The Relationship of Substance of Discussion to Volume

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_moksha
_Emeritus
Posts: 22508
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:42 pm

Re: The Relationship of Substance of Discussion to Volume

Post by _moksha »

DonBradley wrote:Proposition:

Idiotic posts and posters tend to spark more discussion (though of an inferior kind) than do substantive posts and thoughtful posters.

What think ye? Is this (generally) the case? Is it some kind of law of message-board discussion? What, if anything, can be done to counteract it, and make the greatest amount of participation occur in the most fruitful discussions, while stupid posts and posters find themselves alone and ignored (at least until they raise their level of discourse)?

Don't everyone respond at once! ;-)

Don


Did you get this from Juliann? She was always trying to get me into a submission hold with that signal to noise ratio bit. What she forgot was that long, droll and allegedly substantive posts are best interspersed with a little levity in order to make the thread readable. However, there are some threads that should not be bothered due to their esoteric nature that only fellow eggheads follow, and it would be disrespectful to disturb their concentration.

while stupid posts and posters find themselves alone and ignored


Yes, I am ignored to a great extent and so are some others here. Still, I appreciate the MD philosophy of not dumping their hostility on those they find annoying or stupid.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
_Scottie
_Emeritus
Posts: 4166
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 9:54 pm

Re: The Relationship of Substance of Discussion to Volume

Post by _Scottie »

malkie wrote:
Scottie wrote:
DonBradley wrote:Proposition:

Idiotic posts and posters tend to spark more discussion (though of an inferior kind) than do substantive posts and thoughtful posters.

What think ye? Is this (generally) the case? Is it some kind of law of message-board discussion? What, if anything, can be done to counteract it, and make the greatest amount of participation occur in the most fruitful discussions, while stupid posts and posters find themselves alone and ignored (at least until they raise their level of discourse)?

Don't everyone respond at once! ;-)

Don


Well, often times I read a great post, and have nothing more to add. I guess I could post something that says, "Great post! I agree!"

I often wonder if I should be proud or ashamed that so many of my posts get completely ignored.

As a Scot, I have to be kind to Scottie, and make sure that, once in a while, one of his posts is not ignored.

For this week, this post is it! ;)


Thanks, man! You made my week.

As a side note, and WAAAAY off the discussion, one of my biggest fears is that somehow a Scotsman will become the new poster child for the gay community. All the teenagers will start using the term "Scot" instead of "gay". So, instead of saying, "You're so gay!" or "that's the gayest thing I've ever heard!" they will start saying "That is so Scot!!" And, just as teenagers laugh at the name "Gaye" now, they will laugh at the name "Scott" in this future. Oh, the horror of it all!!!

Now, what was I saying about my posts being full of sage like wisdom??
If there's one thing I've learned from this board, it's that consensual sex with multiple partners is okay unless God commands it. - Abman

I find this place to be hostile toward all brands of stupidity. That's why I like it. - Some Schmo
_Blixa
_Emeritus
Posts: 8381
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 12:45 pm

Re: The Relationship of Substance of Discussion to Volume

Post by _Blixa »

Scottie wrote:As a side note, and WAAAAY off the discussion, one of my biggest fears is that somehow a Scotsman will become the new poster child for the gay community. All the teenagers will start using the term "Scot" instead of "gay". So, instead of saying, "You're so gay!" or "that's the gayest thing I've ever heard!" they will start saying "That is so Scot!!" And, just as teenagers laugh at the name "Gaye" now, they will laugh at the name "Scott" in this future. Oh, the horror of it all!!!

Now, what was I saying about my posts being full of sage like wisdom??


???
From the Ernest L. Wilkinson Diaries: "ELW dreams he's spattered w/ grease. Hundreds steal his greasy pants."
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Re: The Relationship of Substance of Discussion to Volume

Post by _Runtu »

Scottie wrote:
Thanks, man! You made my week.

As a side note, and WAAAAY off the discussion, one of my biggest fears is that somehow a Scotsman will become the new poster child for the gay community. All the teenagers will start using the term "Scot" instead of "gay". So, instead of saying, "You're so gay!" or "that's the gayest thing I've ever heard!" they will start saying "That is so Scot!!" And, just as teenagers laugh at the name "Gaye" now, they will laugh at the name "Scott" in this future. Oh, the horror of it all!!!

Now, what was I saying about my posts being full of sage like wisdom??


Uh, where the hell did that come from?
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

I agree that less substantive posts often get more attention due to the fact that it's easier, less demanding, and more entertaining. (although often irritating)

More heavily substantive interactions tend to be limited by nature due to the fact that there are usually a limited number of people with the prerequisite background knowledge to meaningful participate.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_Moniker
_Emeritus
Posts: 4004
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 11:53 pm

Re: The Relationship of Substance of Discussion to Volume

Post by _Moniker »

DonBradley wrote:Proposition:

Idiotic posts and posters tend to spark more discussion (though of an inferior kind) than do substantive posts and thoughtful posters.

What think ye? Is this (generally) the case? Is it some kind of law of message-board discussion? What, if anything, can be done to counteract it, and make the greatest amount of participation occur in the most fruitful discussions, while stupid posts and posters find themselves alone and ignored (at least until they raise their level of discourse)?

Don't everyone respond at once! ;-)

Don


What I find interesting about your OP is that you don't mention the often seen "smart" posters on this board that make "stupid posts" all the time. Of course I'm assuming that the "stupid posts" are those in which there is silliness, one liners, double entendres, and off -topic remarks.

If you don't enjoy the debate then perhaps you should start a thread. Haven't seen you do that. If you did, I must have missed it.

Moksha, you are a pleasure to read. You are actually one of the only posters on this board (other than Blixa) whose posts I always read.
_Jersey Girl
_Emeritus
Posts: 34407
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:16 am

Re: The Relationship of Substance of Discussion to Volume

Post by _Jersey Girl »

DonBradley wrote:Proposition:

Idiotic posts and posters tend to spark more discussion (though of an inferior kind) than do substantive posts and thoughtful posters.

What think ye? Is this (generally) the case? Is it some kind of law of message-board discussion? What, if anything, can be done to counteract it, and make the greatest amount of participation occur in the most fruitful discussions, while stupid posts and posters find themselves alone and ignored (at least until they raise their level of discourse)?

Don't everyone respond at once! ;-)

Don


I think the best solution would be to create multiple forums with one specifically designed for serious and/or scholarly discussion and debate. A threaded view option wouldn't hurt.
_Some Schmo
_Emeritus
Posts: 15602
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:59 pm

Post by _Some Schmo »

This medium is a time killer, nothing more, nothing less.

It seems to me it's all noise. Some noise attracts, some doesn't.

That's how I see it, anyway. I'm either part of the noise or I'm not posting.

Oh, and Scottie, I read all of your posts (in the threads I view, anyway). I just tend to agree with you most of the time and have nothing to add.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
_Some Schmo
_Emeritus
Posts: 15602
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:59 pm

Post by _Some Schmo »

Having given this more thought, it occurred to me that my favorite posts are ones that demonstrate creativity along with thoughtfulness. I guess I care as much about delivery as I do substance. And let's face it; some of those discussions can be as dry as a popcorn fart.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
Post Reply