New warning categories, One-Liners, Big Quotes, and Avatars.

We've long had an ATS policy that encourages meaningful posts, and limited quoting when responding. Moderators now have been given the task to help ATS post-quality by paying attention to the following minor infractions: 1) One-Line or Minimal Posts These are obvious. Simple "me too" or "ditto" posts... or posts containing smilies are frowned upon in ATS. One sentance that contributes to the topic is fine, but not a row of smilies or a silly comment as your only reply. When we see one of these, you'll get a minor warning in your U2U in-box. 2) Heavy Quoting You know what these are, members who quote entire posts, sometimes with nested quotes, and severely disrupt the readability of a thread. Please, when quoting, edit the quoted portion to only the amount you need to make your point. 3) Inappropriate Avatars Some members are still attempting to push the limits, even after we modified this: www.abovetopsecret.com... So, SuperMods and Admin are able to immediately delete inappropriate avatars. In both the first and second cases, you'll be asked to edit your post, and will receive a minor 50 point penalty. There are no "pionts penalties" associated with needed to delete your avatar, unless you continually use an inappropriate image, then full warnings may occur. These efforts are in place not to give our staff a new way to spank members (though some need repeated spanking it seems) but to offer gentle reminders that contribute to keeping the content quality of ATS superior. [Edited on 5-3-2004 by SkepticOverlord] [Edited on 8-3-2004 by SkepticOverlord]

I hate the small replies too, and do try not to post anything like that. I daresay I have been responsible of some of the long quotes though, but usually only because I thought they were needed with regards the thread. (And I never just quote without adding my own take on things).

(I was tempted to just leave the reply and nothing else, but that would have just been taking the piss )

Having just been penalised for putting "WTF?" in a post I think this idea is totally stupid.
Penalising people for short responses will not encourage discussion, but it will lose you members.
If you don't want people to write short responses, then don't make it so people CAN write short responses, put a minimum character limit on the board instead.

Originally posted by �any
Having just been penalised for putting "WTF?" in a post I think this idea is totally stupid.
Penalising people for short responses will not encourage discussion, but it will lose you members.
If you don't want people to write short responses, then don't make it so people CAN write short responses, put a minimum character limit on the board instead.

They have a character limit in place, but if you quote someone that can satisfy the limit.

i think this is a good idea.

i know that i'm guilty of both infractions, and will do my best to not have to be warned or cause said problems.

Originally posted by �any
If you don't want people to write short responses, then don't make it so people CAN write short responses, put a minimum character limit on the board instead.

I agree with that suggestion. if bandwidth drain is what you are trying to eliminate, than such a preprogrammed limitation will get you guys much closer to that goal than passive restrictions. deducting points is a clever idea, but it will only serve to discourage posters who are already becoming tiresome of all of these enforced rules and regulations. (im not one of them; im all for moderation as it can be very helpful towards information sharing)

and such, I admit, I agree with you, SO, because anyone can just think about their response and realize "nah... it's not worth it. no one is going to read or care about it anyway, especially if it's going to be one or two words". using a bit of brainpower isn't a bad thing, right?

Dany - we don't want contributions like "WTF" one liners. If you want to make them, go elsewhere. By limiting discussion, we enrich ATS, like filtering out impurities.

[Edited on 4-3-2004 by ktprktpr]

Originally posted by AlnilamOmega if bandwidth drain is what you are trying to eliminate,

No... it's not bandwidth. We've purchased a monthly limit (700 gigabytes) that we're well-under. However...excessive quoting does add to the size of the database... which does tend to slow-down the entire board at times.

Originally posted by ktprktpr
Dany - we don't want contributions like "WTF" one liners. If you want to make them, go elsewhere. By limiting discussion, we enrich ATS, like filtering out impurities.

[Edited on 4-3-2004 by ktprktpr]

Righto then, seeya.

Uh Oh, thats a bad habit of mine...Im getting better though DOC....

Originally posted by ktprktpr
like filtering out impurities.

Not everyone can be pure, should they all be filtered out?

That begs the question, earthtone- do we want quality or quantity? I would personally rather have the longer posts. It's a blessing, but most idiocy is restrained to one liners. Take thsoe out fo the system, we take out a lot of useless crap like finding a quote and a thumbs-up every three replies.

DE

You think I don't agree with the reasoning behind these new restrictions? There is nothing better than viewing a quality topic, with great replies/arguments in response and the recent additions to the site may help, but with the thread voting as well, doesn't anyone feel a little over moderated? Dany does, he just told me he's left the board.

I think ATS is running pretty good now......The ATSNN took away from some of the debating but I guess thats ok....and the moderating seems to be "OK"....I do think quality over quanity is a good thing but some one liners are what makes us a community of posters and keeps everyone on their feet.

Good observations dreamz.

I view this as more of a...passing affair. Members learn to play by the rules, and once the growth spurt is done the mods will take everyone off the short leash. I hope Dany comes back, personally- he's a pretty decent poster. The problem lies in the better part of the newbs in my opinion, and the other members have to take one for the team while they either adapt or move on. My personal opinion is a little culling is needed. Again, most senior members and even a few newbs are pretty good about this sort of stuff (I'll admit I do some of this stuff too-but it's a bad habit).

Some things don't need more than one line, though. I sure hope this is temporary...

DE

[Edited on 5-3-2004 by DeusEx]

I agree DE and Dany was a good poster...I hope he returns....to much control is exactly what this board is trying to fight with the government so its kind of against what they are promoting, yet they are trying to enforce. I see it as a passing as well......One liners are sometimes needed also because something someone wanted to say has already been said and people still want to know that it is their opinion.....even if it matches another posters.

One liners are allowed on BTS i think.

Don't get all panicky, this doesn't (by a long shot) mean that every one line response will be any sort of problem, it is a small minority of said posts. The ones that don't continue the discussion at all, or serve any particular purpose.

A good example of this is the people who post.

LOL!!

or

Good post!

On BTS (and many ATS forums) this doesn't matter. But its pathetic to see threads full of this in serious forums, or on ATSNN. It smacks of people trying to increase their post/point count, and this is what precipitated these changes.

On BTS 1 liners are kind of allowed right?