Get rid of post count (poll)

[DexterLB]

A poll to this thread: http://rocketryforum.com/showthread.php?t=222

[andytherocketeer]

Don't think you can just turn off postcount.

But with the power of greasemonkey and javascripts you can do anything ;)
I wrote a script, but apparently it nukes a bit *too* much (like the whole page).

[BAR_Daddy]

I say get rid of them. (we are all tired of that Fliss guy whipping our posteriors)....:eek:

BTW...no flames please.
That was meant in jest......:D:D:D

[RoyAtl]

I voted "i don't care," but the best reason for having a post count is that you have a clue when someone signs up just to do something nefarious, or you have a clue that they may not have a clue!

Once the post count gets above 50 or so, then maybe it can become fodder for abuse, but really, I've never seen all that much. And if someone does try to abuse it, Troy can just excise them, and they'll have to start again at zero!

[rstaff3]

IMO inane posts should be allowed in the Watering Hole by definition (except under extraordinary conditions). In other forums, it should be the job of the mods to redirect threads that have totally spun out of control with off-topic discussions. Small diversions are always expected. BTW, even RP with its light moderation does so, and I've yet to see a case where the posters responded negatively to a nudge to keep thing on-track. So if someone wants to keep their post count up by posting in threads like 'word association', let them feel good about themselves.

[AKPilot]

Folks, as always I sincerely appreciate everyone's constructive dissatisfaction when it comes to the board. Sincerely.

One thing that helps any venture grow is feedback from it's customers. At the same point though, like I tell my own folks, 'everyone gets an input but, I'm accountable for the final decision.'

Having said this, I've heard all sides of the conversation; pro, con, and indifferent. I've sincerely thought about all sides and in the end I posted elsewhere that "post count" is here to stay. I hope users of our board will accept that and my decision.

[troj]

Folks, as always I sincerely appreciate everyone's constructive dissatisfaction when it comes to the board. Sincerely.

One thing that helps any venture grow is feedback from it's customers. At the same point though, like I tell my own folks, 'everyone gets an input but, I'm accountable for the final decision.'

Having said this, I've heard all sides of the conversation; pro, con, and indifferent. I've sincerely thought about all sides and in the end I posted elsewhere that "post count" is here to stay. I hope users of our board will accept that and my decision.

Wait...

You think owning the place gives you some special authority, or something...? ;)

-Kevin

[RoyAtl]

Wait...

You think owning the place gives you some special authority, or something...? ;)

-Kevin


I'm shocked! Shocked, I tell you....

[AKPilot]

Yea, you guys are sooooo funny!

[Stymye]

Folks, as always I sincerely appreciate everyone's constructive dissatisfaction when it comes to the board. Sincerely.

One thing that helps any venture grow is feedback from it's customers. At the same point though, like I tell my own folks, 'everyone gets an input but, I'm accountable for the final decision.'

Having said this, I've heard all sides of the conversation; pro, con, and indifferent. I've sincerely thought about all sides and in the end I posted elsewhere that "post count" is here to stay. I hope users of our board will accept that and my decision.

I see the poll standings and agree with them so far, but accept your decision regardless.

[cydermaster]

I've got a XBOX360 and in games you get achievement points and you can compare your total with your online buddies. Occasionally I'll use my total for some light-hearted '/me iz teh 1337357!!!!!one!!111!!' type banter; but at the end of the day everybody knows they are a useless metric and not much more than a bit of fun.

I've got the same attitude towards postcount - its a noddy statistic that can be used for a bit of fun banter sometimes.

I dont hate them and I dont like them so I voted 'dont care'.

[DexterLB]

Wait...

You think owning the place gives you some special authority, or something...? ;)

-Kevin


I'm shocked! Shocked, I tell you....

Well, no matter how much we want to get rid of post count, Troy *IS* the owner of this place and has the authority to do anything. If he says that post count stays - it stays.

Seems I haven't been careful enough, and I haven't seen that "Post count is here to stay" post, and I apologise for that.

[rstaff3]

Off topic, but in the early days, I seem to remember Carl setting his to some humongous number :)

[troj]

Well, no matter how much we want to get rid of post count, Troy *IS* the owner of this place and has the authority to do anything. If he says that post count stays - it stays.

Seems I haven't been careful enough, and I haven't seen that "Post count is here to stay" post, and I apologise for that.

