Proposition: Increase or Eliminate 10k Character Limit

Discussion in 'SF Open Government' started by Tiassa, Mar 6, 2015.

?

Petition the Administration to increase or eliminate current character limit per post?

Poll closed Mar 20, 2015.
  1. Yes

    7 vote(s)
    38.9%
  2. No

    11 vote(s)
    61.1%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,051
    Bells,
    The first bit was at least partly tongue-in cheek, but I want to clarify the "effort" part: I didn't mean you don't favor effort, I meant you favor putting the effort somewhere different from where I favor it. I value concise and consumable more; you value thoroughness more (though the two aren't necessarily mutually exclusive). I understand that in rare occasion where a really long post is needed for thoroughness, a limit could get in the way. However, as Tiassa has so amply (if accidentally) demonstrated, the problem of long, off-topic rants is also very real.
    Certainly not as much as Tiassa, but:
    Tiassa revealed a deep-seated hatred for myself and others - a months old grudge in my case - which has clearly motivated his posts since #20, since he's talked about little else. But I voted before that first rant, and I did so based on the merrits of the discussion held before my first post. Nowhere have I made an argument for my vote based on a personal issue with Tiassa - heck, I didn't even know there was a personal issue between me and Tiassa until he said it! So not only is that a false representation of where my position comes from, it makes no sense due to the timeline of my voting/original posting.

    Let me say that again, more succinctly: I didn't change my vote, so unless I'm inclined to follow Tiassa around, trolling him - and I slow-played this one, knowing he'd explode at me without provocation, I couldn't possibly have voted based on how he's behaved toward me in this or any other thread.

    Similarly, someone (I think you, but not sure - don't feel like flipping-back a few pages) accused a vote-switcher of changing a vote based on personal feelings, but the poster in question was clear that the reason was understanding the pros/cons better. The implied and in some cases overt claim from you/Tiassa is that we're lying about our own opinions and motives, even those of us who expressed those opinions before being explosively attacked. That's a serious problem if that's really how little you think of your members, particularly ones who bring professional science experience to a forum that at least in-name is a science forum.
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,359
    Ah Bells... the mind reader an master of de-es·ca·lation... j/k... you'r nether

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    However... you'r pont about the pathological posters is well taken an i suggest perma-bans... an then wit those posters gone... Tassa will be able to tell people they are fulla-sht wit-out complaint

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Kittamaru Now nearly 40 pounds lighter. Staff Member

    Messages:
    11,912
    Some people follow directives about as well as your average cat takes a bath...
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. dumbest man on earth Real Eyes Realize Real Lies Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,795
  8. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,985
    Tiassa should be banned.
     
  9. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,359
    I thank a simple apology woud win frinds/gain respect.!!!
     
  10. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,985
    An apology from me? What exactly would do I haveto apologize for? Maybe I've been affected by pedophiles who try to intimidate and treat me as nothing but an object and this "moderartor" is trying to be smart but actually is nothing near my level of education? Telling me I'm stupid? I think I can be angry, thank you.
     
  11. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,359
    No an apology from Tiassa... i thank it woud be realy good for him... regular posters an Scifourms as a whole.!!!
     
  12. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    34,089
    Thank you for helping make my point.

    Would you prefer a less concise, and more precise answer?

    It is one thing to tell a person what they think in terms of what their outlook or opinion equals in effect; see "Southern Strategy" of conservative politics for a hotbed of this sort of assessment, insofar as it is on record that the point of the Southern Strategy is to use non-racist policy language to achieve racist effects.

    It is, however, something else to tell a person what they think by re-writing the argument. And then declaring the straw man self-evident, which is conveniently concise in dodging any responsibility to explain the transformation.

    Your complaint is illustrative of the problem with the form of concision I demonsrated.

    Bullshit? What is "blatantly obvious" to him is the exact opposite of what is written. And what is his explanation? That it is self-evident. If he isn't being deliberately dishonest, the issue is one of reading comprehension. Either way, it is, in fact, completely full of excrement. And note that with the more precise explanation, they really don't have an answer except more of exactly what I mocked, and you have complained about. So thank you for complaining. Yes, it would have been better of me to explain why I disagreed with his interpretation, but that's the thing, what you're complaining about is standard fare around here, and that's problematic. I'm always amused that people pretend to be shocked and appalled when moderators take part in what so many in the community seem to want.

    And watching people argue for constriction of rational discourse? That's just a bonus, I guess.
     
  13. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,359
    Personaly... im oK wit tellin sombody ther fulla-sht... as long as its oK for everbody... not just mods.!!!
    If its not oK... then it shoudnt be oK for anybody... includin mods.!!!

    Do you agree wit that.???
     
  14. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    34,089
    In the abstract, no. The complication is one I have attempted to illustrate, so perhaps I might put the question to you because, well, here we are: Would it be better to tell someone why you think they're full of shit, or just leave it as such as I did in earlier posts?

    Consider, for instance, that all I did in #41↑ above is state my sentimental reaction without putting any effort into the phrasing or explaining why I felt that way; and then I tipped my hand. Notice, please, that nobody complaining seems to want to respond to that last.
     
  15. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,273
    It has been made abundantly clear that it is not OK unless you are Tiassa or Bells. (See Tiassa's earlier post.)
     
  16. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,359
    You know what... i will accept that as an apology... an now i consider you my newest best frind

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  17. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,359
    This cant be easy for Tiassa... an im willin to let by-gones be by-gones... so from now on i accept that mods an regular posters will all be subject to the same rules.!!!
     
  18. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    29,990
    You know, we used to have a rule of thumb that said something like: people who publically call for others to be banned should be banned themselves. Just saying...
     
  19. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,359
    That woud be a fine clear cut rule that people coud get behind an i thank it woud benefit Sciforums as a whole... an anuther one even beter... anybody callin someone a "Troll" woud receive moderation.!!!
    That very act of "Troll" name callin... fires up more flames/causes more forum wars than any other thang.!!!
     
  20. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,051
    Disappointing, James.
     
  21. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    29,990
    Disappointing that such a rule would apply in respect of moderators as well as ordinary members?
     
  22. tali89 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    343
    So people shouldn't be allowed to vote, because their supposed reason for placing a vote might not be acceptable to you? Wow, I'm speechless.

    Edit: By the way, I like how you made sure to use the purple moderation font. Could you be more arrogant?
     
  23. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    29,990
    Ok. We're calling this one done.

    Really. Get over yourselves, people! This was a tentative proposal to increase the character limit on posts. And look what it has turned into. Bloch voting based on whether people like or don't like Tiassa?

    Well, it's Open Government, and it looks like the people have decided.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page