Jusunlee.com Forums

Pages (5): « 1 [2] 3 4 » ... Last »
Show all 86 posts from this thread on one page

Jusunlee.com Forums (https://www.jusunlee.com/forums/index.php)
- Random Thoughts (https://www.jusunlee.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?forumid=2)
-- salt. (https://www.jusunlee.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=10270)

Posted by niggoreanboi on 01-28-2003 12:20 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by Crazydeb8ter

Yes, you are a fool for assuming as such. Shame on you. For being a proponent of "intellectual thought," you seem to severely lack the ability to see things from another's angle. Not only that, but you took action before you asked that person to clarify the meaning of the statement. Jumping to conclusions, shall we say?

oh man i guess i'mma lose 100 post cause i just quoted something and not say much shame on me -_-

Posted by ajy on 01-28-2003 12:25 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by niggoreanboi
oh man i guess i'mma lose 100 post cause i just quoted something and not say much shame on me -_-

well you should. and i think its time to stop testing everything out on me, stop picking favorites.

Posted by niggoreanboi on 01-28-2003 12:27 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by AjY 2k
well you should. and i think its time to stop testing everything out on me, stop picking favorites.

Posted by ajy on 01-28-2003 12:30 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by niggoreanboi

wow ive never replied to a post like that and look where its got me.

youve completely missed the point of this thread.

Posted by niggoreanboi on 01-28-2003 12:34 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by AjY 2k
wow ive never replied to a post like that and look where its got me.

youve completely missed the point of this thread.

o well i guess that's another 100 post off my shit

Posted by ajy on 01-28-2003 12:35 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by niggoreanboi
o well i guess that's another 100 post off my shit

no probably not. i doubt jusun will do anything to you

Posted by saranghae on 01-28-2003 01:49 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by tm11
I really think you're setting your standards too high for these forums, however, it's good that you're being proactive about it (on a sidenote, despite my lack of posting, I've thought your recent kindling of activity has been interesting).

i agree. after reading your post.. i'm really scared to post now. its hard posting like 200+ especially if its not coming from the heart-- ahh.. i don't think that made sense ^^; but wut i'm trying to say is.. with the new standards.. wouldn't it make people post less and less?-- fearing that their post won't reach up with the standard? i'm not even sure if i ever made a 200+ post.

Posted by PsychoSnowman on 01-28-2003 02:02 AM:

Re: salt.

quote:
Originally posted by jusunlee
i wish more of you would make posts containing 200+ words more often. say something meaningful for once, not just petty one liners, or even worse, one word or smilie responses.

__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.

"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell

Posted by ajy on 01-28-2003 02:20 AM:

nice job there snowman, what i wanted to do but you do it in a better way. hmmm, jusun's salt thread and now these threads ive seen make me think hes acting like a hippocrite.

Posted by daNNy LuV 1TYM on 01-28-2003 02:43 AM:

i realize the quality of posts should be important, but the standards you're setting are really too high, as several people have already pointed out. 200+ words? i think in mai 9-20 months of membership i've made less than 10 posts with that amount of words. i also realize that many of mai posts have perhaps been useless to the thread topic or may not have contributed much, but i highly doubt they discourage or insult the original thread starters. if this policy is implemented, the amount of posts will dramatically decrease. people will be intimidated by the amount of thought that has to go into each post and will refrain from posting. most people also won't take the time to read lengthy replies.

as for the mod/supermod policy - that seems like an interesting idea, but i don't know if it would be fair. i understand moderators should contribute to their forums, but do they necessarily ahve to be an expert? what if it's just a hobby they're fond of or something?

Posted by azn0monk on 01-28-2003 03:03 AM:

yeah i generally don' t read things that long
unelsss they are a joke

Posted by saranghae on 01-28-2003 03:09 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by azn0monk
yeah i generally don' t read things that long

same here.. unfortunately. i usually juss skim through.. unless if i'm really interested in the topic.

