Change to News, Politics & Economics posting rights
Discussion
Surely those that have a long running account but few post are those that read rather than comment and as such will still be able to read but may not be able to post?
Something needed to be done about the trolls. In my mind I assumed PH would eventually have a paywall so this is a good move.
Something needed to be done about the trolls. In my mind I assumed PH would eventually have a paywall so this is a good move.
fatbutt said:
Surely those that have a long running account but few post are those that read rather than comment and as such will still be able to read but may not be able to post?
Something needed to be done about the trolls. In my mind I assumed PH would eventually have a paywall so this is a good move.
Maybe some people prefer quality over quantity.Something needed to be done about the trolls. In my mind I assumed PH would eventually have a paywall so this is a good move.
Rufus Stone said:
fatbutt said:
Surely those that have a long running account but few post are those that read rather than comment and as such will still be able to read but may not be able to post?
Something needed to be done about the trolls. In my mind I assumed PH would eventually have a paywall so this is a good move.
Maybe some people prefer quality over quantity.Something needed to be done about the trolls. In my mind I assumed PH would eventually have a paywall so this is a good move.
I thought I didn’t post much!I've given this some thought,
Whilst the I fully understand the reasoning behind the decision, it is quite flawed.
I have been on here for over ten years, and read it regularly and is in many instances my first source for fact checking.
This is because I am sure there are many thousands of people like me, with a wealth of knowledge in specialist areas that would only contribute if they had something valuable to add.
I haven't looked back at peoples history but as an example someone like Elysium who has kept me sane and balanced during the pandemic may not have ever contributed on a different subject.
Or on the Ukraine thread I am sure there are may retired Generals and military types that add information, or more importantly challenge the rubbish that the usual ten/twenty/one hundred people that dominate every subject spout.
Maybe they should do it the other way and ban anyone with more than 100 posts in more than two subject areas on NPE. No-one is an expert in that many areas.
Whilst the I fully understand the reasoning behind the decision, it is quite flawed.
I have been on here for over ten years, and read it regularly and is in many instances my first source for fact checking.
This is because I am sure there are many thousands of people like me, with a wealth of knowledge in specialist areas that would only contribute if they had something valuable to add.
I haven't looked back at peoples history but as an example someone like Elysium who has kept me sane and balanced during the pandemic may not have ever contributed on a different subject.
Or on the Ukraine thread I am sure there are may retired Generals and military types that add information, or more importantly challenge the rubbish that the usual ten/twenty/one hundred people that dominate every subject spout.
Maybe they should do it the other way and ban anyone with more than 100 posts in more than two subject areas on NPE. No-one is an expert in that many areas.
Peter911 said:
This is because I am sure there are many thousands of people like me, with a wealth of knowledge in specialist areas that would only contribute if they had something valuable to add.
I honestly don't get this argument. If you have a wealth of knowledge in specialist areas then at the very least you would be posting comments that back up / reinforce posts that are in agreement with your aforementioned wealth of knowledge. For example, if someone were to post "I'm pretty sure that <some fact or other> is true, although I'm happy to be proved wrong" then surely you might reply "You are absolutely correct, <some fact or other> is indeed true. I was closely involved in the development of <blah blah etc.>" rather than leaving the doubt there.
Or "That's broadly true, but in addition to that <some extra information or anecdote or edge case or caveat>"
The forums are a community. I just don't get the lurker mentality - all take and no give.
(This isn't aimed specifically at you, btw, it is a general comment with regards to these and similar posts)
Edited by Clockwork Cupcake on Friday 22 April 10:08
The Lurker Mentality.
A clue? Time.
Sporadically, or often, I visit. Sometimes I go for days/weeks/ months without. it’s solely just to fill time where I can afford to do so. For s
ts and giggles or information, fact checking - whatever.
I look at some of the big-hitting posters and I honestly wonder where and how they find the time, coupled with that being spread over years and years.
That surely equates to a lot of time typing? I’m sure it has to be considered absolutely rewarding in every sense - as you just wouldn’t bother?
