License to Spam

[Alexander I]

There was some concern brought up in the History Forum over this recent issue. With thread limits apparently lifted there, it seems as though posters (perhaps some more than others) have been given a license to spam.

Is that what you guys really want?

Discussion?

[ZEE]

well absolute power corrupts absolutely, i suppose, in certain circumstances anyways. however, there a two ways to look at this.

1)They are spamming to gain +1's and annoy everybody?
2)or they are trying to revive a dead forum that needs all the on-topic threads it can get?
piece™

[Wiglaf]

That forum is retarded. It is just Laz posting History news. It should be combined with OTF along with the tech forum, so that OTF isn't so dead or boring.

[LordShiva]

Alexander01 sub-forum

[Grandpa Troll]

This is spam I fear here, so if you want to keep a topic open, lets try to pick one that really counts.

@ OP, We all who love Poly should do what we can to generate interest.

For the naysayers, what exactly is your problem, if you dont like to post in a certain thread or forum, why let it eat away at you?

For the record, the forums will go the direction of the administration.

But this can only be successful if posters contribute, kinda like what everyones does who comes to a board, they read, they post and they contribute.

Unless they are lurkers, which would bring no harm to anyone.

Gramps

[Cartimandua]

I am afraid I am confused. Having majored in history I visit the History Forum everyday. I don't always post but I enjoy certain threads and people's insights. I understand how the administration would like to see more activity in that forum, however, it does become worrisome that with the quantity of the threads, the quality is diminishing.

Just because someone is posting a lot doesn't mean it is material that should be read. This isn't inducing more traffic in the history forum; the posts there are still made by the same handful of regulars. The only difference is that now they do it in a sea of boring threads made by the same author. He doesn't need to prompt people to post, if they want to they will. I thought it was supposed to be a forum (indicating MULTIPLE PEOPLE) not a monologue.

I don't mean to complain, I like it here at Apolyton, I just am seeking to understand the logic behind the "new" rules.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Cartimandua
I thought it was supposed to be a forum (indicating MULTIPLE PEOPLE) not a monologue.

When were there ever "MULTIPLE PEOPLE" posting in the History Forum?

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Cartimandua
I am afraid I am confused. Having majored in history I visit the History Forum everyday. I don't always post but I enjoy certain threads and people's insights. I understand how the administration would like to see more activity in that forum, however, it does become worrisome that with the quantity of the threads, the quality is diminishing.

Just because someone is posting a lot doesn't mean it is material that should be read. This isn't inducing more traffic in the history forum; the posts there are still made by the same handful of regulars. The only difference is that now they do it in a sea of boring threads made by the same author. He doesn't need to prompt people to post, if they want to they will. I thought it was supposed to be a forum (indicating MULTIPLE PEOPLE) not a monologue.

I don't mean to complain, I like it here at Apolyton, I just am seeking to understand the logic behind the "new" rules.

The problem is with the posters, the posters start a thread. Very often it comes under attack by Spammers. Then the actual content becomes lost in all the so called +1's.

As for what a poster actually starts a thread on, if its History then no one, including the Staff and Administration should censor it. That being said, the thread has to meet certain acceptable criteria and be in reasonable good taste.

As for one poster starting multiple threads, it is kind of like fishing, picking a list of several topics and try to encourage interaction.

For example, one may want to talk of comparing Hitlers Nazi party with the Klu Klux Klan.

One could easily present this without posting pictures of the process at Dachau or the KKK strectching charred and brutalized bodies for display.

The site has to so called police without this being a police state.

The posters have the privelege of posting within reason.

Hope this does help.

Gramps

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Cartimandua- I have no intention of posting multiple new threads daily on a long-term basis, unless things look desperate. However I am a believer in starting with a "bang"- I felt new life and traffic was needed to build momentum on the forum, and draw in posters.

It's with that aim in mind that you'll see a wide variety of topics covered. You've got heavy stuff in the "535AD" thread, comedy in the "Filth", an in-depth exploration of social history I find particularly moving in the "St Kilda" thread, and a number of threads started with the specific aim of drawing contributions from others.

I'm glad that you visit the forum daily, though I wish you'd post more. A quick check of the "Find" feature reveals that you've made 12 posts there. I'd love to see that change for the better.

Curiously enough, I was planning to make a thread about your namesake. Why not tell us about her yourself? I can guarantee that I'll contribute to it, and in skilled hands it would make a great story. How about it?

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp
I'm glad that you visit the forum daily, though I wish you'd post more. A quick check of the "Find" feature reveals that you've made 12 posts there. I'd love to see that change for the better.

Exactly. People who claim to be interested in history and the History Forum but who don't really contribute shouldn't take issue with someone trying to spur activity there.

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by LordShiva


Exactly. People who claim to be interested in history and the History Forum but who don't really contribute shouldn't take issue with someone trying to spur activity there.

Once again ewe r teh guru of teh reasoning

Q F T!!

Thank you LS for pointing out what so many are missing, if it doesnt interest you, why put out efforts to destroy a work in progress?

I salute you sir and you good will efforts world wide

GT

[Kuciwalker]

I'm happy to consume Laz's (and others') posts, even though I don't know anything about history to actually say.

[Mercator]

I commend Laz for being the first forum moderator I know of who really tries to do what debate moderators do: promoting discussion.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Mercator
I commend Laz for being the first forum moderator I know of who really tries to do what debate moderators do: promoting discussion.

Let me join in with saying that I think Laz is doing a good job.

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Let me join in with saying that I think Laz is doing a good job.