Posted by niggoreanboi on 01-28-2003 05:24 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSnowman
man, so do i.

http://www.jusunlee.com/forums/show...;threadid=10034
http://www.jusunlee.com/forums/show...p;threadid=7007
http://www.jusunlee.com/forums/show...p;threadid=6436
http://www.jusunlee.com/forums/show...p;threadid=5397
http://www.jusunlee.com/forums/show...p;threadid=4265
http://www.jusunlee.com/forums/show...p;threadid=4265
http://www.jusunlee.com/forums/show...p;threadid=2763
http://www.jusunlee.com/forums/show...p;threadid=2368
http://www.jusunlee.com/forums/show...p;threadid=2203
http://www.jusunlee.com/forums/show...mp;threadid=774
http://www.jusunlee.com/forums/show...mp;threadid=761
http://www.jusunlee.com/forums/show...mp;threadid=562

i know this doesn't prove anything, but i find it annoying you do things like this and turn around and make a post like you just did in this thread about the rest of the forum being the problem.

nice arguement

power to the posters!

Posted by micron on 01-28-2003 05:26 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSnowman
Sure, i've thought about the useless posts that are in the forums, but i never would have dreamt of enacting a policy like this. This intellectual apartheid your trying to create all for the eventual utilitarian views of the administrator. It's repulsive, it really is. This seperation of members based on their intellectual standing is sickening. I don't care if it's garbage...no need to enforce inquisition on those who didn't even mean to cause . I'm going to start laughing when we start seeing negative post counts, cause this is really absurd. I know you had your reasons for posting and usually i let whatever you say go without directly confronting it, but this is really an interesting action you've decided to take.

youre putting this to an extreme. how am i, in any way, trying to create an 'intellectual apartheid' as you so keenly chose to call it? by requiring thoughtful replies to quality posts? i admit that my original definition of a 'quality post' was somewhat unfounded, and maybe even my approach to preserve quality posts may not have been the best, as tm11 pointed out, but for you to go as far as to say that im trying to create some sort of an elitism is rediculous. from where, may i ask, did you come up with this brilliant conclusion?

quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSnowman
The people you hope to attract through the elimination of the beauracracy is failing through your creation of a new one. The overtaking of the old farm only for the new animal farm to become exactly what they hoped to get rid of. People aren't going to want to come to a forum where they have to be "smart enough" based on whatever we perceive through their online postings. As victor said, this is really biased. This is sickening. Please, tell me how this isn't hypocritical. We're supposedly getting rid of the beaurocracy only to put up another one. Let's make it democratic, and deduct post counts so as to level everyone equally, and then gradually filter out everyone whose not as smart or whatever as everyone else based on their posts. The entire forum will be one big beaurocracy. What are you doing? The democratic idea could work, it's worked on forums like crossx.com and the like but their mods stay mods for as long as they want or until they get out of control or whatever. I think it'd be a hastle to have constant elections. Hm, but whatever you want.

i ask again, where are you coming up with such brilliant assertions of my intentions? if you redisect what i said earlier:

quote:
Originally posted by jusunlee
concerning the bureaucracy of the forums, heres a new thought: i want to try running these forums by democratic principles.

may i so politely ask where in that statement did i ever mention about "eliminating bureaucracy"? or did you think i was not intellegent enough to realize that democracy was in itself a bureaucracy? dont insult my intellegence, i am fully capable enough to realize that myself without you having to point that out for me. with that said, your whole aurgument about 'animal farm' would be invalid then wouldnt it? i merely wanted a change in how things were run in these forums, thats all. and how is my approach biased? wow, you must be on a roll today with these baseless assumptions, because i plainly do not see how it can be. enlighten me if you will.

quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSnowman
Off your #1, i'm not really sure how this works with forums, as victor stated, like "random thoughts" or "personal/other pictures" and "artwork." Seriously, do you expect long circumlocuting posts just so we can get above 200 words? That's absurd, in teh cases of a picture, one liners are fine. I know what you mean when people write something really long and all they get in return is "wow, that is interesting" or soemthing like that. I've probably had this happen more than most people on this forum and i dont' take offense to it. As my ma' TM11 points out, it's not bad, it's not insulting so it's better than an offensive remark. I don't care, and if me, someone who this has happened to a lot doesn't care...how many others do? I'm sure i don't feel differently than everyone else. Different forums serve different purposes. PP and OP and random thoughts and artwork and reception and all those forums like that don't need 200+ words. I mean i've written large compositions in teh debate forum for no one to EVER respond (one thread comes to mind "masculine and feminine"). I'd rather have had someone say "interesitng" or something than nothing. I'm not really that discouraged cause i dont' care that much, but i don't think one liners are that bad. That's asking for too much, and asking for people to needlessly create long posts filled with nothing more than words repeating themselves just so they can appear long. Seriously though, do you realize how many complaints i get becasue of the size of my posts? People don't want to read it, they wont' and they just skip over it. Either that, or they assume i'm mad becuase i wrote so much. I would not need to put that message in my signature if this wasn't happening on this forum because i have to disclaim everytime i write a longer post. If people are like this then i dont' see how meaningful replies would be able to help attract people when peopl ejust want a place to get together and share ideas without reading a novel. Think realistically for a second, we have a lot of freshmen and a lot of younger kids on teh forum. I myself am only 18, probably as old as you, but people our age don't tend to want to come online and type novels for intellectual vigor. If you want an environment of high schoolers who want to do that, go to crossx.com, you'll find whatever you want there and more. This is a kpop forum, the mention of that doesn't really entail the words "intellectual vigor" in my mind, i don't see why it would attract it. A forum for that purpsoe would attract that audience, but what the image put out seems two faced in a way. We have a kpop forum, and then when poeple come to join they are immediately assessed and filtered in order to see if they reach the standards. These standards aren't realisitc. I like a lot of the shorter posters, like alex who posts are really contributive and i like what he brings to the forum. Will he be gone becuase he doesn't post 200+ words? I hope not, that'd be just stupid. But if it's what you want then ok. Or are we going to start deducting post counts until everyone gets into the negative range? haha. It'll scare more poeple than it will attract. Too authoritative if you ask me. We have a new elimination of the beaurocracy through democracy, adn then now we turn around and have a huge liberal aspect of the forum administration that goes and filters everything, like a huge censorship...ugh.

here you go again, showing your disgust for things i never said. let me help you and redisect together what i said earlier concerning quality posts:

quote:
Originally posted by jusunlee
i wish more of you would make posts containing 200+ words more often.

about the "no garbage" policy:

quote:
Originally posted by jusunlee
also, ive noticed whenever there are quality posts, some of the replies they get are unforgivable. if youre going to respond to such a post, atleast have the decency to be sincere and informative.

how in the world did you conclude that i was going to require 200 words for every post from what i said? i merely asked that people make more useful posts more often, and that people response sincerely if they were to respond to quality posts. there is no connection between the two, something you seem to mistaken for. i even went as far to clarify this in my response to crazydeb8ter, as he was also quick to judge without thoroughly reading everything:

quote:
Originally posted by jusunlee
i was only refering to quality posts with garbage responses.

which again brings us to a point that your auguments are baseless, as much as they are correct. had ive been trying to advocate for 200+ for all posts, then i would have been obviously at fault. but by assuming such a thing would be insulting my intellegence. i am more capable as an administrator than to make such irrational decisions.

quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSnowman
i kind of all ready talked about this. But, it really doesn't discourage me that much and i'm sure a lot of people who post long posts like me and some others don't feel so discouraged. I don't think the forums will regress into a demented community either. I haven't left becuase of some of the one liners i get. It's nice to know people appreciate what i said, even if they didn't read it cause i really don't know hehe. But, granted people probably leave because of that...though i've really NEVER seen that happen on these forums EVER, and i've been here pretty much since the beginning.

i find it interesting how you can say such a thing even after complaining in backstage not so long ago how krnswat had the ability to ruin a perfectly fine (and lengthy) discussion merely by inputting a one lined comment. you seemed pretty annoyed back then. had you read my original post more thoroughly, you would have realized it was those very possiblities that i was trying to eliminate by imposing the 'no gabage' policy.

once again, it wont affect any other threads but ones that are started with quality posts. the rest of the forums will still continually run like before and be unaffected by the new policy.

Posted by micron on 01-28-2003 05:27 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSnowman
all right, i'm waiting for you in the debate and enlightenment forums. Bring it.

one the sidenote, i appreciate the fact that you guys can overlook the fact that i am the owner/administrator of this site and argue with me. thats very courageous. i dont think i would be able to bring myself about to get into an arguement with an administrator of another forum no matter how blatantly wrong they may be, as i am cowardly. its commendable, really, even though it brings me to bad light, because it ensures that i make the right decisions.

quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSnowman
No you aren't. If you really are, tell me how. I don't think this applies to me.

you, who arrogantly make blatantly wrong assumptions one after another, why yes, ofcourse it also applies to you.

quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSnowman
This really is offensive (yes, "the purpose of htis wasn't to offend" but well, you can't just disclaim and then say whatever you want cause then you'd make disclaimers have no worth by your abuse of them, i realize intent, but if you've read any of my posts (the ones that tend to be hmm really long) you'd realize how little i care about intent in regards to anything). Have you never been to the debate or enlightenment forum? How do you have the audacity to possibly say that after even clicking on ONE of those threads. There are plenty of posts longer than what you just posted. In face, there have been plenty that have gone OVER the character limit...hmm yes longer.

do you realize this is the only justified statement youve made in your lengthly post? no, i have hardly went to the debate forums, as i am not much of a debater, and felt there was no need for me to go there previously as hardly any problems arise there for moderation. ill gladly retract my statement concerning the length of my post, as i was obviously wrong in my assertion.

quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSnowman
If we don't have it, let's filter out the underprivilidged who could be deemed mature enough, why not? Or we could just deduct post counts. This is getting out of hand...in all seriousness, I don't think we "need" one to make it work, it'll probably work right now.

Ugh, this is such a repulsive move. I can't believe you are advocating such a segregating move in order to actuate your own utilitarian views to be someday implemented of what the forums should be. As if you think this is some sort of deontological move you hvae to make...hey, deduct 100 posts off my next post. I really don't care. In other words, i don't see why you should be discouraged by my next reply. There are other real replies in this thread. It's not to up my post count, cause i dont' care.

again, there you go with unfounded conclusions. im too tired to make another lengthly reply, sorry. go reread my original post.

quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSnowman
man, so do i.

http://www.jusunlee.com/forums/show...;threadid=10034
http://www.jusunlee.com/forums/show...p;threadid=7007
http://www.jusunlee.com/forums/show...p;threadid=6436
http://www.jusunlee.com/forums/show...p;threadid=5397
http://www.jusunlee.com/forums/show...p;threadid=4265
http://www.jusunlee.com/forums/show...p;threadid=4265
http://www.jusunlee.com/forums/show...p;threadid=2763
http://www.jusunlee.com/forums/show...p;threadid=2368
http://www.jusunlee.com/forums/show...p;threadid=2203
http://www.jusunlee.com/forums/show...mp;threadid=774
http://www.jusunlee.com/forums/show...mp;threadid=761
http://www.jusunlee.com/forums/show...mp;threadid=562

i know this doesn't prove anything, but i find it annoying you do things like this and turn around and make a post like you just did in this thread about the rest of the forum being the problem.

and again.

Posted by micron on 01-28-2003 05:38 AM:

Re: Re: Re: Re: salt.

quote:
Originally posted by Crazydeb8ter
lets think about this for a second. Clearly? It is not so clear to me- nor to Roetgen, who did not seem to be offended as she was not looking for lengthy replies. I posted that one word because it summed up properly all the feelings I had in mind after reading her composition. Who are you, of all people, to simply excuse that one word as a flippant, trite, or useless reply. Who are you to assume the meaning of a post. Quality is not measured in length, but in the meaning and the thoughts that go behind it. I feel doubly offended now, that in labeling my reply as useless, you have discarded the feelings I had as unacceptable and as garbage. As while a picture is worth thousand words, so can a word.

oh please, dont flatter yourself. are you trying to tell me that you did infact give her post some thought before you resolved to reply with one word? as much as i applaud you for your debating skills, thats hardly believable. it would indeed be justified to conclude that your post is useless, especially without the further elaboration youve just given. how else was i, or anyone else for that matter, to know?

quote:
Originally posted by Crazydeb8ter
Yes, you are a fool for assuming as such. Shame on you. For being a proponent of "intellectual thought," you seem to severely lack the ability to see things from another's angle. Not only that, but you took action before you asked that person to clarify the meaning of the statement. Jumping to conclusions, shall we say?

its interesting that you say this, because you are the one who made baseless assumptions first. had you read my original post more thoroughly without jumping into your own conclusions, you would have realized that i never intended to force a 200+ word minimum on every post, but only for responses to quality posts, as i clarified in my second post addressed to you. ive never directly attacked your integrity, but you, after the integrity youve shown (or the lack of), decided to redicule mine. you, preaching openmindedness, even go as far to come to a conclusion that im closed minded, thus summing up my whole perspective about life, through one post. one post. some single mindedness huh? let me ask you this: who is more single minded; you, who put words into my mouth and jumped into a conclusion that i never intended, proceeding to expose the faults of your faulty assumption, and go as far as to slander and accuse me of faults ive never intended, or me, who merely tried to defend myself from your faulty and hastily made conclusion? jumping to conclusions, shall i say?

