Hello Guest, please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
Login with username, password and session length.

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: "Double-posting" with regard to Replies  (Read 5920 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
"Double-posting" with regard to Replies
« on: March 20, 2012, 01:15:09 am »
  • Minalien
  • *
  • Reputation: +10/-1
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 2119
Just a quick thought that I'd noticed while updating my tutorial thread. Why does the community still seek to enforce avoidance of "double-posting" in replies? While pointless double-posting (say, posting two responses within a minute of each other) is annoying, and having too much running consecutively can be disruptive, double-posting is a more valid means of providing an update to a thread than editing the original post's subject line with an "[Updated]" tag.

I propose that we change any currently-existing "double-posting" rules to instead enforce the avoidance of 'bumping' a thread, and focus instead on enforcing a common-sense approach.
Logged
Quote
There's such a double standard about religion in the modern world. Catholics can gather, wear white robes, and say "In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti" and be considered normal.

But if my friends and I gather, wear black robes, and say  "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn", we're considered cultists.
  • Development Blog

Starforsaken101

Wake the Beast
Re: "Double-posting" with regard to Replies
« Reply #1 on: March 20, 2012, 01:14:25 pm »
  • www.mouffers.com
  • *
  • Reputation: +69/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 2577
I would like to point out that Min has a point about this. Usually, to avoid double-posting, the user would usually edit their previous post. However, does that notify the community that a new post was made? If the community is not already notified that the user has made a new edit to their previous post, then I believe we should indeed revise the double posting rules to involve some common sense.

Obviously, double posting to the point where there are 3 or more posts in a row is bad. However, I don't think having two posts in a row is a bad thing, unless it's to gravedig/bump a really old topic up.

Since the community is generally well-behaved, I think it is appropriate to revise the rules for double posting. Let's look into this.
Logged
  • Starforsaken101's DeviantART
Re: "Double-posting" with regard to Replies
« Reply #2 on: March 20, 2012, 02:20:37 pm »
  • *
  • Reputation: +8/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 6604
It might just be because it is the morning but are you talking about a written rule or the way this is just commonly enforced by moderation? Otherwise yeah I have always been fine with people "double-posting" all the the way across the forum as long as they are providing new content. I think when people edit their first post to have [Updated] in it that they are trying to get the attention of those going through topics and not just paying attention to the recent posts list.

Otherwise I have thought that the policy has been pretty common sense and am not understanding why this is being brought up as an issue.
Logged
Re: "Double-posting" with regard to Replies
« Reply #3 on: March 20, 2012, 03:19:12 pm »
  • Minalien
  • *
  • Reputation: +10/-1
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 2119
I'm mostly referring to the written rule, because it's generally been enforced as it exists in my suggestion. And... it was kind of just a random thought that came up in my OpenGL tutorial thread. <_<
Logged
Quote
There's such a double standard about religion in the modern world. Catholics can gather, wear white robes, and say "In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti" and be considered normal.

But if my friends and I gather, wear black robes, and say  "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn", we're considered cultists.
  • Development Blog

Starforsaken101

Wake the Beast
Re: "Double-posting" with regard to Replies
« Reply #4 on: March 20, 2012, 03:27:50 pm »
  • www.mouffers.com
  • *
  • Reputation: +69/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 2577
I recall seeing the written rule at some point too...and I was equally referring to reviewing the document.
Logged
  • Starforsaken101's DeviantART
Re: "Double-posting" with regard to Replies
« Reply #5 on: March 20, 2012, 05:33:22 pm »
  • *
  • Reputation: +9/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 3725
I don't recall there being a written rule about double posting. However my opinion is this:

When member A makes a post which is a reaction to member B. Within 8 hours member A makes a double post that adds information to his previous post. In this case I would say "slap, just edit your freaking post earlier." Because it can be that Member B and other members went to bed just before member A made his first post. And a reasonable person has an average of 8 hours sleeptime in total (this include the night and morning rituals). Within 8 hours one can reasonably assume that others haven't seen it yet or had the chance to react to it. Thus in this case I think double posting is wrong. An alert to his addition is not needed.

When the time difference is 10 to 16 hours it is a gray area, because some member look at the forum all day or in the morning and evening. Thus it could be missed by some. However it is most reasonable to assume that members look at the forum once every day, probably at the same time. Thus when double posting occurs more then 20 hours apart I would not mind it at all.