Hmmm... Perhaps my attempt at sarcasm was missed by a few....

-Kevin

[WiK]

I've got a XBOX360 bla bla bla...

Do you have to bring that up in every thread?? :p

FWIW I think postcount should stay, but maybe have non-rocketry forums (such as this one) not count towards it?

Phil

[troj]

FWIW I think postcount should stay, but maybe have non-rocketry forums (such as this one) not count towards it?

Go back in your hole, Wik... :p

In all reality, that would be a pain in the tuckus for AK, etc. Getting rid of post count is as simple as changing the template, so it doesn't display.

Making it only appear for some forums and not others likely gets into extensive code mods.

-Kevin

[WiK]

Fair enough... I thought seeing as on the old TRF Area 51 posts didn't count towards post count that maybe it was just a check box somewhere.

And my hole has wifi, so I'm afraid you're stuck with me ;)

[andytherocketeer]

No turning off postcount accumulation for a single forum is just a setting in the edit forum settings panel.
http://www.vbulletin.com/docs/html/main/forum_add_forum (2nd last entry)

[Fred22]

Fellas it just not a big deal IMO :) If anything it gets the odd laugh :)

[troj]

No turning off postcount accumulation for a single forum is just a setting in the edit forum settings panel.
http://www.vbulletin.com/docs/html/main/forum_add_forum (2nd last entry)

Oh.

Well.

In that case....

+1

:D

-Kevin

[madsen]

I'm winning, I'm winning, I'm winning--so there

[troj]

I'm winning, I'm winning, I'm winning--so there

Oh yeah?

Well, I'm whining!

(ask my wife, I do it well....)

-Kevin

[madsen]

Whoa--what is going on? All of of a sudden every vote is against getting rid of the post count. This is kind of like the vote count in Minnesota. I do not want to imply anything against the "moderators" or others involved in this forum--but I will not take this. What are you afraid of?

[Peartree]

Whoa--what is going on? All of of a sudden every vote is against getting rid of the post count. This is kind of like the vote count in Minnesota. I do not want to imply anything against the "moderators" or others involved in this forum--but I will not take this. What are you afraid of?

I haven't been watching all day, but this is generally the same proportion that I've seen earlier. I'm not sure what you are implying. In any case, remember that a) it doesn't matter anyway and b) if there are 500+ members on the forum and only 65 have bothered to vote, "I don't care" would seem to be way ahead.:D

Trust me, Troy has too many other things far ahead of this on his "to do" list and most of us don't have high enough privileges to steer the results one way or the other. I doubt if anyone is up to anything nefarious. More likely, people came home from work, logged on and voted.

[KDRaven]

Hey Peartree for your information I just voted in this. The reason why I just voted was that I was a lurking member here for a while untill I got arotherized to be able ot post or add new threads or even say Hi other than doing the IM mailing. I voted I dont care but then my vote did not mater much since Akpilot said it is here to stay. so now my post count is up to 2. yah ho and those other words of fun and excitememt.

[madsen]

I'm not sure what you are implying.

Trust me, Troy has too many other things far ahead of this on his "to do" list and most of us don't have high enough privileges to steer the results one way or the other. I doubt if anyone is up to anything nefarious.


Even with your cheating, I am winning. Ha, Ha, Ha.

[Peartree]

Even with your cheating, I am winning. Ha, Ha, Ha.

:confused::confused:

[KDRaven]

The thing is that I really did not think that too many listned to me on the old TRF when my post count was over 300 so when it is now at 6 do i really expect any one to notice? no so therefore I really don't count my posts. I almost used as many reallys as my post count....

[Micromeister]

kind of a waste of a poll, since the OWNER already said they are here to stay.

[cydermaster]

Do you have to bring that up in every thread?? :p

Ahhh .... you're just jealous :p ;)

[AKPilot]

Folks, we used to laugh about all of the polls on TRF 1.0. But there's some validity to it all. By the end of this you're going to be saying, "AK lighten up!" Or that just what my wife says?

Polls are notorious for being in accurate. Here's the problem with many of them.

They typically only hit a sample of a population.

In this case we have 600+ TRF users currently. As of now, only approximately 60 some-odd people have replied. So the population is 600+, the sample is 60 (roughly 10%).

The problem with samples is that they hit a few snags. Statistically, the individuals who respond are typically either happy or upset (outlying T-values). The majority (80%; paretto principle) don't respond. So in polls, the people that respond are often the "vocal" minority.

