Attention Admin: Your 10-post rule sucks

[BluEyes]

so, guru, you would like 40 posts a day?

That's laughable.

I do agree in theory that people who have been around longer/have more rep, should be allowed a higher post cap whatever that may be...

On the other hand, someone mentioned above that anyone with time enough to post more than 10 interesting posts, simply spends far too long on here. There is merit in that, whichever way you look at it and however you would like to deny it.

 

[Latinoman]

Come on guys...NOBODY should determine how much time a member should spend in here. It is more than pretentious to even suggest that a person that spent time in here a particular day, is better served spending it somewhere else.


We are adults. We should not tell people what amount of time they should be spending in self-help message boards on a particular day. That's the member's prerrogative.

 

[reset]

Here is the part everyone is missing. Most posters here do not post over ten times a day. My average is under 5, whatever that means.

When a topic really does something for you, and you are "tuned into it", the natural thing is to want to ask, clarify, etc. and as you are changing and growing you can EASILY zoom past ten posts in a 24 hour period. For me those few times where I have done that, have given me the most GROWTH.

Now SS can do whatever it wants, but I'd appreciate if some guys here would get off their high-horses, and stop psychoanalzying other posters on whether they should be happy with a limit or not, and inferring the sort of lifestyle they lead based on post-count. Whatever works for you... works for YOU. You don't get to make that choice for another man.

(edit--looks like Latinoman and I agree on that one)

But anyway, I sure hope MM picks up again. I've been approached by three guys from another forum in the last couple days asking me about my "men's forum" and I told them to come here and check out MM. I have a feeling a lot of new users will read the announcement and think "ten posts? Whatever." and that's the last you'll see of them.

 

[Latinoman]

RECOMMENDATION RECOMMENDATION RECOMMENDATION

I understand the easiest way to deal with this is assigning a number of posts per day. It is obvious that the other suggestions will take a lot of work.

The problem here is that “day” is defined as your “last 1440 minutes”. So, any post you post in the last 1440 minutes will count toward your 10-post-count. We all know that in average the person with the most posts (Francisco) has an average of 8 posts per day. So, 10 posts is not a bad reference. However, the problem is that there are times in which a person does not posts for several days and then decides to post 20 or so posts in one day due to the level of discussion or debate or advice. Then that same person might go back to a 1 or 2 posts per day rate.

I say that if they must force a 10-post-per-day (or per 1440 minutes)…why not set a 60-posts-per-week (or per 10,080 minutes) instead? A week has 7 days. 60 posts per week means an average of 8 ½ posts per day (LESS than the current 10). But the advantage is that it allows people to post more than 10 posts in a particular day. If the person wants to post 30 posts in one day…then that person will only have 30 posts left for the remaining 6 days (or 5 posts per day). If a person posts 60 posts in one day…then that person will have to wait 6 more days before he/she can post again. THAT makes more sense to me than the 10-posts-per-day (e.g. 10-posts per your last 1440 minutes). I say…let’s make it 60 posts-per your last 10,080 minutes (or last 7 days).

 

[Francisco d'Anconia]

What we keep meandering around is that the quality of the posts aren't as good as they could be. Take a good look at the majority of the new posts created since the change and it's readily apparent. There's a myriad of new accounts created containing either:

1. Newfound "revelations" expounding on things which have been said before and easily found if someone would use the search function (Which Pen has suggested be stickied as something which should be done before posting).
2. Questions which focus on using tricks and subterfuge in order to get a woman. Also a ton of the same adolescent-like questions which seem to pop up every couple of weeks (again a good reason to do a search beforehand).

Threads of substance have hardly been touched. One of the most vibrant and information rich sections, The Mature Man Forum seems to be dying a slow death due to the lack of posts.

In my opinion the site definitely needed some housecleaning. Unfortunately instead of cleaning up the big piles of crap, the crap has just been spread out across the floor. No matter spread it, the crap is still there.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm casting no blame especially since someone said that this was kinda sprung on the Mods. But really the only thing that seems to effectively cleans up the crap is banning people, several times if necessary. That takes a hell of a lot of management overhead but that would seem to be a better way of maintaining quality.