Thus in short double posting:
< 8 hours apart = Edit your freaking post.
10 - 16 hours apart = I'll take the content into consideration and consider the primary addressee's last active time.
> 20 hours apart = No problem.
Logged
Re: "Double-posting" with regard to Replies
« Reply #6 on: March 20, 2012, 06:29:02 pm »
  • Minalien
  • *
  • Reputation: +10/-1
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 2119
I disagree with that, Niek. The assumption that a user "may have gone to sleep" is a bit out there, if you ask me. I think that it should be a matter of how appropriate the extra post is, taking all factors into consideration - merely re-stating the same point or revising something is something that can (and should) be handled in an edit, but additional information is most appropriate in another reply, even if that would mean double-posting.

Here are two major scenarios to illustrate:
1) In a discussion, I read initial response A and have nothing to say to it - I'm unlikely to look at the post again until there is a new post, and even then I'll likely only look at the latest unless I need a refresher of the thread up to the point. This means that if a user edits in additional information, which is perhaps something I would respond to, it either takes a fair amount of time before receiving input - or receives nothing at all.

2) This, I think, is the most important scenario. Say user posts initial Response A, and I do have something to respond with. Then, the user has additional information to add while I'm already typing my response. Unless the user adds another response, I will have no way of knowing that there was anything new - which I may wish to include a response to. If instead of merely editing their post, the user posts a new reply, I will be notified of new content before my response is posted - allowing me to revise or add information.

I think that the biggest problem is that the forum has traditionally looked down upon double-posting because of an increased "post count" for the user - which, honestly, should never have been a problem (except for when there were rewards tied to post count, which was a concept that died away quickly). Consecutive posts really do no harm to anything in the community - if anything, they show more activity, which (last I checked) was a good thing.
Logged
Quote
There's such a double standard about religion in the modern world. Catholics can gather, wear white robes, and say "In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti" and be considered normal.

But if my friends and I gather, wear black robes, and say  "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn", we're considered cultists.
  • Development Blog

thestig
Re: "Double-posting" with regard to Replies
« Reply #7 on: March 20, 2012, 11:15:09 pm »
I'm sorry, but anyone who thinks there should be a rule against double posting should step down from their moderator status or admin status right now. Such a rule should NOT be needed as such, irrelevant posting would already be covered by other rules. For example, how broad do you think "spamming" and "trolling" goes? Do you really NEED a double posting rule? I feel that such a rule discourages relevant flow of discussion because some times, its good to have.

Now, another thing people neglect is that we _should_ be technologically capable in extending the forum software to support auto-merging a double post during an exhaust period. In fact, this could be written to update the time and placement on the recent posts ticker to serve its purpose.

Guys, just drop the whole movement towards this rule. Just like the gravedigging rule, it kills potential discussion. And don't give me that "its impossible!" because its not. I implemented this on The World BBS back when it was on SMF. Ask Hawthorneluke himself.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2012, 11:17:26 pm by gm112 »
Logged
Re: "Double-posting" with regard to Replies
« Reply #8 on: March 21, 2012, 06:41:37 am »
  • *
  • Reputation: +16/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 1633
I am for the rules in general, just not so much for exact/harsh enforcements. Heck, I double post a lot in my own topics so I must not find the concept bad in every situation. However, you do want to have the rules present so you can act against individuals that DO spam up the place. Like posting multible messages in a couple of hours (just have some patience dude) or responding to a number of dead topics with comments like "Nice" (moving the active topics down).

The rules are indeed needed to be able to keep things from getting out of hand. Especially for newer (young) visitors that are too enthousiastic. But instead of double post you could talk about quadruble posting. And instead of gravedigging you could talk about gravedigging multible times within a day. That should please everybody. "You can double post, triple post or gravedig. Just do it moderatly."
Logged

thestig
Re: "Double-posting" with regard to Replies
« Reply #9 on: March 21, 2012, 09:39:55 am »
Quote from: Martijn dh on March 21, 2012, 06:41:37 am
I am for the rules in general, just not so much for exact/harsh enforcements. Heck, I double post a lot in my own topics so I must not find the concept bad in every situation.
Thank you for backing up my point. Now let's implement this.
Quote
However, you do want to have the rules present so you can act against individuals that DO spam up the place. Like posting multible messages in a couple of hours (just have some patience dude) or responding to a number of dead topics with comments like "Nice" (moving the active topics down).
Wouldn't that just be simply covered under a "spam" rule, if they were spamming up the place like you said? The plugin would mostly suck up whatever else gets through. To be honest, I don't mean to attack you but I had to re-read this because you're really coming off as overly paranoid over a situation that's being focused on too much. The point I am trying to get across to you that with or without such a plugin to the forum, there are already rules present that cover double posting and that it should be up to the moderator's digression in order to figure out what to do about the situation. Double posting isn't always bad, but sometimes it is excessive. And think about the situations where it's not alright. What would you call it? Spam? Trolling? Might as well say gravedigging is against the rules too, since you guys have a literal written rule for that... lol...