In the case of the poll above, initial looks tend to indicate that there are people who want posting numbers taken away (e.g. Yes vote). However, there are also those who've said "No". And another who have said "I don't care".

Unless we get everyone on TRF to commit and complete this poll the "I don't care's" are represented by the population who haven't voted. Not those who responded. In other words, "I don't care" is representative of those who both answer - as well as those who don't do the poll.

As for the "No" vote, their vocaling stating no. However, if the remaining TRF population was to answer that statistic may go up more. Same with the "Yes" votes. We simply don't know.

See being vocal, and answering a poll are two entirely different things.

This is why many people, who are savy, discount polls entirely. Basically, the press, TV, radio polls, etc. are skewed from the onset, and tend to suck-in people who take them for gospel truth.

Are they fun? Yes, at times. But, I can't base my decision on a sampling of the vocal-minority.

Also, my decision was based on the issue that they don't hurt anyone either. It's another tool for some, to chide and to have conversations about - such as is happening now.

I'll be the first to admit - I liked being able to chide Jim Flis on his 15,000+ post count on TRF 1.0. Jim, being the stellar man that he is, never took it personally as far as I knew.

[madsen]

In this case we have 600+ TRF users currently. As of now, only approximately 60 some-odd people have replied. So the population is 600+, the sample is 60 (roughly 10%).

But these are the smartest and brightest of all forum participants. Therefore, you should give them extra consideration.

[luke strawwalker]

Folks, we used to laugh about all of the polls on TRF 1.0. But there's some validity to it all. By the end of this you're going to be saying, "AK lighten up!" Or that just what my wife says?

Polls are notorious for being in accurate. Here's the problem with many of them.

They typically only hit a sample of a population.

In this case we have 600+ TRF users currently. As of now, only approximately 60 some-odd people have replied. So the population is 600+, the sample is 60 (roughly 10%).

The problem with samples is that they hit a few snags. Statistically, the individuals who respond are typically either happy or upset (outlying T-values). The majority (80%; paretto principle) don't respond. So in polls, the people that respond are often the "vocal" minority.

In the case of the poll above, initial looks tend to indicate that there are people who want posting numbers taken away (e.g. Yes vote). However, there are also those who've said "No". And another who have said "I don't care".

Unless we get everyone on TRF to commit and complete this poll the "I don't care's" are represented by the population who haven't voted. Not those who responded. In other words, "I don't care" is representative of those who both answer - as well as those who don't do the poll.

As for the "No" vote, their vocaling stating no. However, if the remaining TRF population was to answer that statistic may go up more. Same with the "Yes" votes. We simply don't know.

See being vocal, and answering a poll are two entirely different things.

This is why many people, who are savy, discount polls entirely. Basically, the press, TV, radio polls, etc. are skewed from the onset, and tend to suck-in people who take them for gospel truth.

Are they fun? Yes, at times. But, I can't base my decision on a sampling of the vocal-minority.

Also, my decision was based on the issue that they don't hurt anyone either. It's another tool for some, to chide and to have conversations about - such as is happening now.

I'll be the first to admit - I liked being able to chide Jim Flis on his 15,000+ post count on TRF 1.0. Jim, being the stellar man that he is, never took it personally as far as I knew.

Good points Troy, and well taken...

I understand that the post counts are here to stay and that's your right, and I'm not disagreeing with that, but for sake of discussion, I would like to make a couple counter points, just to get it off my chest...

