|
quote:
Originally posted by marvinOPPA
the reason people thought u meant 200+ word count for all posts...even tho u dint say such a thing...its because people tend to gestalt...or in laymen's terms...complete an object or make whole...so by readin 'quality post' and '200+ words' the simply "completed" ur statement....for example...the picuture at the bottom was sent out to random people and i asked for them to look at the picture and to redraw it....100% (6 of 6)redrew a COMPLETE circle...even tho everybody sees the gap...unconciously completes the circle in their mind and draws a complete circle...
haha. a psychological perspective to why people misunderstood.. no wonder you were pressing me to make a 'circle'. but the reason i redrew a full circle was because i misunderstood what you meant - the directions you gave me were too vague and i didnt know what you really wanted me to do. i think thats also part of the reason why people were confused here - the wording i used, and how i presented everything.
quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSnowman
No offense is intended at all. But, every single person made this argument pretty much, and you brushed it aside when i said it in a condescending way, brushed it aside when victor said it, only for you to honor TM11 for it? I don't really care that much and no offense is intended...but i don't see why you have to pick and choose, especially after you denoted almost my entire first post as "baseless" (granted a lot of it was) when i voiced this very same argument.
actually, crazydeb8ters argument was misleading - he stressed the requirement of 200 posts for every posts more than anything else. i overlooked it the first time i read it, but i did mention something about it in my last reply to crazydeb8ter. and i dont think you ever implicitly criticized the apparent unfairness of penalizing people only by my perception of what was quality or not. if you did, i must have overlooked it, im sorry.
quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSnowman
Just to clarify as i don't think i really ever did, i figured the wording you used, "bearocracy" entailed something bad. We've talked about it in the backstage forum about how the beaurocracy of the moderators may scare people away, because new poeple may come here and see every know everyone on a first name basis and whatever and be deterred from it. I didn't think you realized that you could possibly make a new one, and that i thought you wanted to get rid of it by making what i perceived to be your new democracy. But, now i realize you did and i had a lot of misconceptions.
Anyway, i think this really is a good idea. I really misperceived it, and i'm looking forward to seeing this being actuated in these forums.
its 2.30am right now, i need more brain power to give you a more thorough reply. ill get back to you tomorrow, to everyone actually, becuase this really concerns everyone. ill rebrief myself in american history and lay out the basic guidelines of the new government based on the american republic sometime tomorrow. everyone is free to add or suggest anything. everyone will be included in the making - we'll all do this together. as an incentive, for people who really help out, im going to give them a secret pass to the new media section (accessible only for one week though). =)
quote:
Originally posted by TyGer STyLe
really in my opinion (i jus noticed how accoustomed i am to using that statement now...) i could careless about the post count, spamming (as long as it doesn't get out of hand and kept to certain areas), and the politics of this whole issue... yes there has been a lack of meaningfull posts lately from what ive seen, but this forum hasn't particularly attracted the older more experienced and well spoken people... so its hard to put such a high standard of word usage in replies, not many people can match the ability to debate and put into words what they feel as well as victor, snowman, tm11 and such, so i don't feel its a good idea at putting the level that high... perhaps 30 would be appropriate? anyway i think its a decent idea, but needs some work... sorry if im just repeating the issues you guys said before, but i was really too lazy to read through that book of replies...
you have some good points but i think theyve all been mentioned already. and just to clarify again, because i think youve misread my original thread, i wasnt going to require 200+ word posts on every post. i asked people to make meaningful posts more often, and in my haste attributed 'meaningful' by '200+ words'. and the penalty was for people who i deemed replied thoughtlessly in the more thoughtful posts, so to preserve the quality of the thread. the former still stands, but the latter, i decided might not be for the best.
quote:
Originally posted by TyGer STyLe
oh by the way... some of you people get offended much to easily at some harmless remarks... really some of the stuff you guys point out really has no bearing on the subject and can be avoided... just a suggestion, try ignoring some of the less offensive stuff eh?
heh. its called passionate writing. haha, im only joking. yes, i think some replies got out of hand, mine included. thanks for the advice, will keep in mind next time. =)
quote:
Originally posted by tm11
I'm still curious to hear about the status of the e-zine as well as the media section, but like david said, no rush heh.
im planning to put up a new batch of old zandd.com articles sometime this week. and hopefully, for next month, we can start our own. i shouldnt be all that busy now, that college apps are over and 2nd semester started. ill be able to dedicate more time into this site. =)
|
01-29-2003 05:45 AM
no rush.