We have rules in the forum which forbid threads on race, religion and politics in addition with rules of conduct which the majority of the forum members adhere to. The problem is typically with a handful of members who can not follow rules, get banned and come back as some other incarnation of Captain Save a AFC. Even though their posts aren't of the subject matter which is forbidden, it tends to be divisive and destructive. The threads tend to be pungent, rehashed diatribes which lack quality.

I would suggest managing the few members who posts detract from the positive energy of the forum. Certain members have been banned and particular posts and/or threads removed in the past which has had a positive effect on the forum. There has even been a couple of members who have come back and have made positive contributions after their reincarnation. Then there are those few who have come back countless times with the same recognizable message (I guess someone has found a +999 ring of reincarnation).

When it comes down to it we are not equal. We each have uniquely individual perspectives to contribute to the forum. Some of the contributions have been detrimental and in an attempt to fix that problem, we have been treated with the equality of those who are detracting from the quality of the forum. And now here we are, after one broad sweep of a brush as though all of the contributers to the forum are the same.

The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal.

 

[iqqi]

I understand that Allen wants more quality, less quantity. More profound posts. He has told me specifically that this forum is not a place to make friends or waste time. I remember when he told me that, I did feel kind of offended. Because this is a "community", why would making friends be a bad thing? But then again, I actually can see why. There tends to be a team up on certain posters, instead of actual discussion of ideas. <shrugs> There is a herd mentality, a group think, that I personally think is detrimental to new ideas.

As much as I like a good discussion, I also enjoy my occasional back and forths with Thundermaverick, and MNIN when he is wanting real time suggestions on what to text his latest disaster of the week. So I am sad that those real time "chats" or whatever will be less likely to happen. I am not a fan of PM's, I find them annoying.

So I don't know how I feel about this rule. I think excessive restriction/censorship is detrimental to a discussion board. However I think the results might be ok in the long run. PPL might pay more attention to the words being said in a post, and not so quick to jump on any battleships.

If I had to sum it up

Pros: Take time to say something important
Quality over quantity
Stop procrastinating on your life by spending so much time here
Break up of certain "herds"
It is fair

Cons: It is offensive
The reasons behind it contradict both "discussion" and "forum" or "community"
Humour and morale takes a nose dive
AE forum dies off
Less real time conversation, one of my fave things about this site


I know the number one way this will affect me is that I won't be responding as much to personal attacks, and that is a good thing.

 

[reset]

Uhm, after guys have repeatedly given you good advice, and taken an interest in helping you out, sorry, you're going to kind of look at these dudes as online friends. Sorry. Even if that's not what the intention was.

Priceless.

 

[iqqi]

Uhm, after guys have repeatedly given you good advice, and taken an interest in helping you out, sorry, you're going to kind of look at these dudes as online friends. Sorry. Even if that's not what the intention was.

Priceless.

I definately agree, I was pretty p!ssed for a minute when Allen said that.

However, I think the lesson to learn here is objectivity needs to prevail over subjectivity on a forum like this. There are some "fanatics" that will not disagree with a poster JUST BECAUSE they are "friends" or buddies. And you have to admit, that is kind of gay. Or they won't speak up when they agree with someone, because their "buddy" is that person's "enemy". It's really Sweet Valley High cliquish here sometimes, and I think that is more detrimental than any feeling of restriction.

There are a lot of lurkers who lurk solely because they don't want to get jumped on by the lynch mob. These people tend to communicate solely through PM's, and it gets ridiculous. Maybe now they will feel more secure in posting their ideas, without worry of getting run over by any groups of "buddies", or overtalked by certain members who reiterate the same thing over and over.

This forum is supposed to be a place to discuss topics, not pat each other on the back and circle jerk. Which has been a common complaint lately.

 

[Mr.Positive]

The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal.

The 10 post limit will not affect me personally...but, I feel I'm still here to learn. I couldn't contribute 10 posts in a day.