For the 80% plus who don't care to make their opinion known, I for one don't particularly care what their position is. (I'm talking about FAR more than just one somewhat unimportant poll on TRF here, even extending to choosing and mandates given to our leaders.) They had a chance to make their feelings known and CHOSE NOT TO. That is a decision too. Choosing not to bother expressing an opinion is the same as saying, "I don't care what happens or which position wins out, because the outcome is unimportant to me either way and not worth my time and effort to formulate an opinion and make it known." That says to me that if THEY aren't worried about making their point of view and preferences known, that it isn't worth worrying about WHAT their opinion is and idly speculating HOW THE NUMBERS WOULD CHANGE IF THEIR OPINIONS WERE KNOWN. That invalidates the whole point of having a 'poll' (or election or voting on a proposition or whatever) in the first place! It is those who VOTE who decide the outcome, not those who sit idly by and do nothing; the poll/vote NUMBERS should be the metric for determining the outcome or preference, not IDLE SPECULATION on how the numbers would change had EVERYONE taken time to express their opinion. As I recently told my 6 year old nephew who's getting in trouble in school for not doing his work, and as I tell my kids on the schoolbus, "NOT doing the right thing is a CHOICE as well... it's choosing what's easiest NOW, which has repercussions, and by so doing also choosing to receive the repercussions of not doing what you're supposed to do. All we in authority do is make sure that you face the repercussions of YOUR decision." In short, when faced by kids who ask me, "why did you write me up and send me to the principal for XYZ and get me in trouble?" and I reply, "I didn't get you in trouble, YOU got you in trouble by your bad choices-- I just make sure you face the consequences for that." That makes a LOT of kids think... I can see the gears turn in their heads as they consider that.

Anyway, just wanted to throw that out there, because I've heard a lot of this sort of thing recently relating to 'fairness' and 'making everyone happy' based mostly on speculation by one group or person or another based on their best 'guesstimate' of what people WOULD have wanted had they bothered to express an opinion.... a VERY slippery slope my friend! And a very sad state of affairs it indicates...

Interesting thought exercise though... Yall have a good one! :) OL JR :)

[AKPilot]

Good points there Luke!

The question will always remain though, "why didn't that person vote in a poll"?

On TRF, was it the fact that they didn't see it? Was it the point that they didn't log in? Were they sick? Where they out of town on business, etc?

Just too many ifs.

[FatBoy]

Not only can you choose to vote in the poll or choose to ignore the poll, but you can also choose to not pay attention to the upper right corner of each post.

[jflis]

I'll be the first to admit - I liked being able to chide Jim Flis on his 15,000+ post count on TRF 1.0. Jim, being the stellar man that he is, never took it personally as far as I knew.

What? Who? Me???? :D

Just a newbe here, nothing to see here folks...

Interesting poll though. I voted no, fwiw...

[hognutz63]

"AK lighten up!" Or that just what my wife says?

Your wife calls you AK? I wish mine would call me by my handle.

[powderburner]

In this case we have 600+ TRF users currently.

What do you call a 'user' here on TRF? (Yes, I am going to split hairs.)

I don't know how many folks are signed up here as users, but I do know that a large portion of that group do not post much (or, at all). For all I know, a big chunk of them signed up for some reason and then seldom ever come back. (I have done this at other websites, to get a piece of info, and I don't feel the need to remain active there forever and ever.) I think it would be entirely reasonable to consider a survey valid if it has responses from most of the active TRF users.

If you define an 'active' user as someone with, say, ten posts or more, then a quick check of the info on the Member List shows that we have 85 - 90 active users. Right there, if your survey has responses from ~68 opinionated users (and 90+ total users), then you do indeed have a significant level of participation.

If you define 'active' as someone with five posts or more, the number of active TRF users jumps to something more like 150. But your ~68/90+ survey responses are still a meaningful portion of this group.

I am one of the people who posted here and on other threads that it might be nice to dump the post counts.
http://www.rocketryforum.com/showthread.php?p=1854#post1854

Let me be very specific on my reasons; I don't care whether we have, use, and show a post count. I do care very much that so much drivel shows up (in ALL threads) so often that is apparently posted merely for the sake of someone fluffing their count. These posts can not always be detected ahead of time, and are often embedded in a stream of interesting posts. You are reading along, and before you know it, you have stepped right into it. In fact, you usually don't even know it's a cr*p post until after you have read most or all of it, and by then you have wasted your time.

My interest in a post-count-free-forum is because I expect that removal of these numbers would remove most of the incentive for people to post blather. If they are not rewarded for wasting space, hopefully they would slow down or stop. TRF admins would have less stuff to supervise, store, sort, and keep up with, and TRF users would have a higher signal-to-noise ratio.

If we MUST have 'status' markers, we could substitute something as simple as Beginner and Member and leave it at that.

But I am sure there are more important issues for the TRF admins to address right now, such as trying to bring back the old TRF1 posts in some useful form. The issue of post counts is probably pretty far down their list.

Oh, wait, Troy already said......

[madsen]

I am one of the people who posted here and on other threads that it might be nice to dump the post counts.

