justinsayne
Cody Rhodes is an excellant
Believe me I was getting around to it
Would you post more in the wrestling sections if the spam rules were relaxed??
- Thread starter Mighty NorCal
- Start date
Believe me I was getting around to it
Papa Shango
Frontman of the WZ Band!!
The quality of the forum has BEEN way down, and for awhile now too. It's not gonna get much worse. In fact, it may get better with the relaxed spamming. Less restrictions means more traffic. More traffic increases the odds of having quality discussion.
And if someone shows up, who even by the NEW standards, is too spammy, they'll be bounced outta here faster than a member of the A/V club at a frat party.
I like this idea a lot, actually.
klunderbunker
Welcome to My (And Not Sly's) House
Factor in that the traffic has picked up a lot since the advertisements have been updated on the main page. The forums have barely worked in the past 4 months also. Wrestling has gone up as have the forums. Give it time.
Papa Shango
Frontman of the WZ Band!!
Cuz Murfish is funny lol. God help me, this fucker's starting to grow on me.
It's not really neccessary. It depends on how "relaxed" exactly, you mean.
For instance:
I feel that Jeff Hardy is the best worked on the Smackdown roster at the moment. He is in the most interesting storyline, and coupled with great selling and in ring psychology makes for him to be a great interest to many. He draws fantastically, and continuely gets superb pops from crowds. In my opinion, and for those reasons, the belt should be kept on Hardy for a long time.
That, I'm almost certain, would not be constitued as spam under the current non-relxed spam rules - in a discussion about Jeff on whether or not he should hold the belt. That post wasn't really top notch, obviously. It got accross what I wanted to say, and it wasn't mindless rambling either.
So, depends how many relaxed you think you can get without stretching it. The example post was 4 -5 lines, but spam isn't based on number of lines ... but 1 isn't usually enough to get your point across anyway.
I guess it doesn't really matter, and I just rambled on there myself - for something I don't particular care either way about. It wouldn't make me post more, because when I do post, it's of a decent length to get want I want across.
But it sounds less strict, which will probably make nubs post more, so go ahead and do it.
For instance:
I feel that Jeff Hardy is the best worked on the Smackdown roster at the moment. He is in the most interesting storyline, and coupled with great selling and in ring psychology makes for him to be a great interest to many. He draws fantastically, and continuely gets superb pops from crowds. In my opinion, and for those reasons, the belt should be kept on Hardy for a long time.
That, I'm almost certain, would not be constitued as spam under the current non-relxed spam rules - in a discussion about Jeff on whether or not he should hold the belt. That post wasn't really top notch, obviously. It got accross what I wanted to say, and it wasn't mindless rambling either.
So, depends how many relaxed you think you can get without stretching it. The example post was 4 -5 lines, but spam isn't based on number of lines ... but 1 isn't usually enough to get your point across anyway.
I guess it doesn't really matter, and I just rambled on there myself - for something I don't particular care either way about. It wouldn't make me post more, because when I do post, it's of a decent length to get want I want across.
But it sounds less strict, which will probably make nubs post more, so go ahead and do it.
Shadowmancer
I am The Last Baron
I have no motivation to post in the wrestling topics because there is very little actual discussion beyond that of I like this wrestler or I don't/do Like this storyline. The more mentally challenging threads about possibilities from a business standpoint is far more interesting and would be useful more because of the gauge of what people think is good for business rather than what is occuring on TV and what is happening in reality.
First off, I want someone to name what exactly they mean by having "relaxed spam rules".
Now, I totally agree with NoFate here. Some people on this forum think that just because they make 30 non spam posts a day, they think they are a good poster. I think it's bullshit. I try to type the best non spam posts that I possibly can, by means of using detailed explanations and a good overall point. I don't give a damn about post count. I type decent posts because "I" think it contributes a lot to discussion. And I think that many people read the more detailed posts (including myself).
The spam rules are why Wrestlezone is a damn good forum. It helps establishes the newer posters. It makes them want to type good posts in order to be recognized. Jake and Jonny turned this place into what it is today, but before this, apparently it was spam infested. Why change it back when we have a lot of members already? Plus, is it that damn hard to read the rules?
If the spam rules were relaxed, I definately wouldn't post more. I would either post less in there, or just post the same and continue with what I'm doing now.
But Slyfox is always right
Shadowmancer
I am The Last Baron
These are pretty much the same spam rules that I joined under, maybe slightly harsher now since noone gives out yellow tickets for people that have been here less than a month. That was my rule, two yellows in their first month for spamming, any more and that would be infractions(or Reds). It actually provides a good system, I know AJ and Jake were both infract first people, as was a number of the other staff. So better use of the warning system could be implemented instead of changing the rules.
Downward Spiral
I'm Not From Your Country
We have a spam zone already if there's a need to discuss wrestling without much effort, and I don't even use that. Naturally, you get people on this site who would see the incentive in this because they could increase their post counts with ease (as if people actually look at them...) so it might not be a bad idea.
You can't be this dense. We've said MANY times that there WILL be a spam rule, just what is constituted as spam will be different.