Quote
The rules are indeed needed to be able to keep things from getting out of hand. Especially for newer (young) visitors that are too enthousiastic. But instead of double post you could talk about quadruble posting. And instead of gravedigging you could talk about gravedigging multible times within a day. That should please everybody. "You can double post, triple post or gravedig. Just do it moderatly."
Of course. No man, I am all for maintaining stability. But I am not for cluttering up the rules with repetitive clauses that just make things in regards to rules so convoluted that puts members in a situation where they are accidentally breaking the rules. In regards to that last quote, you again confirm the notion of legitimacy behind gravedigging and double posting. Shouldn't it be clear at this point that such rules are an absurdity because of how repetitive they are? It's a waste of space and bandwidth. Please for the sake of the community focus on more important issues than something as trivial as double posting. Say, why not try to come up with ideas that could encourage more activity here?

I think I've made my point clear enough, so I'm just going to drop the issue. Thank you for taking the time in reading my posts as I have read yours out of respect.
Logged
Re: "Double-posting" with regard to Replies
« Reply #10 on: March 21, 2012, 02:34:16 pm »
  • ...---^^^---...
  • *
  • Reputation: +6/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 616
Quote from: gm112 on March 21, 2012, 09:39:55 am
I don't mean to attack you but I had to re-read this because you're really coming off as overly paranoid over a situation that's being focused on too much.
Erm...  I have to say I actually agree with gm112 about not having double posting rules or grave digging rules, but rather let those be covered by other existing rules if observed to be used in excess, but I have to say man.  After having read all the post here, the one that is sounding paranoid to me is you man...  Just saying.
Logged

Starforsaken101

Wake the Beast
Re: "Double-posting" with regard to Replies
« Reply #11 on: March 21, 2012, 03:14:03 pm »
  • www.mouffers.com
  • *
  • Reputation: +69/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 2577
I'm not trying to add fuel to the fire, but I think you're all misusing the word "paranoia" here. Please take a moment to reflect on what it means. There is a difference between being paranoid and wanting to clarify a rule that might have been active either recently or in the past.

I'd like to add that everyone had some great points in this topic. I think the basis of the double-posting is to just use your head. If the user ends up spamming, then clearly this is bad. If the user ends up gravedigging, we have another issue. Just use common sense and everything will be fine.

Niek, I don't like your timing rule because it could potentially enforce gravedigging as being okay.

Quote
> 20 hours apart = No problem.
^^ This. A year or two > 20 hours.

The bottom line is common sense.
Logged
  • Starforsaken101's DeviantART

thestig
Re: "Double-posting" with regard to Replies
« Reply #12 on: March 21, 2012, 04:51:10 pm »
Quote from: Aero88 on March 21, 2012, 02:34:16 pm
Quote from: gm112 on March 21, 2012, 09:39:55 am
I don't mean to attack you but I had to re-read this because you're really coming off as overly paranoid over a situation that's being focused on too much.
Erm...  I have to say I actually agree with gm112 about not having double posting rules or grave digging rules, but rather let those be covered by other existing rules if observed to be used in excess, but I have to say man.  After having read all the post here, the one that is sounding paranoid to me is you man...  Just saying.
I meant paranoia in response to the staff's desire to have accessory rules in addition to generic rules. i.e. A spam rule versus Spam + double posting + gravedigging rule. I'm pretty much trying to imply that, rolling out these rules COULD lead to a chain of events nobody would want to be on.

If you mean I'm paranoid in that sense, then you are right that I am concerned about the staff taking the wrong direction with these rules because I feel their focus should be shifted towards more community-oriented friendlyness versus rules. Make sense?

