Define quality.

In lieu of my ground breaking (for me anyway...almost four years here and this is all I’ve got) 700th post, I’d like to ask you all a question.
In your opinion, how do you define a quality member? How do you remember certain posters?

WATS score alone?

Post Counts?

Star to Post Ratio?

Longevity of the member?

Something totally different?

Because it’s your alternate profile? (nah, just kidding…)

Here’s a confession. In my time here, and this is really dependent on the thread and/or forum I’m in, I’ve gotten to the point where I automatically “ignore” certain posts in a thread…almost like I just subconsciously don’t see them . I don’t see their name, or their mini profile, it’s just like they are invisible to me. Lately, I’ve stopped myself to see why…I’ll go back and reread all the stuff I usually skip, and oddly enough, it’s usually one liners that don’t contribute anything, and surprisingly, its not just the newer members that are habitually doing it.

For me, quality doesn’t necessarily = wall’s of texts in their posts. Just bring something relevant to the discussion, and I’ll remember your name.

How about you?

To me it's really about the content in a post and mostly the intention behind it. Differing opinions than mine, I really don't mind, as long as it's done with respect.

Peace and much Love!!

I think if it's something thought-provoking, or something that contributes to the over-all awareness of what's going on in our world, or even adds to the cloud of theories regarding metaphysical stuff, I'll have a look.

Since politics and religion generally don't go anywhere, I'll ignore it. Why? Because they are inconclusive, insignificant, and irrelevant. Your opinion may differ...I won't argue the point. But that is how I view it.

Not that my thought on the matter really makes a difference, but I can see where you're coming from. One-liners usually don't contribute a lot, and a wall of text can be 90% bull# and the rest a simple speculative game of ring-around-the-rosy.

All in all, it's where your interests lie, and what you value most. That differs from member to member, so there's really no precise system. I'm glad you brought this up, though...maybe members need to take a closer look at the stuff they automatically ignore...you know, just to make sure they aren't missing the diamond for the rough.

You never know where the gems are.

ha! i don't post alot on here with my own take of things on here,but i do reply alot.
the reason for this is that you get attacked alot!!!
mind you,when i do post a question,ats members are quick to help!
but for the most part,if you express your opinion on something someone else posted,your setting your self up for a verbal slap in the face! its happening alot more frequently lately,and thats kinda sad.
just had it happen this morning by some english guy calling me an ignorant yank! i'm canadian!!!
too many people are toquick to judge.
it's easier to hate than to understand i suppose!
peace

Quality on ATS - I think it's best found when you don't just write something up and then post. I think you produce quality when you actually take the time out to really think about what you're saying, when you make the time to re-read your post/thread a few more times and so on because it does make a huge difference.

I think we need to remember that ATS is not a race to get an opinion or alternative viewpoint in, and turning it into some sort of competition can be, and is, hugely damaging to over all quality. Hell, the 'competition factor' is a great detriment here, in my opinion. Instead make the site something personal to you, feel the need to learn, or indeed teach, and in my opinion quality is then truly found/made.

A quality member is someone who takes the time out to put that little bit of extra effort and thought into the mix. Someone who bothers to try and make a difference here. The WATS rating, the borders, the post counts, the stars count, the flag count etc., mean very little, something I've learnt in my time here. A new member who's a day old could in theory produce the greatest thread this website has ever seen while the most experienced and decorated could post nonsense.

reply to post by Juston
I have a dream...that someday, ATS posters may be judged according to the quality of their content, and not according to the numbers on their mini-profiles...

I'll give most posts a read, but admit quite a few get discounted for either adding nothing (while usually being amusing, granted), appear to be one-trick ponies who continue to rehash the same trite opinions while providing nothing new (here's looking at a couple of my favorite active anti-Paul posters), or are just so messy and uninformed that I can't do much with them.

Everyone gets their chance, though - and they score if they add actual opinion with due consideration, are willing to consider alternate views even if they disagree with them, and act with respect and kindness.

Originally posted by Juston
In lieu of my ground breaking (for me anyway...almost four years here and this is all I’ve got) 700th post, I’d like to ask you all a question.
In your opinion, how do you define a quality member? How do you remember certain posters?

WATS score alone?

Post Counts?

Star to Post Ratio?

Longevity of the member?

Something totally different?

Because it’s your alternate profile? (nah, just kidding…)



How about you?

WATS Score - naw.

Post Counts? Only occasionally, and in reverse. As in members who are posting averages of 20 to 30 a day, over weeks, months, whatever. Shows the possibility of quantity over quality. Or someone not taking time to read, ponder, or more or less think before posting.

Star to Post Ratio? Well, problem there is that stars have become a popularity thing, they don't automatically indicate quality.

Longevity of Member? Well a little perhaps. I do tend to look at the date of member joining combined with post count. A post count of over 1000 may look great, until you see that its a brand new member. I also tend to look with a more critical eye on threads by members who blow through the 20 post minimum for thread writing to get a thread put up their first day or so.

Bottom line for me, I read. I consider. And when I see a pattern, I may post a comment or two to a low quality contributor, and then set them on ignore in my head for the future.

ATS has, and has had some awesome members who have contributed to the overrall quality of this site. It isn't the length of the post or thread. It isn't a matter of wrong or right. It isn't a matter of stars and flags.

All you need do is look at their contributions to see what quality is, and what it means. By no means is the following exhaustive, but it will give anyone an idea of the quality these members produce, while still maintaining a diversity of perspective and interests.

Not in any particular order. And not because I agree or disagree with any of them.

Zorgon
Rising Against
Phage
Slayer69
Kandinsky
Undo
Muzzleflash
Noreaster
Dimensional Detective
Lucidity
CLPrime
Jean Paul Zodeau
And some of our Mods too.

And the list could go on. These are just off the top of my head. These and more, are what I call quality members.