But when you look back on your life which we all will one day. I wonder if any, may think I probably could have spent less time on PH.
I really don’t feel it’s a ‘one size fits’ for all posting achievement or commitment - there are other factors at play.
And individual preference.
A clue? Time.
Sporadically, or often, I visit. Sometimes I go for days/weeks/ months without. it’s solely just to fill time where I can afford to do so. For s
ts and giggles or information, fact checking - whatever.I look at some of the big-hitting posters and I honestly wonder where and how they find the time, coupled with that being spread over years and years.
That surely equates to a lot of time typing? I’m sure it has to be considered absolutely rewarding in every sense - as you just wouldn’t bother?
But when you look back on your life which we all will one day. I wonder if any, may think I probably could have spent less time on PH.
I really don’t feel it’s a ‘one size fits’ for all posting achievement or commitment - there are other factors at play.
And individual preference.
I'll confess to being somewhat of a 'lurker', with a very low post count given how many years ago I joined. Whilst I appreciate the aim of trying to reduce troll posts on NP&E forums, the requisite post count does seem to be quite high and judging by this thread will exclude many long-termers from being able to contribute.
I also find some of the comments in this thread a little odd, regarding people's contributions (or lack thereof) to the more motoring focussed parts of the forum. They are what brought me here but it's the breadth and sheer volume of information and discussion about such varied subjects throughout that have kept me here 'lurking' on a daily basis. Although I'm rarely moved to contribute, I enjoy reading many of the discussions and the fact that the very large membership allows the whole societal spectrum to be represented. As in all aspects of life, I agree with some posts and disagree or even find abhorrent some others.
My thought is that people keep readily feeding the obvious trolls and that's what keeps them here. If the greater membership was more self-policing and simply ignored obvious troll posts, surely that would be an effective way of discouraging them. I fear that what's been implemented here will be taken as a challenge by dedicated trolls who'll be determined to find a way to circumvent.
There also seems to be a degree of glee in some of the posts in this thread that suggests that some seem feel that their contributions to the forum are inherently more worthy, simply because they've posted a greater number over a certain time period. This is a little disappointing as I've largely found the forum to be surprisingly inclusive and diverse normally.
Anyway, just my 2p worth; I'll continue to enjoy reading even if I'll be unable to partake in certain discussions whether i'd like to or not!
I also find some of the comments in this thread a little odd, regarding people's contributions (or lack thereof) to the more motoring focussed parts of the forum. They are what brought me here but it's the breadth and sheer volume of information and discussion about such varied subjects throughout that have kept me here 'lurking' on a daily basis. Although I'm rarely moved to contribute, I enjoy reading many of the discussions and the fact that the very large membership allows the whole societal spectrum to be represented. As in all aspects of life, I agree with some posts and disagree or even find abhorrent some others.
My thought is that people keep readily feeding the obvious trolls and that's what keeps them here. If the greater membership was more self-policing and simply ignored obvious troll posts, surely that would be an effective way of discouraging them. I fear that what's been implemented here will be taken as a challenge by dedicated trolls who'll be determined to find a way to circumvent.
There also seems to be a degree of glee in some of the posts in this thread that suggests that some seem feel that their contributions to the forum are inherently more worthy, simply because they've posted a greater number over a certain time period. This is a little disappointing as I've largely found the forum to be surprisingly inclusive and diverse normally.
Anyway, just my 2p worth; I'll continue to enjoy reading even if I'll be unable to partake in certain discussions whether i'd like to or not!
Jim H said:
The Lurker Mentality.
A clue? Time.
Sporadically, or often, I visit. Sometimes I go for days/weeks/ months without. it’s solely just to fill time where I can afford to do so. For sts and giggles or information, fact checking - whatever.
I wasn't debating that. I was querying the "I read a lot but don't feel the need to post" attitude. That's completely different from "I don't visit often". A clue? Time.