I'm tempted to ban you for being so idiotic.
And it'd be the same thing with a relaxed spam rule. This "vain" thing has nothing to do with it. When you get right down to it, you post on wrestling forums because you enjoy it, right? I don't mean you enjoy seeing your screenname with words under it, but you enjoy the chat, correct?
How would that change? You can still post your thoughts and try to improve on them. That won't change. You'll just have more to post in opposition to. It's not like we're going to MAKE you post shorter posts. Just allow you to.
No it's not. What we'd do is the EXACT same thing we do now, except more would pass by the spam filter. It's not a slippery slope, it's a very set and define line against spam. Just what is considered spam changes.
So people can't post well thought out one-liners, that further a discussion and make a point?
The only reason people actually think that is because when the forums were bad, the admins (I'm guessing Jake and Jonny) decided to kill the nonsense...so they went overboard with the spam definitions, and that's where we get the "prided itself" part.
False. It IS the reason. I've been on other wrestling forums (still do) with MUCH better posting rate on wrestling, forums who should have few members than we do...but don't.
A problem? No. Want to see improvement in it? Yes.
And you are not alone. Many people feel the same way, and it hurts our posting rate in the wrestling forums. It's not like what you'd post would be bad or spam, it would just not be as time consuming.
You don't care that you make yourself look like a moron for failing reading comprehension?
Says who? For what basis are you stating this? You have none. There will still be spam rules, posts will still need to be on topic, and it would still lead to quality discussion.
It makes sense to at least try for a while. If it doesn't work, then we can always go back. But where's the harm in trying?
Factor in the number of posters who were banned and/or left because of the spam rules, and this place would be hopping with posting.
Why do you always leave that part out?
And I believe more people would create thread topics if it was easier to do so. And thus, you'd have more to post in. Everyone wins.
You must be on-topic, and make a point.
For example, if someone were to say "The Undertaker is Mr. Wrestlemania because of all the great matches he has been in", then that would not be spam. We're assuming he's on-topic, and he made a point. If someone were to counter with, "What are all these 'great' matches you speak of?", then that, too, would not be spam, as he would also be on topic, and making a point. If the third person were to say "Whatever you say", then that would be spam, as there is no point being made.
That make sense?
No, it isn't. The reason why WZ is a good forum is because it has some good posters and a ton of hard-working moderators. Spam rules mean zero, if there isn't someone to enforce them.
From what I can see in the Archives, yes, it was. But, we're not proposing to let it go back to the way it was, we're proposing a happy medium. No spam, but easier posting. Everyone wins.
It's not the reading of the rules that is the problem. It's the desire to have to work at something that is meant for relaxation.
Let's go Cena!But Slyfox is always right
The warning system is used much more now than it was. The problem I have is not the following of the rules part. The problem I have is the amount of posting in the wrestling forums...which is very little overall.
Exactly my point. Wouldn't you like to post more about wrestling, when you don't have to have a ton of time?
No, they wouldn't. You people just don't seem to get it, at all. I really don't know how to explain it any better to you.
I assure you, if this measure gets a trial run, EVERYONE will see that you are assuming the worst, and thus, are completely misguided.
Yeah that makes sense, but I don't really agree with it. I mean, some people might attempt to boost their post count by asking questions such as that in almost every single thread. It will get annoying after a while.
And the moderators enforce the rules quite well, which is why the forum has good posters who listen to the rules.
Asking a question in a Wrestling thread isn't part of what I'd call a credible forum. We have a spam zone for that type of stuff.
I do agree with this, but what makes people get more recognized? Long posts or one liners? You have to earn your reputation.
Yes, Slyfox is definately always right
But seriously, I wouldn't say no if we try it for a week or two, but I'm personally happy with the way it is right now.
So? Why should you care if someone tries to boost their post count? If it's important to them, why does it have to be important to you?
It's also why many people don't post here.
Asking a question that is relevant to a topic, or requiring a poster to validate their point IS part of what makes a credible forum.
I mean, if you're in a formal debate, is there not a whole SECTION devoted to each debater for them to ask questions of their opponent?
Who cares if people get recognized. Not everyone cares if they get recognized, they just want to post about something they enjoy.
Definitely.Yes, Slyfox is definately always right
A week or two wouldn't show much difference.
I'd say you'd have to go AT LEAST until Wrestlemania.
Posters that are boosting their post count isn't what I'd call a good poster. And if it happens all the time, and becomes more common, then you have a forum full of crap posters who only care about rep and their post count, which I'd assume is what we are trying to get away from since the forum is meant for discussion.
You're always going to get that though. Starting out as a noob on any forum is never easy.
I know but if they JUST type the question in the one post, I'd still call it shameless post count boosting. I mean, what exactly are THEY adding to the thread? All they are doing is typing a question that is answered by someone else, not themselves. Therefore they aren't adding to the discussion of the thread.
That can be opinion based. Most people would rather be recognized.
See the thing is, we have a LOT of guests right now viewing the forum, we just have to find a way for them to sign up. And I don't think this will be as great as you think it will be. Not to mention if we get more members, we need more staff, which means more headaches.