I think this rule will keep the posters with the most knowledge, and advise, from posting.

Some of the best posts are the ones that are straight from the gut..or the heart, with little thought on "how important" they are, because of a limit on them.

That's what really makes the sosuave "brotherhood". Shooting off opinions, advise, unedited....the real deal. What reality is.

You ask a question, seek help...bamm!! Like a right hook to our afc jaw. you get it, no limits. Straight up.

I would really hate to see that lost, because the guys (and gals) that could offer the most help, have to THINK too much on what posts to reply too.

 

[Señor Fingers]

I have very mixed feelings about this.

On one hand I have always been an advocate of getting people here into the real world so when they do post, they actually have something of substance to contribute. The armchair philosophers, trolls and keyboard jocks do pose a bit of a problem, so on that level I can appreciate the rule.

On the other hand, I don't like the fact that this rule is enforced on EVERYONE.
To me this is kind of a slap in the face to the few posters who post both quality AND quantity (yes it is possible). Why should people like Latinoman, Guru and others be lumped into the same category as everyone else?

If they want to take time off from the real world to really add something to this place (and help the young men who desperately need it), shouldn't it be their call?

On this level I do not like the rule at all.. it makes the assumption that we are all children who cannot control ourselves.

Personally this wont affect me much as I do not post that frequently. But the principle of this whole thing seems... OFF.

I am just not 100% convinced this will improve the forum in the long run.

Time will tell I suppose.

Gonna go clean out my PM box now.. been filling up like mad lately.

 

[Magma]

At first, I was all for the rule. However, VU made some comments that really made me wonder if the overall effect would be positive. I agreed with VU on the notion that a poster's body of work defines his personality to those of us in the online environment.

There are many posters here whom I clearly identify with, and take their advice more than others. This is because I have been able to see many posts by them and have also been able to discern who I trust and who I do not trust.

The thing that I find both equally appealing and concerning at the same time, is the feeling of comraderie here. We have found SS for different reasons, and continue to return for different reasons. Our collective life experiences and perceptions on life are what create such a dynamic environment. The downside is that, because of the feelings of comraderie, maybe there are some guys who spend more time on here than they should.

Now that is just my opinion. What you do with your own time is up to you. I don't judge anyone.

I have noticed a significant decline in activity though, especially in the MM forum. Time will tell. It will be interesting to see how things are when I get back from Africa in six weeks.

(post #3 for the day)

 

[reset]

There's a Mature Man section? You mean that ghost-town? How depressing. Heart of this site, ripped right out.

Actually at this point, how could I get to ten posts when the forum is dead?

 

[ThunderMaverick]

Just think, if you hadn't made this reply complaining, or the other two, you would have had 10 posts to talk about whatever you wanted. Instead, YOU CONTROLLED yourself to make 3 posts about a new rule that LIMITS POST.

Come on people, this isn't rocket science. Instead of complaining about having 10 posts a day to use, why not use those posts productively instead of wasting them on complaints? You are only doing it to yourselves here.

Just think, if this rule wasn't enforced in the first place I wouldn't be wasting my time trying to fight against it. Who said I didn't post productively while the 10 post rule wasn't active? Who says I didn't have great advice or great stories during the time the 10 post rule wasn't active?

You're making it seem like it's a great thing to constrict someone into posting what YOU think is quality. There are plenty of people who post quality AND quantity here. (Mods, you should feel guilty about this because you KNOW it's true!)

I love your last paragraph. It's like saying "Instead of fighting against a stupid rule, why succumb to it and conform, even if you don't like it." I love how you describe these glass prison bars as something positive.

As I said, I should be the one who decides if I'm going to make a quality post or not. NOT YOU or anyone else here. There are plenty of people who think quality post are subjective, that's why we have debates.

Just the very idea of limiting how much we post seems way too dictatorial for me. I don't like that controlling aspect of it.

 

[Quiksilver]

As far as I know, the mods were not aware of this announcement until it happened.

