Suitable discussion?

[PsychicHeart]

Amen to that!!

[2ma2]

Babar: Consider yourself flamed.

Farlander: I assume your point be that actual linguistic quality or presentation defines thread quality, independant of content? But is this true? Correct spelling and grammar might be pleasant to watch and heighten readibility, but interesting topics may be lost just because the persona have limited knowledge of the english language, or textual communication at large. If we think a topic is interesting, yet lack presentation or actual punctuation, is it not our duty to establish the discussion with a reply adding this? Because if it is not, then why bother replying in the first place.

Andail: But what defines 'better'? And what is something worthy to share? Despite my lack of posting, I do read the forums almost daily, and follow threads that interest me. And other threads I do not follow. Must it be another way?

LJUBI: No.

Kinoko: Yes I will PM-flame you. But let's ot discuss that.

The fact that you can 'get away' with something apparantly silly and worthless ties in to Farlanders thoughts of presentation value. Also Hyde's oh so true remark on how 'oldies' make silly posts aswell from time to time, without suffering. But your other ideas are more interesting. The fact that you wish to discuss with people with similar interests, references and preferences implies you see the forum as something dear and close to you. In fact, something that in many ways are yours.

This is a natural development of human social behaviour, but a world wide forum presents the villager hostility rather openly. Adapt or suffer the consequences. We are very much threatened by people entering our spheres bringing change, but where a village could always bring the pitchforks and torches to get rid of nasty elements, a forum is owned by noone and a result of its inhabitants. So the notion of qualitative threads is just a matter of personal taste of the established forumites. My question is; Who are we to decide a threads value by our subjective preferences?

DG: With that, I think we have reached two separate notions that attract our forumites tastes. Presentation and substance. But where presentation is very much based on subjectivity, substance is more solid. Or is it? Bringing up your example, I can retrive very much sustance from that:

Growth, frustration of physical appearance, exposition, school relations, puberty and how that affects all of the aformentioned and actual relief of being considered 'normal'.

Where it lacks in presentation, and writing of reflection, if you read between the lines, you can pick up and interpret reflection pretty easy due to the naïvistic use of words. And that may either spawn discussions on the perils of puberty, the aspiration of fitting in and the fear of not doing such. Your other point is regarding the receiver. Where a blog is almost anonymous, a forum works with a specific set of receivers, and this notion is much more interesting. As Kinoko mentioned, she knew the community well enough to know what works and what does not. So in such a matter, it is near impossible to make a valid thread as a newcomer since you have no means of knowing the forumites preferences without some intense lurkings; and even then, the familarity between regulars spawn jokes, nudges and irony that might give the wrong impression of a community.

Basically, he/she can write that, but you can't. No actual question here, just a reflection. It is like this in all social gatherings, www or no www.

Ghormak: I love you

Squinky: Is that really true? Often, being in a group with a common interest makes you debate outrageous sillyness without knowing eachother that well at all. Well, ok, perhaps the Order of Perpetual Sorrow might not discuss breakfast cereals vividly, but in any sense, I can tell you dozens of people I've had immensly silly discussions with, without knowing them at all. Just having something in comment. I can only speak of myself ofcourse.

Eldkatt: Regardless of your wonderful input, I must PM-flame you now..

[Nacho]

No Linnus, you completelly missed my point. I was talking of effort. There are some "IMO annoying" posts are perfect gramatically, but they aint more than a line or an extremelly short/lack of effort brief. As Yaksplit said... Why should we spent more than 5 seconds replying to a thread made in 30? The most effort, the most enthusiastic reply.

I am very bad at grammar, as you can see... ^_^ But I try to present my threads propperly and put effort into it...

[Kinoko]

Kinoko: Yes I will PM-flame you. But let's ot discuss that.

The fact that you can 'get away' with something apparantly silly and worthless ties in to Farlanders thoughts of presentation value. Also Hyde's oh so true remark on how 'oldies' make silly posts aswell from time to time, without suffering. But your other ideas are more interesting. The fact that you wish to discuss with people with similar interests, references and preferences implies you see the forum as something dear and close to you. In fact, something that in many ways are yours.