EDIT: And Star, you are very correct. This is the point I've been trying to make. There's rules covering misbehavior already and each case is different. Trust the moderator's gut-feeling on the situation. If they mess up, it can always get corrected. We're all here to have a good time, no?
« Last Edit: March 21, 2012, 04:52:57 pm by gm112 »
Logged
Re: "Double-posting" with regard to Replies
« Reply #13 on: March 21, 2012, 06:57:57 pm »
  • *
  • Reputation: +8/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 6604
When you say "desire to have accessory rules in addition to general rules", sometimes things need to be clarified in non-vague ways so that those with different guts and different gut-feelings can come to the same understanding. A general rule can have many applications, and explaining those applications isn't the same as trying to bureaucratically crack down on everyone. That being said, I have been trying to get the staff more into development rather than what you would consider typical moderation of user behavior.

Again though I don't know why this is really an issue because it really has been for a long time a common sense issue. The only time double posting has to be corrected is when new users are doing a lot of it in short replies or anyone is trying to bump their topic for attention without content. I don't think that someone who has "[Updated]" in their topic title is oppressed and fears double posting. I think that a person who does this just wants to inform people looking through the board that the project is in that it is active - as the recent posts list may update quickly.
Logged

thestig
Re: "Double-posting" with regard to Replies
« Reply #14 on: March 21, 2012, 08:22:33 pm »
Quote from: 4Sword on March 21, 2012, 06:57:57 pm
When you say "desire to have accessory rules in addition to general rules", sometimes things need to be clarified in non-vague ways so that those with different guts and different gut-feelings can come to the same understanding. A general rule can have many applications, and explaining those applications isn't the same as trying to bureaucratically crack down on everyone. That being said, I have been trying to get the staff more into development rather than what you would consider typical moderation of user behavior.
That's the whole idea, though.  See, wouldn't it be easier to just have a set of rules that specify what to do and what not to do clearly versus building rules based on case-to-case basis? It isn't the end of the world that there's a rule for double posting, though.

Quote
Again though I don't know why this is really an issue because it really has been for a long time a common sense issue. The only time double posting has to be corrected is when new users are doing a lot of it in short replies or anyone is trying to bump their topic for attention without content. I don't think that someone who has "[Updated]" in their topic title is oppressed and fears double posting. I think that a person who does this just wants to inform people looking through the board that the project is in that it is active - as the recent posts list may update quickly.
You're quite right. I mean, if there is a case where a user doesn't know that double posting is bad, then the warning they get would teach them to consider the situation they're posting in to make sure it's not coming close to border-line spam. You know?
Logged

Jeod

Team Dekunutz, Doubleteam
Re: "Double-posting" with regard to Replies
« Reply #15 on: March 21, 2012, 10:37:55 pm »
  • *
  • Reputation: +3/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 1675
Add something to the reply box. Like that "THIS TOPIC IS OVER 20 DAYS OLD" warning, only about double posting. Easy pie.
Logged
"You should challenge your fates. When all else fails, you can still die fighting." ~Yune
___________________________________

Zelda GBC+ Engine for Multimedia Fusion 2
  • Doubleteam Project Page
Re: "Double-posting" with regard to Replies
« Reply #16 on: March 21, 2012, 11:17:12 pm »
  • Minalien
  • *
  • Reputation: +10/-1
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 2119
That really wouldn't help anything, Jeod. If you'd bothered to read the thread, you would see that this is a discussion on the validity of it, and more importantly the removal of redundancy within the rules dealing with it.
Logged
Quote
There's such a double standard about religion in the modern world. Catholics can gather, wear white robes, and say "In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti" and be considered normal.

But if my friends and I gather, wear black robes, and say  "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn", we're considered cultists.
  • Development Blog

Jeod

Team Dekunutz, Doubleteam
Re: "Double-posting" with regard to Replies
« Reply #17 on: March 22, 2012, 03:10:06 am »
  • *
  • Reputation: +3/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 1675
Quote from: Min宇宙人 on March 21, 2012, 11:17:12 pm
That really wouldn't help anything, Jeod. If you'd bothered to read the thread, you would see that this is a discussion on the validity of it, and more importantly the removal of redundancy within the rules dealing with it.

I was just offering a solution to those who want to keep it. But my own personal opinion? Tolerate double posting and get over it. It's just a post below a post.
Logged
"You should challenge your fates. When all else fails, you can still die fighting." ~Yune
___________________________________

Zelda GBC+ Engine for Multimedia Fusion 2
  • Doubleteam Project Page
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »

 


Contact Us | Legal | Advertise Here
2013 © ZFGC, All Rights Reserved


Page created in 0.305 seconds with 73 queries.

anything