quote:
Originally posted by Crazydeb8ter
Had I an online bitch slapper, I would use it now, angry as I am.

im hurt (really). if you were offended by my posts, i apoligize. it was never my intention to offend you, or anyone else for that matter. i realize i may have come off very bluntly and rashly in some of my statements (and made some that may be uncalled for), but that is just my style. yet, i understand that a disclaimer does not warrant my rudeness as psychosnowman pointed out earlier. please understand my shortcomings as i will yours. im not much of a debater but in due time, as i see there will be much debating for me to do ahead, ill learn to become a more effective communicator. =)

Posted by PsychoSnowman on 01-28-2003 05:51 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by jusunlee

i find it interesting how you can say such a thing even after complaining in backstage not so long ago how krnswat had the ability to ruin a perfectly fine (and lengthy) discussion merely by inputting a one lined comment. you seemed pretty annoyed back then. had you read my original post more thoroughly, you would have realized it was those very possiblities that i was trying to eliminate by imposing the 'no gabage' policy.

I'll reply to the rest later, this one struck out as obvious though. Read on when i say that it's better to receive an encouraging "interesting" than an insulting remark. That being said. You aren't even arguing for the same point. You're connecting your own dots. I said krnswat had the ability to ruin a perfectly fine discussion by one liners that were intervening and told me to calm down, rather than someone just syaing "interesting" or another not insulting/not intervening remark. his remark interrupted the discussion, not a remark upon how the post was intriguing or profound or whatever. There is a difference, and it's in no way a cop out. I knew you'd bring this up (yes, good for me, i know), and it just doesn't work. His remarks asked for a halt of discussion (i.e. intervening remark), not a simple one liner. There are different types of one liners, some are harmful, some are neutral, and others help to boost things forward.

And, of course i thought this might have been a reason for you to enact this policy. But, then i thought about it more and realized that it really didn't connect all that well and some of the lines drawn are imaginary because they are really connected in some ways but not in others.

Posted by marvinOPPA on 01-28-2003 06:00 AM:

omg...there are so many grammatical errors. ive been tryin not to think bout them....but i jus wanna go thru and correct them...ARGGGG!!

Posted by micron on 01-28-2003 06:06 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by tm11
ooh that's nice...

thanks for pointing out my faults so lightly. your arguments struck a chord. and i think you're the only one who replied so far that actually read my original post as it is. =*)

id like to say more, but im tired now, from writing so much already. ill get back to you tomorrow.

Posted by PsychoSnowman on 01-28-2003 06:20 AM:

i realize that i misread the first post in some aspects and i was rather insulted by what you wrote so i started extrapolating on bad cases that could happen because of it. I am sorry for that, and i realize that a lot of the scenarios i outlined are worse case ones, but that doesn't mean they are simply without warrant, though i know the probablility of such is very low. I'm fine with that. Yes, i misunderstood what you meant as trash posts, and hence a lot of what i said in the previous post was based on wrong ideas.

quote:
Originally posted by jusunlee
youre putting this to an extreme. how am i, in any way, trying to create an 'intellectual apartheid' as you so keenly chose to call it? by requiring thoughtful replies to quality posts? i admit that my original definition of a 'quality post' was somewhat unfounded, and maybe even my approach to preserve quality posts may not have been the best, as tm11 pointed out, but for you to go as far as to say that im trying to create some sort of an elitism is rediculous. from where, may i ask, did you come up with this brilliant conclusion?

actually that phrase is from tm11's post, and ok, wow it's an extreme, good job. "Clearly," this must be be so unfounded. For me to go as far as to extrapolate and say you are trying to create an elitism? No no, you are effectually creating an elitism by deducting and deterring other members off. From where did i come up with the brilliant conclusion? Hmm, well if one thinks about it for awhile it is probable one can come up with a conclusion like this. It's not as if it's absurd that this intellectual apartheid could happen haha, it's foolish in my eyes to deny it by simply brushing it aside with regards to me somehow missing your intent. Intent doesn't even matter. That won't stop it from happening, or any mitigated version of it to. Yes, of course you could say it's foolish to think it could but it's not as if i'm fully advocating it and you of all people realize that i misread your course of actions so now i'm just clarifying what i meant and not advocating. I'm outlining possiblities, apparently i'm not the only one who thinks so. You somehow agree with TM11 when i borrowed the very wording he used (and he points it out so lightly? Sure, i agree with some of that. I don't see why you credit me with this idea so fully. I wasn't the first person to talk about it and people did afterwards.). But, yes i realize this is a worse case scenario.

