Parking Lot Posts Should Count in the Offseason

-What about when you're necessarily evil?


Negative rep points for not being evil to the point that it would be considered excessive and unnecessary.
:FIREdevil

How about 2 post counts - one for football forums and one for non-football forums. Of course, I have no idea how difficult that would be to setup.

How about 2 post counts - one for football forums and one for non-football forums. Of course, I have no idea how difficult that would be to setup.

Why? To what end?

How about 2 post counts - one for football forums and one for non-football forums. Of course, I have no idea how difficult that would be to setup.

I don't really see the need for that quite honestly. As long as you (the collective you) follow the rules and add value to the board when you contribute you've got nothing to worry about.

Why? To what end?

Just offering a solution to the problem posed. Personally, I don't care.

Perfect solution. We need someone to write a program that allows users of this site to select whether or not they want any of their individual posts to count towards their total post count. That way the people who just want to be recognized for their insightful, well-reasoned posts can ensure we only notice those. Whereas the Those That Shall Not Be Named crowd can credit themselves for all of their posts and allow their self-esteem to grow, grOW, GROW.

Honestly, I'm totally embarrassed everytime I look at my post count because I definitely realize that after 2 years perhaps 35 of them are decent and credit worthy.

A person's value to this board should not be measured by number of posts. If someone wants to be "rewarded" then write strong, well-reasoned posts and you'll probably get positive rep points. And even if you don't, I think we all know who the valuable members of this board are.

But I understand your frustration. You're thinking someone might see you with just a few hundred posts and wonder why they should listen to you, you n00b. But I'm telling you that you needn't worry so much about what others think....just what I think :)

Seriously though, quality not quantity. I don't mind posts counting, but don't think it's a must.

The number of posts doesn't have any bearing on the poster. Look at it this way - SmootSmack has over 19,000 posts, while I'm under 3,500. Is SmootSmack better than me? Yes, and measurably. But five times better? Not even close.

More upsetting than the Parking Lot posts not counting is that the top-secret moderators-only forum where we make fun of regular people doesn't count. That's not fair to us.

The number of posts doesn't have any bearing on the poster. Look at it this way - SmootSmack has over 19,000 posts, while I'm under 3,500. Is SmootSmack better than me? Yes, and measurably. But five times better? Not even close.

More upsetting than the Parking Lot posts not counting is that the top-secret moderators-only forum where we make fun of regular people doesn't count. That's not fair to us.

can we get an behind the forum access to that?

If post counts truly don't matter to people, then we should never see another milestone thread ever again. If I see a milestone thread, I'm going to assume the number of posts you have means something to you and you're essentially being a hypocrite when you say otherwise. Why should I congratulate you on something you deem to be insignificant? I didn't do a milestone thread when I hit 1000, because first of all, I didn't care and secondly, I didn't see the point in celebrating a year of overall mediocrity on my part. :)

The nuts and bolts of this argument is not about whether people think post count reflects a member's value to the site. It's about the "earthquake rule" and trying to deter a certain type of posting behavior. I'm just wondering if taking away the counts from the PL actually achieved its desired effect or not. If it didn't, then what's the harm in reinstating them?

If post counts truly don't matter to people, then we should never see another milestone thread ever again. If I see a milestone thread, I'm going to assume the number of posts you have means something to you and you're essentially being a hypocrite when you say otherwise. Why should I congratulate you on something you deem to be insignificant? I didn't do a milestone thread when I hit 1000, because first of all, I didn't care and secondly, I didn't see the point in celebrating a year of overall mediocrity on my part. :)

The nuts and bolts of this argument is not about whether people think post count reflects a member's value to the site. It's about the "earthquake rule" and trying to deter a certain type of posting behavior. I'm just wondering if taking away the counts from the PL actually achieved its desired effect or not. If it didn't, then what's the harm in reinstating them?

I love that the rule is named after me