Who cares what their intentions are if they are making good posts? Just because they want to boost their post counts, doesn't mean they can just spam the place.
Again, false. I've started out on many wrestling forums, and never had problems...with the exception of this one, where I was given an infraction because an on-topic and relevant post was too short. The infraction was removed, but it left a sour taste in my mouth at the beginning.
It depends on what the question is and why they posted it.
Then those people can make the longer posts. No one is saying they have to make short ones.
If WZ didn't have such a bad reputation for posting, maybe they would.
I've been on several forums where it is like this, and the wrestling forums were BETTER, not worse. And, we won't need more staff, we already have an overabundance of staff as it is. But, even if we do get more staff....so?
What he said.
Nope. Sounds far too much like emancipating the working class to me, and given that I proclaim myself a member of the upper echelons of society, a bunch of inferior minds running around with posting power is only going to detract from to worth of my own vote.
It's a tangled mish mash of a metaphor, but if you take the time to unpick it I assure you that you'll find it completely relevant.
Anyway. On a personal level, the reason I hang around here it to read, and partake in, debates. Slyfox, you often seem to prefer going up against members of 'ye unwashed masses' and refuting an intellect far bellow your own. For many however; an enjoyable debate requires participants on both sides of comparable posting ability, and attempting to usher in a new wave of less talented posters will only serve to make obtaining a meritus discussion more difficult.
I don't believe for a second that there's an untapped stream of mini IC25s and Slyfoxs out there who are suddenly going to think "Man, I've always been put off joining Wrestlezone, but now that I can make single sentence posts..." and usher in a new age of enlightenment. What I think will happen is that we'll get marginally fewer posters getting banned in their first month. 95% of them will turn out to be mediocre at best, and we might make a new profit of one or two worthwhile members.
When I compare this against the perceived cost, it doesn't seem worth it. Now I know you don't think lowering the benchmark for posts will hurt quality, but I disagree. You are correct when you state that a one line post is not inherently without merit (the example that comes to me is that of pointing out a factual error that undermines a persons argument). However; guarding against such posts does provided a level of defence against posts without merit, and if you relax the minimum standard, the primary result will be that the bulk of posts sink to meet it. Again, not worth it in my eyes.
Severn pages suggest that you disagree, so don't feel the need to ratify this in little pieces. The question was asked, and my answer has been forthcoming.
It's a tangled mish mash of a metaphor, but if you take the time to unpick it I assure you that you'll find it completely relevant.
Anyway. On a personal level, the reason I hang around here it to read, and partake in, debates. Slyfox, you often seem to prefer going up against members of 'ye unwashed masses' and refuting an intellect far bellow your own. For many however; an enjoyable debate requires participants on both sides of comparable posting ability, and attempting to usher in a new wave of less talented posters will only serve to make obtaining a meritus discussion more difficult.
I don't believe for a second that there's an untapped stream of mini IC25s and Slyfoxs out there who are suddenly going to think "Man, I've always been put off joining Wrestlezone, but now that I can make single sentence posts..." and usher in a new age of enlightenment. What I think will happen is that we'll get marginally fewer posters getting banned in their first month. 95% of them will turn out to be mediocre at best, and we might make a new profit of one or two worthwhile members.
When I compare this against the perceived cost, it doesn't seem worth it. Now I know you don't think lowering the benchmark for posts will hurt quality, but I disagree. You are correct when you state that a one line post is not inherently without merit (the example that comes to me is that of pointing out a factual error that undermines a persons argument). However; guarding against such posts does provided a level of defence against posts without merit, and if you relax the minimum standard, the primary result will be that the bulk of posts sink to meet it. Again, not worth it in my eyes.
Severn pages suggest that you disagree, so don't feel the need to ratify this in little pieces. The question was asked, and my answer has been forthcoming.
So you believe in the man and superman theory? I prefer the man and Batman one myself.
You can still do that. If anything, it will help by encouraging further discussion. You can reply to each other quickly and easily, without having to break down lengthy posts point by point.
You'd be very, very, very surprised.
Not much of a defence. Many posters just post long, rambling bullshit and get away with it because there's a lot of it.
klunderbunker
Welcome to My (And Not Sly's) House
In regards to what you said about people that have been banned for spamming, show me more than two that you saw potential in. The majority of spammers that are banned use little 5 words posts or less. You really want to let them in? Why?
I'm sure there are some good posters that have been banned because of the rules, but we've been able to survive them. Why can't they as well?
I'm sure there are some good posters that have been banned because of the rules, but we've been able to survive them. Why can't they as well?
I was thinking a couple weeks ago of an expansion to the Live Discussion and Spam zone. Maybe make it the higher end posting forum where the new people or those without substance can post. Probably is a bad idea, but if there is any potential in it, it should be checked out.
Again, you're confusing relaxing the rules with removing them.
Why should they have to?
justinsayne
Cody Rhodes is an excellant
Who gives a fuck about post count?!?, seriously is that your biggest concern?!, you're afraid of how big peoples post count will be?!, this is one of the dumber arguments I've heard for not relaxing the spam rules yet
