A piddling little matter

I want to tell you a story. I used to be a fireman, and saw my fair share of tragedy. One time we were sent to a 5-alarm fire. Following procedure, we entered the building, but I somehow got cut off from the rest of the guys. I was pretty much trapped and began fearing the worst. Then, above the sound of the roaring fire I heard a child screaming. Going against procedure, I plunged further inward and found a small girl huddled with her baby brother, who was alive, but barely. I picked them both up and somehow manged to get them to saefty. Now that young girl is about to graduate from medical school. Helping the fight against cancer is her chosen field. The boy is an artist, and a rather good one at that. He has a talent for really speaking to people through his work. As boastful as it is, I can't help but be proud of myself for saving these two, who are a massive credit an asset to mankind.

But saving them is nothing compared to getting rid of quotes and nothing else posts.

 

Glad to see you have it all in perspective, Paul. I totally agree.

And Lord_NoONE, there is a rule against this if the JCC mods decide to employ it more harshly...it's called "no spamming".

 

When you're posting in a thread that has a lot of replies you'll most likely need to quote them because people won't know which particular post the user is agreeing with.

 

I understand that there is a no spamming policy already in effect, but what use is it if the moderators do not enforce it as a blanket rule? It is arguably beneficial to the MS as a whole that if a moderator sees a "QFT" post that it be edited out immediately and a warning be sent to the individual who posted it. Making it a categorical rule among the moderators requiring action makes the policy of "no spamming" more effective than currently constituted and enforced.

 

To clear up confusion (since many people seem to get confused by this)... whether you post the same picture once on a page, or twenty times on a page, it takes the same amount of time to load.

I realize it still is annoying, but some people have tried to argue that it bogs down dial-up users, which really isn't the case.

That's why you say "I agree with [user], I think that [whatever idea] makes sense, blah blah blah." You get a minimum of a minute between posts, it shouldn't kill anyone to type out a few more words. Or, if you have to quote someone, just pick and choose a sentence or two from their post, and follow it with [...]. There is no need to quote paragraphs and paragraphs of information (this is especially true when people quote an entire huge post and then only address one small portion of it...).

 

I concur.

Really, it shouldn't kill anyone to scroll down the extra inch that makes up a quote. Some of this is just a bit nit-picky.

 

When people quote a page-long post and only add 2 words of their own thoughts to the end, it does get annoying, especially if the post they are quoting is the message right above theirs. Should there be a rule against that? Maybe, maybe not. It isn't nearly as bad as just quoting without adding anything, but it still can be annoying. People shouldn't get banned for it, but it at least should be discouraged (and edited to make reading the thread easier in more extreme cases).

 

I think it comes to basic JC posting manners.

While we are at it

what about the five time quote rule. Do we really need to quote over and over. And then just ad a smiley while we are at it.

 

Really, it shouldn't kill anyone to scroll down the extra inch that makes up a quote. Some of this is just a bit nit-picky.


Okay one or two QFT's may be fine, but when half the page is just really QFT's that's a problem. Heck, that's spamming.

 

Half the page sure... but anything up to five (even with 'lol') I find quite amusing to be perfectly honest. I've encouraged it in The Beautiful Game thread on occasions. It's teh fluff and it's fun. I could only support a crack down on pointless quotes with no reply.

Also, I agree with Jeff that if someone quotes an entire long post to just add and I agree or QFT or an emoticon or an lol, then an edit of the loooooooooong quote shouldn't be out of the question.

 

I actually don't mind blank quotes (if they are what i think you are talking about) i find it tidier than "QFT" stuck at the bottom.

 

I agree with Everton.

 

lol@arsenal


I dunno, I like it if I make a well thought out post and a few people quote me with claps or QFT. However, I'd easily survive without this ego boost. I'd prefer it if someone had something to add.

 

Well that's where I think the beauty of The Beautiful Game thread lies. Everyone in there is liable to post a simple 'lol @ Arsenal' to one scenario and also respond in a thoughtful manner to the same, or another. Infact, it's only running jokes (a very good thing for community building) that tend to see the lol's.

 

I dunno. Maybe we should set an example and cut out the lol@Arsenal. Sure it's fun, but there comes a point when it's just silly.



















j/k, I'm no where near that point. lol@Arsenal.

 

I agree that lol @ Arsenal must stay

 

I don't actually know what the intended point of the Quote Reply option was, since the copying and pasting the specific part of a person's post that you wanted to reply to, seemed to do fine.

However, in the RPF Forum, if you are heavily into formatting your text, it can be an incredibly useful way of capturing and using all the formatting without having to type it yourself.

I would point out that during my time on the boards, I have come across posters to whome the term, "not a rocket scientist" could be attributed, and such users might be interpret the link "Quote a reply" to mean exactly and only that, since it appears next to a link called "Post reply".