Why Count Posts?

~~[MERIT]~~ · 05-12-2011, 05:33 PM

Just pondering why a forum counts it's members' posts. It is obvious that when considering the content of a member's posts, that QUALITY is more important than QUANTITY.

I would posit that whether it relates to music or not, it takes no more thought to vote in an "Album War" or to post "What You're Currently Listening To," than it does to tell us about your day or to complain in the "Bitch Box." Why one post should count towards your total, and the other not is a bit of a mystery to me.

I've been on forum's that have had "Rep" systems, and that did little to validate the actual content of a post either. Friends would "rep" each others' posts just to get their stats up, rendering the entire system meaningless.

I personally believe that an avatar, signature, join date and a username should be enough to distinguish a user's profile badge, letting their actual posts speak for themselves.

RVCA · 05-12-2011, 05:41 PM

Why not?

~~Sansa Stark~~ · 05-12-2011, 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RVCA

Why not?

/thread

~~[MERIT]~~ · 05-12-2011, 05:49 PM

"Why?" is equally valid an argument as "Why Not?"

Do you actually judge someone based on their post-count? No. (Or at least you shouldn't.)

It's completely meaningless. They should either all count, or none of them count. My personal opinion falls under the "None" category. It's like an attempt to quantify a user's value to the forum.

EvilChuck · 05-12-2011, 05:53 PM

Because post count = the size of your e-díck.

~~[MERIT]~~ · 05-12-2011, 06:15 PM

It's not like I'm losing any sleep over the matter, just thinking out loud.

I know that when I was younger and joined a forum, I would tend to give more value to the opinions of members who had the highest post counts. But after a while, it became evident that the two were not mutually eclusive. I'm guessing that some of the newer or younger members of the forum may feel the same way.

Maybe it's just my wanting a level playing field, with each person being judged on their own merit, rather than on their post count or tenure (Not that this doesn't happen already.)

Just a thought. I was curious what other's thought as well. No biggie.

**Janszoon** · 05-12-2011, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oojay

Maybe it's just my wanting a level playing field, with each person being judged on their own merit, rather than on their post count or tenure (Not that this doesn't happen already.)

Why do think post count and tenure are not a part of someone's own merit?

~~[MERIT]~~ · 05-12-2011, 06:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janszoon

Why do think post count and tenure are not a part of someone's own merit?

Because someone could be here 10 years and post 5,000 times in "What Are You Currently Listening To," adding absolutely ZERO value to the forum. Someone sees "Oh, they've been here 10 years and have 5,000 posts! They must be some kind of bigshot!"

Neapolitan · 05-12-2011, 07:00 PM

You're right there are other things about a member that are more important. I really don't pay much attention to post count, it is a small stat that that gives a rough idea how much a member participates to the forum at a glance. You can find more detailed stats in the member's Profile under Statistics - if you were curious about that.

**Janszoon** · 05-12-2011, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oojay

Because someone could be here 10 years and post 5,000 times in "What Are You Currently Listening To," adding absolutely ZERO value to the forum. Someone sees "Oh, they've been here 10 years and have 5,000 posts! They must be some kind of bigshot!"

True, but what I'm saying is those things are additional pieces of the puzzle, not the whole thing.

I think you are making a pretty big assumption that the only thing people think when they look at a post count is something like "Oh, they've been here 10 years and have 5,000 posts! They must be some kind of bigshot!". There are other things that might make post count relevant.

05-12-2011, 05:33 PM	#1 (permalink)
~~[MERIT]~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Missouri, USA Posts: 4,814	Why Count Posts? Just pondering why a forum counts it's members' posts. It is obvious that when considering the content of a member's posts, that QUALITY is more important than QUANTITY. I would posit that whether it relates to music or not, it takes no more thought to vote in an "Album War" or to post "What You're Currently Listening To," than it does to tell us about your day or to complain in the "Bitch Box." Why one post should count towards your total, and the other not is a bit of a mystery to me. I've been on forum's that have had "Rep" systems, and that did little to validate the actual content of a post either. Friends would "rep" each others' posts just to get their stats up, rendering the entire system meaningless. I personally believe that an avatar, signature, join date and a username should be enough to distinguish a user's profile badge, letting their actual posts speak for themselves.

05-12-2011, 05:53 PM	#5 (permalink)
EvilChuck #based Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: (Near) London, England Posts: 443	Because post count = the size of your e-díck. __________________ Last.FM

05-12-2011, 05:41 PM	#2 (permalink)
RVCA （￣ー￣） Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 3,270	Why not?

05-12-2011, 05:49 PM	#4 (permalink)
~~[MERIT]~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Missouri, USA Posts: 4,814	"Why?" is equally valid an argument as "Why Not?" Do you actually judge someone based on their post-count? No. (Or at least you shouldn't.) It's completely meaningless. They should either all count, or none of them count. My personal opinion falls under the "None" category. It's like an attempt to quantify a user's value to the forum.

05-12-2011, 06:15 PM	#6 (permalink)
~~[MERIT]~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Missouri, USA Posts: 4,814	It's not like I'm losing any sleep over the matter, just thinking out loud. I know that when I was younger and joined a forum, I would tend to give more value to the opinions of members who had the highest post counts. But after a while, it became evident that the two were not mutually eclusive. I'm guessing that some of the newer or younger members of the forum may feel the same way. Maybe it's just my wanting a level playing field, with each person being judged on their own merit, rather than on their post count or tenure (Not that this doesn't happen already.) Just a thought. I was curious what other's thought as well. No biggie.