DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Sheep Tag Community
HTML https://sheeptag.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 3244--------------------------------------------------
Double posting - are it a crime?
DIR By: Chiefhero[sks]
Date: December 4, 2013, 5:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
doubleposting is generally assumed to be negative. mods
delete/merge doubleposts. double-posting is discouraged. etc.
i'll argue that double-posting can be good, and i'll be
referring to the "ask cele dota questions!" thread, where two of
my posts got merged. disclaimer: this is by NO means a complaint
thread about cele's decision, he's a good kid. im just here to
question what everyone else assumes to be true, gonna be
interesting to hear if anyone can tear my case down.
so why is double-posting generally bad? probably because it
spreads the persons point/argument/story across several
sections, and in turn; disorganizes the thread. people are used
to a format where different posts constitute different content
(argument followed by rebuttal, question followed by reply, joke
followed by response, etc). a format where post 1 = X, post 2 =
Y, post 3 = Z. it's confusing and abnormal when post 1 = X, post
2 = X, and post 3 = X.
if the above is true, it then follows the organizing the thread
is good. my claim is that double-posting (in certain situations)
helps organize the thread, and makes reading easier for everyone
else. the dota thread is a good example:
my first post was answering 2 dota-questions posed by someone.
my answers turned out to be massive essays. my following post
was a short one, where i added 2 of my own questions,
encouraging others to answer them. these two posts got merged
into 1, based on a presumption that double-posting was negative.
here's why double-posting was positive: the "essense"/content of
the two posts weren't related. double-posting helped organize
the thread by separating my questions (which i assume everyone
wants to read) apart from my own answers to ensteks questions
(which i assume many posters don't wanna read, partly due to the
excessive lenght). When the questions are merged into the bottom
of my essay post that most people won't read -> most people
won't notice the questions either.
in summary, the double-post followed a "post 1 = X, post 2 = Y"
pattern, rather than a "post 1 = X, post 2 = X" pattern. it was
therefor positive for the thread.
anyone think im wrong? have i misrepresented the reason
double-posting is generally bad? was my logic flawed? im anxious
for the replies! i love cele btw, he probably did the right
thing.
#Post#: 3247--------------------------------------------------
Re: Double posting - are it a crime?
DIR By: Celestial_One
Date: December 4, 2013, 12:32 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
If we allow double posting then triple posting, quadruple
posting, and quintuple posting should all be allowed too if they
follow your criteria (they are different subjects/not related),
and honestly what's more offputting in a thread that seeing the
last 2+ posts made by one person?
#Post#: 3248--------------------------------------------------
Re: Double posting - are it a crime?
DIR By: Alph4bet
Date: December 4, 2013, 12:51 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
What you could have done instead is put a horizontal break line
like I have done below.
---------------------------------------------------------
That is much cleaner than seeing two posts made by the same
person after each other.
I am simply disagreeing with you when you're stating that it is
making the thread cleaner, I looked at the fact that you double
posted and was like hmm, I'll just read the shorter post(Very
lazy of me), but I did. Otherwise I most likely would have read
the whole thing that pertained to what I was interested in. Just
my point of view.
#Post#: 3250--------------------------------------------------
Re: Double posting - are it a crime?
DIR By: XXXandBEER
Date: December 4, 2013, 1:04 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Now is "Bumping" technically double posting or is it bumping?
#Post#: 3251--------------------------------------------------
Re: Double posting - are it a crime?
DIR By: Celestial_One
Date: December 4, 2013, 1:09 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Yee I like that mike, and I was thinking about how to do it
yesterday. What's the code or w.e for it?
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
or w0t
#Post#: 3252--------------------------------------------------
Re: Double posting - are it a crime?
DIR By: Chakra
Date: December 4, 2013, 1:39 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[ hr ] is the BBC code.
It's this
HTML http://i.imgur.com/MRtN3Ed.png
icon.
#Post#: 3254--------------------------------------------------
Re: Double posting - are it a crime?
DIR By: Chiefhero[sks]
Date: December 4, 2013, 7:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote=alph4bet]What you could have done instead is put a
horizontal break line like I have done below.[/quote]
ye i guess. seems like you agree with the argument tho?
double-posting and manually splitting your post with lines are
variants of the same reasoning -> making reading easier for
everyone else.
the only way i see my argument being taken down is if you can
demonstrate why it's inherently negative if the same username
makes 2 posts after eachother. i don't think it is. as much as
cele/you think its off-putting, i (and probably others) think
it's more organized and makes reading easier.
--- Quote ---
> That is much cleaner than seeing two posts made by the same
person after each other.
> I am simply disagreeing with you when you're stating that it
is making the thread cleaner, I looked at the fact that you
double posted and was like hmm, I'll just read the shorter
post(Very lazy of me), but I did. Otherwise I most likely would
have read the whole thing that pertained to what I was
interested in. Just my point of view.
--- End Quote ---
i think your story perfectly illustrates my point. most people
don't wanna read the long answers (apart from the person asking,
and perhaps a few others). merging 1 small good text into a big
text that people won't read = just enhances the problem. it
makes the post seem even longer at face value, and people assume
the whole shit is an answer to ensteks question.
separating the text everyone wants to read from the text
specifically targeted at enstek = yEeEeEe!!! 3+3=6
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1