This is a natural development of human social behaviour, but a world wide forum presents the villager hostility rather openly. Adapt or suffer the consequences. We are very much threatened by people entering our spheres bringing change, but where a village could always bring the pitchforks and torches to get rid of nasty elements, a forum is owned by noone and a result of its inhabitants. So the notion of qualitative threads is just a matter of personal taste of the established forumites. My question is; Who are we to decide a threads value by our subjective preferences?

But I think that's just it. We dont 'decide', and we should be open minded, but at the same time, what's wrong with every individual who wants to expressing their opinion of a post?

[DGMacphee]

DG: With that, I think we have reached two separate notions that attract our forumites tastes. Presentation and substance. But where presentation is very much based on subjectivity, substance is more solid. Or is it? Bringing up your example, I can retrive very much sustance from that:

Growth, frustration of physical appearance, exposition, school relations, puberty and how that affects all of the aformentioned and actual relief of being considered 'normal'.

Where it lacks in presentation, and writing of reflection, if you read between the lines, you can pick up and interpret reflection pretty easy due to the naïvistic use of words.

You make Fluke out to be some kind of Peter Sellers-like character from the movie Being There where the most banal blatherings can cause deep thinkers to go, "Hmm, yes he does have a point!"

Could media analysts in 50 years time read Fluke's posts and scatch their heads while thinking, "Hmmm, what could these strange texts mean? This man is wise beyond his years!"

I honestly doubt it. But stranger things have happened so, meh, I could be wrong.

All I can say is sure, I agree with you that there's a lot of insight in Fluke's posts on the perils of puberty... but only if you're psychology professor investigating teen development (and let's fact it, there are hundreds of those guys on this board every single day)!

But if that's the case, I might as well do the same thing... Start threads on the most trivial aspects of my life. For example: "today cleaned some storage sheds! IT WAS AWESOME cuase i used a BRUSH! then i drove home! watch out cars i'm in a hurry! weeeeee". I'm sure from that you could extrapolate great substance on the mind of a 24-year-old dickhead.

Now imagine if we all did this. Ta-da! You're just created the internet version of a toilet bowl.

See, a lot of the threads on this forum do have some specific purpose. Ususally it's someone looking for a specific piece of software, someone with material to debate, or shameless bragging.  Notice Fluke didn't cop too much flack for his "please help me with my homework" thread (even though the bastard should do his own damn homework)! See, that thread at least had a purpose.

But to tell us that he's grown a couple of inches? Great. Good for him. But does he really have to announce it here? To quote David Cross, I don't cream my pants when the guy at the donut shop gets my order right.

Maybe that's just my grumpy, old man perspective on things. But that's just it -- a perspective. To be honest, I don't really care. I do the same thing as Ghormak... I just ignore those threads and carry on with my life. But since the issue has been brought to light (like it has sooooo many times in the past), I figured I'd add my cashews to the mixed nuts.

Also, what Farlander said about effort. Farlander may not have the best grasp of English but the dude tries his best every single time to get very insightful points across.

[2ma2]

Farlander: Ah, right, that's another Barbie to fry. But then again, what defines effort? It is possible that someone spend 3 hours thinking on how to formulate something, and then yet write one line, be lacking of effort? I do see your point though..

Kinoko: Nor do I, I do not try to defend useless posts, I just want to cause a ruckus. The point is not to accept all posts, but to heighten the awareness on why we do not accept all posts. Because in that sense, the flames of people annoyed are just as valid as the post that annoyed them in the first place.

DG: I do not think that text has deeper meanings, but when reading between the lines, you can find substance. I can agree that less is more only if the lesser is based out of the more and carefully cut out in a conscious way. Or in a more suitable wording: To say little, you have to think big.

However..
"But does he really have to announce it here?"
..that goes for basicallly anything. The line between interest and pointless crap is next to zip. And the bastard is elastic aswell. To clarify; the forum rules, both official and inofficial are not based on anything but constructed preferences without any basis other than sociocultural (in)differences. Therefor, how can you decide wether a thread topic has value or not before it actually do get feedback?

[Andail]

Nobody said it's easy to draw the line, but there is a line somewhere, and we have to draw it.

You have a line too, Linus. If somebody would start three threads in a row stating "poobungies" along with eleven exclamation marks, you would find them rather useless as well.
At the moment the tolerance of the general member of this forum is just slightly below yours, it seems. There's nothing wrong with you being extra tolerant, but we're all different.
In the end, CJ sets the standard.