Let me be very specific on my reasons; I don't care whether we have, use, and show a post count. I do care very much that so much drivel shows up (in ALL threads) so often that is apparently posted merely for the sake of someone fluffing their count. These posts can not always be detected ahead of time, and are often embedded in a stream of interesting posts. You are reading along, and before you know it, you have stepped right into it. In fact, you usually don't even know it's a cr*p post until after you have read most or all of it, and by then you have wasted your time.

My interest in a post-count-free-forum is because I expect that removal of these numbers would remove most of the incentive for people to post blather. If they are not rewarded for wasting space, hopefully they would slow down or stop. TRF admins would have less stuff to supervise, store, sort, and keep up with, and TRF users would have a higher signal-to-noise ratio.

Yes, Yes, Yes. Powderburner gets it. My complaint is not with the number of posts that someone has--if that were true, I would have to put out a contract on Jim Flis. My original complaint was exactly as Powderburner states. He has expressed himself perfectly. All I can say is "what he said".

[Peartree]

My personal feeling is that people make note of the post count because they can. The folks who post random nonsense are just as likely to do so whether the post count is displayed or not. In fact, I believe that when there are folk with post counts of 5,000 and 10,000, noobs are even LESS likely to pad their post count with drivel because they quickly realize that there is literally no hope of catching up. My own average on TRF 1.0 was about three posts a day, which is about a thousand posts in a year. Knowing that the "post leaders" were literally a decade of posting ahead of me made it incredibly obvious that no amount of drivel would ever allow me to "catch up." Again, people who like to hear themselves talk (write?) will do so regardless of whether you keep track or not.

[KDRaven]

Oh well if Peartree is correct that those that just like to hear them selves type is true thenI gess there will still be the ones trying to increase their numbers more and more. The thing that gets to me more than the post counters is the ones that will copy an entire post and then make a comment on either all of it or part of it even when the post contains several pictures and when this happens more than once in a thread it takes a while to go through the thread and when I see several postings that this has been done with it just makes me wonder how much of the server is being used up so I can see the same picture or comment several times....

just my gripe and sorry for stealling the thread.

[AKPilot]

Sorry folks, I've just got to say it . . .

I never knew that a small, 6-font, statement in the upper right corner of of a user id could draw so much attention.

It'll remain an open discussion, with a closed action, but why not expend more energy into building, launching, or posting build threads?

[Stymye]

I vote to turn on the 'Reputation' feature , it's explained at the bottom of this FAQ page.

http://www.rocketryforum.com/faq.php?faq=vb3_user_profile

that would quickly solve any issues over post count

[AKPilot]

Folks as a matter of policy, we don't "vote" on adding or deleting TRF features. You can go to the "Feedback" section of this message board and put in a request.

[WiK]

What do you call a 'user' here on TRF? (Yes, I am going to split hairs.)...

...If you define an 'active' user as someone with, say, ten posts or more...


Keeping with the theme of splitting hairs:
Ah, but if there was no postcount then how on earth would you define an active user? ;)

[m85476585]

Disabling post count won't make useless posts go away.

[roadkill]

If it ain't broke - don't fix it...

I voted 'don't give a hoot'...

[sylvie369]

Are we supposed to be proud of having lots of posts, or embarrassed? :confused2:

[evil ed]

Are we supposed to be proud of having lots of posts, or embarrassed? :confused2:


Depends on what's in them!:bat:

[Pat_B]

In the forums I post to I've always found that a lot of the high post count people were generally the ones who had to put in their comments on every topic and were generally the ones I avoid reading.

I've always thought that it would be a good strategy to put a limit on posting when someone's post count far exceeds that others. Would establish an automatic limit when the poster can't contain themselves :roll:

[H_Rocket]

My interest in a post-count-free-forum is because I expect that removal of these numbers would remove most of the incentive for people to post blather. If they are not rewarded for wasting space, hopefully they would slow down or stop.

Surely you jest.

Give an idiot a forum and I got good odds they will foam away at the keyboard whether or not the get boo-boo points in the corner. Most of the post count junkies just like seeing their drivel on screen.

Unless those folks who moderate this place want to actively filter the noise, the S/N is not gonna improve.

[kelltym88]

Yea, you guys are sooooo funny!

Sarcasm! Nice. You can see why he doesn't want get rid of it, he's got over 1600. It's like he's a moderator or something.


All kidding aside, it doesn't really matter now does it? Decision has been made, let's move on.