that's just not friendly.

ok... it would stop all the annoying posts from people who seemingly just joined so they could make some nonsense ramble about how terrible there day was, or to very subtley advertise there site.
If you removed the post count in the lounge, I would begin a macnn coo and make it so every lounge poster posts in the feedback forum instead.

Peter · Jul 20, 2004, 02:52 AM

Originally posted by scaught:

i say get rid of the damned post counts ENTIRELY.

scaught · Jul 20, 2004, 08:57 AM

Originally posted by Peter:

sissy

Arkham_c · Jul 20, 2004, 09:25 AM

I can think of a significant advantage of requiring some number of posts to post in a more controversial area like the lounge.

Even people with way too much time on their hands would take a while to get up to 1000 posts. At that point, they would have a vested interest in not getting their account locked. Because if they did, they would have a long wait before they could again partake in the discussions. I know there was that one "cash" guy who seemingly has a new account every week.

I'm not saying it should or should not be implemented (I rarely read the lounge, so I don't know that I care), but I could see the above as a compelling argument to prevent people from coming in and causing trouble.

gorickey · Jul 20, 2004, 10:22 AM

Originally posted by Arkham_c:
I can think of a significant advantage of requiring some number of posts to post in a more controversial area like the lounge.

Even people with way too much time on their hands would take a while to get up to 1000 posts. At that point, they would have a vested interest in not getting their account locked. Because if they did, they would have a long wait before they could again partake in the discussions. I know there was that one "cash" guy who seemingly has a new account every week.

I'm not saying it should or should not be implemented (I rarely read the lounge, so I don't know that I care), but I could see the above as a compelling argument to prevent people from coming in and causing trouble.

Hmm, that's a nice way of looking at it...

Again, I'm all for it!

chris v · Jul 20, 2004, 10:23 AM

Do it backwards. No one with more that 1000 posts can post in the lounge. That'd stop the postwhoring.

CV

scaught · Jul 20, 2004, 10:36 AM

Originally posted by Arkham_c:
I can think of a significant advantage of requiring some number of posts to post in a more controversial area like the lounge.

Even people with way too much time on their hands would take a while to get up to 1000 posts. At that point, they would have a vested interest in not getting their account locked. Because if they did, they would have a long wait before they could again partake in the discussions. I know there was that one "cash" guy who seemingly has a new account every week.

I'm not saying it should or should not be implemented (I rarely read the lounge, so I don't know that I care), but I could see the above as a compelling argument to prevent people from coming in and causing trouble.

ya. but requiring a post count to gain access to anything in a messageboard forum causes post whoring. the actual informative forums around here would fill up with junk.

Peter · Jul 20, 2004, 10:36 AM

Originally posted by scaught:
ya. but requiring a post count to gain access to anything in a messageboard forum causes post whoring. the actual informative forums around here would fill up with junk.

they have access. they just cant post.

Chris O'Brien · Jul 20, 2004, 10:49 AM

I think I'm with dreilly on this one. Why, just because you keep going '+1' in countless threads does it make your opinion more valid? I admit that there is probably some need for keeping out people signing up to cause trouble - but that's not much worse than post whoring really, is it?

Of course, I'm only saying this because I'm nowhere near 1000 posts

Peter · Jul 21, 2004, 02:47 AM

Originally posted by Black Book:
I think I'm with dreilly on this one. Why, just because you keep going '+1' in countless threads does it make your opinion more valid? I admit that there is probably some need for keeping out people signing up to cause trouble - but that's not much worse than post whoring really, is it?

Of course, I'm only saying this because I'm nowhere near 1000 posts

when did i ever say your opinion wasnt valid?

Chris O'Brien · Jul 21, 2004, 06:06 AM

Well, good point. You didn't

It was a presumption I made from the fact you didn't want me (not specifically me, I know) to post in the lounge.

Edit: To be pedantic, I never said that you said my opinion wasn't valid, just that you may think yours was more so.

Ω · Jul 21, 2004, 06:13 AM

Just in case +1???

You only have to look at some of the post whores to realise that post count is not a good indicator of quality.

All new "candidates" should have to sit a written test, and perform a 1 week adventure course in the wild to ensure they are up to our "high" standards.

Or maybe we can start a reality show?

Sod Off Sadr · Jul 21, 2004, 02:08 PM

just don't make 'em count in the lounge, OR give only 1/4 credit.

dreilly1 · Jul 21, 2004, 02:35 PM

Originally posted by chris v:
Do it backwards. No one with more that 1000 posts can post in the lounge. That'd stop the postwhoring.

CV

Oh, and

+1

djohnson · Jul 23, 2004, 08:28 AM

Originally posted by scaught:
I say get rid of the darn post counts ENTIRELY.

Blasphemy!!!!

djohnson · Jul 23, 2004, 08:29 AM

Originally posted by chris v:
Do it backwards. No one with more that 1000 posts can post in the lounge. That'd stop the postwhoring.

CV

Nope, then everyone would have Eleventy Billion names!

wulf · Jul 23, 2004, 08:56 AM

Originally posted by Peter:
If you removed the post count in the lounge, I would begin a macnn coo and make it so every lounge poster posts in the feedback forum instead.

I think you meant 'coup', right?
</pedant>

(+1)

Drakino · Jul 24, 2004, 07:49 PM

Make any post to the religious/war section decrease the post count by n, where n is a random number between 2 and 50.

I wonder how long some people would take to reach 0. :-)

Peter · Jul 31, 2004, 04:39 PM

Originally posted by wulf:
I think you meant 'coup', right?
</pedant>

(+1)

KrazyEvilGoat · Aug 5, 2004, 12:08 AM

If u total all my usernames I have welllll over 1000

Zimphire · Aug 5, 2004, 12:11 AM

Why all the usernames?

Brien · Aug 5, 2004, 12:11 AM

For awhile posts in the Lounge didn't count towards your post count, and there was still some +1. Meh.

MacGorilla · Aug 5, 2004, 04:29 PM

Originally posted by brien:
For awhile posts in the Lounge didn't count towards your post count, and there was still some +1. Meh.

It was +0 posts, I believe.

Peter · Aug 19, 2004, 10:45 AM

still think this is a GREAT idea.

CharlesS · Aug 19, 2004, 11:27 AM

Originally posted by dreilly1:
If the mods are going to put limits on lounge posting (which I don't necessarily agree with), I think they should make it time-based. Give a new account a brewing period of a month or two before it could post in the lounge. (Or, better yet, only let a new account post a set number of times a day). Chances are, by the time the PC trolls can post in the lounge, they will have lost the password.

So they would just spam the OS X forum instead. Great...

MacGorilla · Aug 19, 2004, 11:59 AM

I think post counts should be dropped. That would be a great start.

gorickey · Aug 19, 2004, 12:23 PM

Originally posted by MacGorilla:
I think post counts should be dropped. That would be a great start.

Agreeinated.�

Demonhood · Aug 19, 2004, 12:43 PM

If we disabled post counts, we'd create WAY more user levels. Which, actually, is something we mods/admins have discussed before. Maybe it's worth another look.

gorickey · Aug 19, 2004, 02:40 PM

Originally posted by Demonhood:
If we disabled post counts, we'd create WAY more user levels. Which, actually, is something we mods/admins have discussed before. Maybe it's worth another look.

Yeah, that makes perfect sense to me. Give it a go!