[DGMacphee]

Linus, I have an assortment of ideas in regards to your queries.

DG: I do not think that text has deeper meanings, but when reading between the lines, you can find substance. I can agree that less is more only if the lesser is based out of the more and carefully cut out in a conscious way. Or in a more suitable wording: To say little, you have to think big.

In that case, I think the problem with Fluke's posts is that he doesn't think big either. He limits the sphere of his inital post to himself and never really opens things up for discussion. I think he needs to expand his posts to encourage better communication.

"But does he really have to announce it here?"
..that goes for basicallly anything. The line between interest and pointless crap is next to zip. And the bastard is elastic aswell. To clarify; the forum rules, both official and inofficial are not based on anything but constructed preferences without any basis other than sociocultural (in)differences. Therefor, how can you decide wether a thread topic has value or not before it actually do get feedback?

I'm not too sure how you came to the conclusion that something that has interest has the same value as something that's pointless (if that is what you're saying) -- I can see what you're saying in some regards, but at the same time i ask if it's either helpful or harmful. It's a pretty big leap that you haven't really justified to well, other than "that goes for basicallly anything". It's sort of like comparing salmon to a MacDonald's Fillet o' Fish and concluding they both are edible because they're both food. (DG notes: you can build you own house with Micky-D's Fillet o' Fishes as bricks. The special sauce also makes a good substitute for concrete.) We humans crave information as much as we crave food. Even more so in some cases. If the choice was up to me, I'd pick the threads that taste like salmon. But that's because I'd a snobbish bastard. (Can someone pass the grey poupon, please?)

I think there's a difference between a thread that encourages the free exchange of ideas in order to make us an enlightened community, and one that focuses squarely on the trivialities of a 13-year-old. I don't think that has as much to do with alienating sociocultural differences because Fluke is more than welcome to give his 2 cents in any of the other major topics out there and I'm sure he's contributed at least some nuggets of insight to our more popular topics. Hooray for freedom of speech! And I'm not disregarding his worth as someone who can provide insight. But when setting a particular agenda for a thread (as in "Okay, we're going to discuss this: blah blah blah"), he really needs to try harder.

My guess is this forum assumes a fairly high level of maturity of its members. That's not to say people under 16 can't join. They can. They just have to be willing to participate in communications that require a more mature tone. It's fine to discuss the heights of all form members, but make the thread a little more relevant. Expand the height issue so people aren't going, "So what?"

How about something like:

hey Guys!

i've had a huge growth spurt in the last few days. now all my friends won't call me shorty.

fluke: 1, puberty: 0

**how about you? did you have any difficulties with you height? or puberty in general? share your stories...**

kthxby

I've tried to replicate Fluke's typing style to show that presentation is no big deal as such, but my main point is its at least a initial post that can encourage discussion. The bit with the asterisks where I ask what the rest of the forum thinks is key.

But I don't think it's unjust for users here to become critical when Fluke posts some random blatherings about his height and expect them to actually give a shit. Once again, just my opinion. Maybe it's just a miscommunication on Fluke's behalfn

And to be honest, these forums are pretty lenient with such things. I've been to forums where people (normally 13 and 14 year-olds) start dud threads and then get the shit kicked out of them. If this was SomethingAwful, Fluke would have been banned by his second post. And even after paying the $10 to use the forums in the first place!

[EldKatt]

So a pointless, uninspiring thread can be improved by explicitly telling people to discuss it? I really don't think this is where the problem (or solution) lies. The flaws:

1. Discussion is the whole point of a discussion forum. Post something on a discussion forum, and people will discuss it (well, unless they ignore it) because the invitation to discussion is implied by the very fact that it's on a discussion forum. If there's any need to tell people to discuss, then you should really try to find another forum.

2. If you consider a thread--such as our favourite case-in-point, Flukebake's height thread--dull, pointless and with little food for further discussion, then the substance of the actual post and its subject can't be improved by tacking on that little remark. That's just icing on the cake. If it's a bad cake, no such icing will save it. If it's a good cake, it'll need no icing.