quote:

i ask again, where are you coming up with such brilliant assertions of my intentions? if you redisect what i said earlier:
may i so politely ask where in that statement did i ever mention about "eliminating bureaucracy"? or did you think i was not intellegent enough to realize that democracy was in itself a bureaucracy? dont insult my intellegence, i am fully capable enough to realize that myself without you having to point that out for me. with that said, your whole aurgument about 'animal farm' would be invalid then wouldnt it? i merely wanted a change in how things were run in these forums, thats all. and how is my approach biased? wow, you must be on a roll today with these baseless assumptions, because i plainly do not see how it can be. enlighten me if you will.

yes you didn't say that, i apologize for misreading.

but, you miss the point again, it's not about my predictions of your intentions, it's about my predicitons of the effects of them. Regardless of intent, that's all i'm talking about. yes, good job, you didn't even say eliminate beurocracy, i simply perceived when you talked about a "the topic of the beaurocracy" i figured you meant it in a negative way which i implicated to mean that you wanted to eliminate it. I'm sorry, you are clearly intelligent enough to realize this and that a democracy is in itself a beaurocracy...let's think about that for a minute...of course i thought you didn't realize it... that's why i said it...seriously, there was no insulting that was meant by me (yes, intent isn't everything as i've been saying, i know, now if i didn't put this parenthetical note in here you might have pointed that out in a reply to this, but i woulnd't think you were insulting my intelligence by pointing it out like you have stated several times, it's rather impossible to read and know what someone knows. The insulting was effectual and not meant, i apologize. You should know i wasn't trying to insult you, it's not as if i know you in real life and you rarely posted before this...exactly how was i supposed to know this? hah, i don't think anyone could have known either way)

Anyway, How is your approach biased? Because you deem what is quality posts and what is not. Just stating the obvious. Oh yes, and my whole argument about the animal farm goes away in an aspect, sure. I was under a misunderstanding. It wasn't that great anyway, it was a heat of the moment thing haha

quote:

here you go again, showing your disgust for things i never said. let me help you and redisect together what i said earlier concerning quality posts:
about the "no garbage" policy:
how in the world did you conclude that i was going to require 200 words for every post from what i said? i merely asked that people make more useful posts more often, and that people response sincerely if they were to respond to quality posts. there is no connection between the two, something you seem to mistaken for. i even went as far to clarify this in my response to crazydeb8ter, as he was also quick to judge without thoroughly reading everything:
which again brings us to a point that your auguments are baseless, as much as they are correct. had ive been trying to advocate for 200+ for all posts, then i would have been obviously at fault. but by assuming such a thing would be insulting my intellegence. i am more capable as an administrator than to make such irrational decisions.

no no, that was never the point. I was just exploiting an absurdity i saw in your post. Of course i realize you weren't going to require 200 words per post. The number 200 was continually cited only because it was the one that you used. It is being used in the context as any post being "long enough" for it to be considered "quality." I was showing my disgust for any sort of penalty for having "garbage posts" as in no posts should penalize a person. That is what the disgust is for, did you not say that? I'm sorry, it must be baseless. Seriously, that's what it is. I'm negating the entire idea of "quality posts," you did bring that up. Despite the specifics in the post that you interpret so literally (200 words requirement, it was exploitation of the idea of how length can dictate quality, yes i realize you've answered this), the entirety of it is about how quality post deeming is not in the best interest i think, but you are the admin. You, who agrees with the TM11's post, choose to ignore that entire facet of the post in order to make me, and crazydeb8ter, the scapegoats for the 200 word misunderstanding? Thank you.

I didn't conclude you were going to require 200 words, i coudl very well say here "don't insult my intelligence," and in a way i just did, but i don't want that. If i came off condescending my post i apologize, i think i came off more mad that condescending but just in case. I would think that is why you are replying in what comes off to me right now as a condescending tone because of reciprocity? i'd think that, or maybe you just feel like acting like that, but whatever i don't want to waste time disecting behavior.

quote:

once again, it wont affect any other threads but ones that are started with quality posts. the rest of the forums will still continually run like before and be unaffected by the new policy.

ok.

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:05 AM.

Pages (5): « 1 [2] 3 4 » ... Last »
Show all 86 posts from this thread on one page