Sporadically, or often, I visit. Sometimes I go for days/weeks/ months without. it’s solely just to fill time where I can afford to do so. For s
ts and giggles or information, fact checking - whatever.Jim H said:
I look at some of the big-hitting posters and I honestly wonder where and how they find the time, coupled with that being spread over years and years.
That surely equates to a lot of time typing? I’m sure it has to be considered absolutely rewarding in every sense - as you just wouldn’t bother?
But when you look back on your life which we all will one day. I wonder if any, may think I probably could have spent less time on PH.
I see what you're implying, but I have made loads of friends in real life via PistonHeads. I have been to social events, homes, even weddings, of people I have met on PH. I've been on some amazing road trips with PH friends. Over half my friends on Facebook are people I met through PH. I've even landed fee-paying work due to friendships and contacts made on PH. That surely equates to a lot of time typing? I’m sure it has to be considered absolutely rewarding in every sense - as you just wouldn’t bother?
But when you look back on your life which we all will one day. I wonder if any, may think I probably could have spent less time on PH.
So when I look back on my life, I will think that PH is the best thing that ever happened to me socially.
But, as you say, it's an individual thing.
Peter911 said:
I've given this some thought,
Whilst the I fully understand the reasoning behind the decision, it is quite flawed.
I have been on here for over ten years, and read it regularly and is in many instances my first source for fact checking.
This is because I am sure there are many thousands of people like me, with a wealth of knowledge in specialist areas that would only contribute if they had something valuable to add.
I haven't looked back at peoples history but as an example someone like Elysium who has kept me sane and balanced during the pandemic may not have ever contributed on a different subject.
Or on the Ukraine thread I am sure there are may retired Generals and military types that add information, or more importantly challenge the rubbish that the usual ten/twenty/one hundred people that dominate every subject spout.
Maybe they should do it the other way and ban anyone with more than 100 posts in more than two subject areas on NPE. No-one is an expert in that many areas.
+1 Whilst the I fully understand the reasoning behind the decision, it is quite flawed.
I have been on here for over ten years, and read it regularly and is in many instances my first source for fact checking.
This is because I am sure there are many thousands of people like me, with a wealth of knowledge in specialist areas that would only contribute if they had something valuable to add.
I haven't looked back at peoples history but as an example someone like Elysium who has kept me sane and balanced during the pandemic may not have ever contributed on a different subject.
Or on the Ukraine thread I am sure there are may retired Generals and military types that add information, or more importantly challenge the rubbish that the usual ten/twenty/one hundred people that dominate every subject spout.
Maybe they should do it the other way and ban anyone with more than 100 posts in more than two subject areas on NPE. No-one is an expert in that many areas.
Bodo said:
Is the reason for your restriction to contribute to NP&E that you have <12 months of membership, or that less than 1,000 of your 2,784 posts have been made outside of NP&E?
What's your point? I've not had any bans or warnings.I'm a non troll member that's been a contributer for 11 months without any issues who has effectively been given a temporary ban from a while subset of the forum.
Without wishing to sound rude, what i post on is none of your business.
As another long-time lurker / very infrequent poster, while I agree that there is an issue in NPE, I don't think this is the best way to solve it.
Don't think I've ever posted in NPE, but I do read it a bit and then usually regret it. There are no end of topics in NPE which end up as a slanging match between 3-4 posters, often the 'old hands' with 30000 posts each and seem to spend their days doing nothing but arguing on PH. A better solution would be a limit on posts-per-time either in total or per thread, e.g. max 3 posts per day in any thread or something like that. That would still allow people who have something useful to contribute to do it, but limit the appeal to troll accounts and the more deranged keyboard warriors.
Jim H said:
The Lurker Mentality.
A clue? Time.
Sporadically, or often, I visit. Sometimes I go for days/weeks/ months without. it’s solely just to fill time where I can afford to do so. For sts and giggles or information, fact checking - whatever.
I look at some of the big-hitting posters and I honestly wonder where and how they find the time, coupled with that being spread over years and years.