[IM NOT TEH SPAM]

Well, there's only so far you can stretch the "3 golden rules"... for example:

I start a thread about my life.  All the crap that happened to me and my family the past 13 years... written down into one huge post.  Sure, it could be interesting... mabye even helpful, and funny... but would it be right to post such a thread?  Of course not.  The "minimum age here is 16" is almost impossible to enforce.  I could be an 8 year old korean kid, or a 75 year old crazy jamacian guy simply pretending to be 13--and there's not a damn thing anyone could do to tell if it's true.  The "if you're not a mod." thing I dislike.  People use that too much when someone responds to a stupid comment.  Though it is a valid rule and point, it should be properly interpreted.  Also, it's very hipocritical to say something like that--by doing so, you are acting like a mod.

[Nacho]

No, EldKatt... As 2ma2 said, no thread is pointless, there is no divine law which says "DG MacPhee's political threads are good, Fluke's moogoo recipes are not". But a thread well presented, with some topics, explanations and personal experiences invite to share... whereas a post which has been made (thought, typed and posted) in 30 seconds does not invite to anything more than flaming the poster if you haven't had a good day, or simply ignore if you had a nice one.

[DGMacphee]

Aye. My point was not to say people should explicitly ask for feedback in threads. More so, my point was to open the sphere of your thread, take it to the next level, and give us something more.

[PsychicHeart]

a 75 year old crazy jamacian guy simply pretending to be 13--and there's not a damn thing anyone could do to tell if it's true.

how did you know (sorry, i'm just trying to keep these threads comedic admist all this hellish doom.)

[TheYak]

To me, it's all about investment.  Many people have started threads that share personal details (sometimes way too many) or a personal revelation.  Even the pretty pointless Ear Cyst thread by Geof revealed something potentially embarassing until you realize how very common it is (and how readily people discuss it when they themselves have that realization). 

When a thread doesn't invest anything that specifically pertains to the individual, people become indignant because they've (in essense) been asked to invest themselves in something that it seems the creator doesn't care about.  Why we haven't discovered that posts go away if they're ignored is beyond me. 

The height thread (to beat this one into the ground), could've been made more interesting with specifics, but more so if it were expanded with something other than a common factual statement.  Maybe instead of starting threads like this one, we could introduce a bitch-slap smiley and be a little more efficient about these things.  Let Fluke work on communication skills (which he has, obviously) and move on.   He's a scapegoat at the moment, but there've been more asinine personalities that've come and gone.   

Now if we could just fix DG, everything'd be swell.

[Squinky]

Now if we could just fix DG, everything'd be swell.

We'll just pretend we're taking him to the ice cream parlor instead of the vet. He'll understand eventually.

[DGMacphee]

Icecream? Oh boy! I'll definately come with you guHEYWAITAMINUTE!!

[2ma2]

Andail: Yes, we all have lines, and I really do not think I am a bit more tolerant than you. I am infact more fascist supportive and filled with contempt than you might imagine. But the thread was not about increased forum tolerance, but a discussion on how you set your line and what basis you use for putting it where you put it. Metadiscussion at it's worst..

And Happy Birthday f00!

DG: Yes, interest and pointless matters are on an objective basis the same thing. Value is something nonexistant. What does matter however I think you, Farlander and Eldkatt discussed to it's simple solution, and YakSpit took it down with great wording:

"but more so if it were expanded with something other than a common factual statement."

NOTE usage of word 'something'

To summarize:

A threads value is the result of undefinable axioms that differ the topic from mere factual statements to a discussional invitation.

These axioms are the result of the very core of human social interactions, thus impossible to define, only easy to spot when failed.

I am pleased. You may use this thread to further taunt DG (Hey, it's fun!) or perhaps debate wether bananas actually are deliscious or not. If you do must, feel free to question statement above.. but I'd rather you didn't. 

[Paper Carnival]

I am pleased. You may use this thread to further taunt DG (Hey, it's fun!) or perhaps debate wether bananas actually are deliscious or not. If you do must, feel free to question statement above.. but I'd rather you didn't.Ã, 

Why not turn it into a religious debate?

It all comes down to this: If you have accepted Jesus as your Lord and saviour, all your new started threads are automatically going to be interesting.

[Andail]

And Happy Birthday f00!

Thanks, mate

And there's no real point in complaining on DG. He's like a part of the furniture that came with this joint. You can try to taunt him, but you'll end up making out with him. Or something.

[TheYak]

Now I'm forever cursed with the image of Andail making out with furniture.