True there are members who post quality and quantity, but is asking for MORE quality in a less number of posts such a crime?

I still don't see how allowing 10 posts a day would diminish use of the site. 10 posts is more than enough, for me at least. Of course, I don't ask that everybody use this site as I do, that would be ignorant. Make of the new rule as you will... If you see it as "glass bars" and prison-like, then that is what it will be to you. Perhaps one might see it as an opportunity to step your game up, to really think and question yourself at every turn. Then again, who am I to tell people how to live.

This thread is tired...

 

[reset]

Latinoman's idea works, it acknowledges that most here don't post over 10 a day but occasionally it really helps to be able to post more than that.

 

[ThunderMaverick]

As far as I know, the mods were not aware of this announcement until it happened.

True there are members who post quality and quantity, but is asking for MORE quality in a less number of posts such a crime?

I still don't see how allowing 10 posts a day would diminish use of the site. 10 posts is more than enough, for me at least. Of course, I don't ask that everybody use this site as I do, that would be ignorant. Make of the new rule as you will... If you see it as "glass bars" and prison-like, then that is what it will be to you. Perhaps one might see it as an opportunity to step your game up, to really think and question yourself at every turn. Then again, who am I to tell people how to live.

This thread is tired...

Your second sentence sounds like double speak.

The problem is, is that whoever enforced this rule isn't asking; they're FORCING.

If you see it as "glass bars" and prison-like, then that is what it will be to you. Perhaps one might see it as an opportunity to step your game up, to really think and question yourself at every turn. Then again, who am I to tell people how to live.

The second part of that paragraph nullifies the first, and I agree with it.


Edit: So if the mods didn't do this, Allen did?

 

[iqqi]

Edit: So if the mods didn't do this, Allen did?

Allen = admin = god of sosuave.

DUH!

Yes, Allen did this.

And I am still on the fence about whether this is good or not. I guess Allen just got sick and tired of all the multiple posts and threads happening, I don't blame him. I mean, even Latinoman who is a good contributor, was REPOSTING his same posts, in the same threads! If this was my forum, I'd be annoyed as well.

There are less threads regarding sh!t like "red-blondes have it made and here's why" and "stuka's mathematical analysis on why men under 5'8.45 will never get laid by hot white women" and "please kill be I am short" and the such. I think that is a good thing!

But I don't feel as inclined to get involved in any real discussions.

And I don't respond to as many newbie threads either. But HEY! There is always the bible.

If this is a temporary forced break/time out for the forum, then I'd say it is needed.

 

[ThunderMaverick]

It might be a good thing for you too then, miss chatterbox.

Hmm. Maybe if it wasn't for you this might not have happened!

lulz

 

[iqqi]

You wasted a whole post to say that.

"lulz".



EDIT: This is post #5 I think. 5 more to go!

 

[Latinoman]

Allen = admin = god of sosuave.

And I am still on the fence about whether this is good or not. I guess Allen just got sick and tired of all the multiple posts and threads happening, I don't blame him. I mean, even Latinoman who is a good contributor, was REPOSTING his same posts, in the same threads! If this was my forum, I'd be annoyed as well.

I will break a few eggs to make sure people eat some scramble eggs.


If I took my time to give SERIOUS advice...and after two pages, I take my time and add more SERIOUS advice....and two more pages later, I add another bit of SERIOUS advice...if the thread reaches 8 or 10 pages, and NEW people that did not feel like reading several pages ask for the same advice, you better believe that I will REPOST those three posts and repeat the advice I gave and was lost between pages and pages of Iqqi-trolling and bickering. I will in fact, direct them to those three posts (by providing post # and a quote).

You see? I rarely repost the same advice in the same thread...unless that thread has reached SEVERAL pages of bickering and fighting...burying my SOLID-SERIOUS advice. And typically YOU are the common denominator in those bickering-trolling 10+ pagers.

Repeating solid advice in a 10+ pager should not be the issue. The issue should be the trolls-bickering that buried SOLID advice in a 10+ page thread.