That surely equates to a lot of time typing? I’m sure it has to be considered absolutely rewarding in every sense - as you just wouldn’t bother?
But when you look back on your life which we all will one day. I wonder if any, may think I probably could have spent less time on PH.
I really don’t feel it’s a ‘one size fits’ for all posting achievement or commitment - there are other factors at play.
And individual preference.
Clearly this doesn't apply to everyone, but many users seem to post during 9-5, Monday to Friday, i.e work hours. Especially the people who post frequently. So really, they aren't consuming much, if any, of their own time/private time/family time. A clue? Time.
Sporadically, or often, I visit. Sometimes I go for days/weeks/ months without. it’s solely just to fill time where I can afford to do so. For s
ts and giggles or information, fact checking - whatever.I look at some of the big-hitting posters and I honestly wonder where and how they find the time, coupled with that being spread over years and years.
That surely equates to a lot of time typing? I’m sure it has to be considered absolutely rewarding in every sense - as you just wouldn’t bother?
But when you look back on your life which we all will one day. I wonder if any, may think I probably could have spent less time on PH.
I really don’t feel it’s a ‘one size fits’ for all posting achievement or commitment - there are other factors at play.
And individual preference.
Probably less than 5% of my posts are evenings or weekends. Occasionally I will post outside office hours while I'm sat waiting for something, such as waiting for my wife to finish browsing in a shop
I fully appreciate what you are saying about 'wasting' so much time on a forum, but I suppose if people enjoy it, then why not?
Speaking personally, I've learned loads from PH. Lots of really useful stuff to do with business, personal finance, investments, careers and tax advice, property stuff, and so on. PH has solved a few problems for me and genuinely helped me in many areas, so I am quite happy to have spent 1-2 hours a week having a read or posting something (during office hours...)
Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 22 April 11:32
This thread has brought out nearly as many lurkers as the weekly prize thread did a couple of years ago.
Lurkers are not contributors, who are what makes this place the forum it is.
Without contributors forums die.
So to all you lurkers who are complaining, there is a simple remedy to your complaint
Lurkers are not contributors, who are what makes this place the forum it is.
Without contributors forums die.
So to all you lurkers who are complaining, there is a simple remedy to your complaint
Ben Lowden said:
... lots of stuff.......... ......and posted 1,000 times in our motoring forums in order to post in NP&E. This will be applied retrospectively to existing members too......... more stuff.
It does read that 'you must have 1000 posts excluding your posts in "The Pie and Piston". '.Be interesting to see if it is.
Jenny Tailor said:
Ben Lowden said:
... lots of stuff.......... ......and posted 1,000 times in our motoring forums in order to post in NP&E. This will be applied retrospectively to existing members too......... more stuff.
It does read that 'you must have 1000 posts excluding your posts in "The Pie and Piston". '.Be interesting to see if it is.
CarCrazyDad said:
What's your point? I've not had any bans or warnings.
I'm a non troll member that's been a contributer for 11 months without any issues who has effectively been given a temporary ban from a while subset of the forum.
Without wishing to sound rude, what i post on is none of your business.
Chin up, another 8 days and you will be qualified.I'm a non troll member that's been a contributer for 11 months without any issues who has effectively been given a temporary ban from a while subset of the forum.
Without wishing to sound rude, what i post on is none of your business.
Unless you get banned first for being a bit obnoxious.
And you need to get your memory sorted as well
Monkeylegend said:
CarCrazyDad said:
What's your point? I've not had any bans or warnings.
I'm a non troll member that's been a contributer for 11 months without any issues who has effectively been given a temporary ban from a while subset of the forum.
Without wishing to sound rude, what i post on is none of your business.
Chin up, another 8 days and you will be qualified.I'm a non troll member that's been a contributer for 11 months without any issues who has effectively been given a temporary ban from a while subset of the forum.
Without wishing to sound rude, what i post on is none of your business.
Unless you get banned first for being a bit obnoxious.
And you need to get your memory sorted as well
Made me chortle.
Gassing Station | Website Feedback | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff