Proposition: Increase or Eliminate 10k Character Limit

Can't wait for your explanation of that bullshit. Or, what, will it take too many characters to actually make the point?

Then learn to read.

It does, however, require basic reading comprehension in order to assess the post.

I am seriously maintaining that both he and you are full of excrement.

Stupid pedantry.

You know, every once in a while, I laugh at one of my colleagues who says the defining aspect of Sciforums is its overriding respect for the scientific method. Not only can nobody actually explain what that means, but as you show, it's also bullshit in any context.

I'll take it under consideration when you demonstrate adequate reading comprehension.

I just want to be able to write a goddamn post without having to break it up into pieces for the sake of something arbitrary.

In truth, I estimated this community wrongly; I hadn't expected the objections to be a defense of trolling.

Let me be clear: Go get some reading comprehension and then, if you are so inclined, try again.

That should be self-evident. Brevity. Concision. Right?

Or would you like a more complete answer? One that requires a few more characters: Learn to read.

Illiteracy and delusion are, in fact, disabilities.

Only someone with as poor reading comprehension as you have displayed could be so astounded.

Encouraging a lack of information degrades communication.

Encouraging short posts promotes bogus pedantry as people "fisk" and try to be witty without regard for context instead of actually communicating anything of use.

See above remarks about this "science forum".

I've read plenty of technical papers that, by your description, are too long to be anything but trolling.

Cheap wit is proof of nothing.

The appearance of wit is easier than actually having genuine wit. The appearance of intelligence is a happy market for fools. Attend American politics, sometime, and tell me what argumentation by brevity and concision gets people.

Your chronology is, predictably, dishonest.

Yes, I give a damn about the moral outrage of a semi-literate pedant with a soundbite fetish.

(Oh, would you like more precise answers? Sorry, then I'd have to [ahem!] "troll" you with more characters.)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Thank you for a long post that perfectly and precisely demonstrates the sort of posts that we should not be enabling.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Tiassa, the problem with your example really should have been self-evident and my brevity in pointing it out shouldn't have been a problem (a demonstration of a concise point) and certainly shouldn't be worth of such a string of vitriol.

However, if you really don't get it: you posted as an example of why we need longer posts, someone who made long posts and still failed to get his point across - which shows that long posts don't necessarily help get a point across. Perhaps if you showed someone who SUCCEEDED in getting a point across that really required more than 10k characters, it would support your point.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Most long posts could be shortened with no loss of meaning, and people would be more inclined to read them.
Long posts are nearly always over long.

 

Tiassa, your behaviour in this thread is ignorant and immature. I am unable to place you on ignore as you are - amazingly, based on the attitude displayed here - a member of staff. So, I shall seek manually to avoid your posts, at least until one of the sensible members tells me you have sobered up.

And for the benefit of non-staff, I have reported Tiassa's last post.

 

Maybe this forum needs new moderators.

 

I changed my vote to 'no'. After this Donnybrook, I see the point.

 

I agree that we should not be enabling that idea of concision.

• • •​

Try making sense.

• • •​

Sounds like lowering the bar for the lazy.

• • •​

You're an example of the problem.

 

Some posts take longer to read than they took to write.

 

Beg pardon? Snippy, are you?

 

If that was an example of "concise" then I for one am glad that the 10k character limit plays a part in limiting such posts to a mere 5400 characters.

 

Excuse me? You accuse me of trolling with a one-sentence response that should have been enough in the first place (note: I wasn't even the first to make the point -- you ignored it the previous time as well*) and your response is your own one-liner trolling instead of actually responding to the point, now that - hopefully - you get it? This is just pathetic, Tiassa. Moderators are supposed to act professionally. WTF is your problem? Grow up.

And previously:

Go back and reread the title and first few lines of your second post in the thread. That was the beginning of hostility in this thread, and thus far the hostility was almost completly you (until I fought-back, above). That post of yours (your second post) contained no direct responses to anyone's point, it was just a long and not really on topic diatrabe. It seems to me you need to work on both your attitude and your communications skills.

*The parameters for a relevant example were laid-out here:

 

Don't wet yourself, Toad. I'm just trying to be concise.

Or would you prefer I use a few more words, which requires some more characters, in order to be a bit more precise?

• • •​

You see? In the end, you're just out to silence the people you hate.

Tell you what, Bill: I'll do what I can to use fewer characters so as not to unduly distress you, and you will do what you can to actually get some decent character.

• • •​

Quit bawling. I would use more characters in order to be more precise, but I'm trying to honor your standards and not troll you.

If you don't have the basic decency to respect that, don't make your own inadequacies anyone else's problem.

 

No, you really aren't. You are trolling here and you have been since your second post when you accused everyone who disagreed with you of supporting lying without actually addressing the points they made.

And you still haven't addressed the points being made.

 

Ten posts ago, the vote was pretty even, 5 to 4. Now it is 10 to 6 against. Keep up posts like that and you should be able to drive it up to 20 or 30 to 6.

 

You're not exactly a reliable character, Russ.

• • •​

And?

Your appeal only reminds of your superficiality.

If this community wishes to lionize low-effort, social media-style posting, they're going to do it regardless of any feeble claims about this being a "science site". Some of us would just like to be able to write. You know, communicate. But communication apparently equals trolling in your outlook. What the fuck ever.

Watching trolls such as yourself and Russ freak out, meanwhile, is an unexpected side benefit.

But you do win one point: "Concise" is fun.

 

While I respect the effort you put into these things, trolls use this tactic purposely to waste your time and overwhealm you. And since they are cutting-and-pasting their responses, you have no hope whatsoever at coming out on top of such an argument. The best way to combat this isn't for you to do attack it outright, it is for the moderators to outlaw it:

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop

So the better solution is to force shorter, more concise arguments -- to outlaw excessive copy-and-paste flooding. Realistically, that's copyright violation and/or plagarism and should be outlawed anyway.

 

Since you don't know me even a little bit, you are not in a position to judge my character. However, what I do know is that character attacks are against the forum rule here, yet somehow you are being allowed to break them.

Tiassa, you stopped communicating and switched to trolling with your second post. Legitimate points remain unanswered because you switched to insulting the people you disagree with instead of answering them. I think most people can recognize here who is freaking-out and who isn't based on the extreme amount of insults in your posts, compared to the reasonable arguments being made in others' posts.

 

For sure... an ive read this thred 3 times an for the life of me... i cant figer out who made it personal

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!