[hotShot]

gwnn, on 2011-August-05, 08:27, said:

I don't understand that scale hotshot. I think it's probably me, but it seems to sound like:

"on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is a horse, and 10 is an orange tree, where would you put an Interstate highway?"

I think there are (along with the majority of posts that are non-annoying) annoying posts and very annoying posts. I don't think very, very, very annoying posts will ever cause anyone to commit a crime.

Sorry though it was clear, but it was not. Edited the post to clarify. At least I hope it does.

[gwnn]

Unfortunately I still cannot comply to our request because I don't see a continuum of "evil", or what not, between these two notions. I have some criteria that I dislike about certain posts, but they are not necessarily on a continuum.

If your point is that our annoyance at someone reading and replying on the forums almost exclusively for the sake of finding posts that are too short, or too off-topic, or too impolite is ultimately insignificant compared to the suffering of children in Sudan, I agree with that. I agree that there could be hypothetical posts that are 10 times more annoying than the posts objected to in this thread. I don't think that means much, though: these posts are annoying and we would like to see mods do something about it. You obviously don't.

[Phil]

hotShot, on 2011-August-05, 08:12, said:

So compared with your irrigation with those suit symbols, the effect of the ignore functions would be worse?

The ♠ is clearly best for irrigation; it makes nice straight rows in my garden!

(don't mean to poke fun at your English usage hotshot, but I couldn't resist this one )

[hotShot]

Phil, on 2011-August-05, 08:57, said:

The ♠ is clearly best for irrigation; it makes nice straight rows in my garden!

(don't mean to poke fun at your English usage hotshot, but I couldn't resist this one )

at least this typo is funny.

[matmat]

The inquistion, what a show
The inquistion, here we go
We know you're wishing
That we'd go away
But the Inquistion's here
And it's here to stay
The inquistion, oh boy
The inquistion, what a joy
The inquistion, oy oy

-- Mel Brooks.

[matmat]

gwnn, on 2011-August-05, 05:18, said:

Thank you for that apparently very wise, deep post hotShot. Four problems with it:

• some people do not like the "ignore user function", because it can create confusion, a notable example being unblocked replies to blocked posts.

A small clickable phrase shows up where the blocked person's post would have been. you can click on that to expand if you need to be able to see the post to understand whatever reference someone else is making.

[inquiry]

gwnn, on 2011-August-05, 03:56, said:

Mods, this is ridiculous, look at Lurpoa. She thinks she is some sort of hippyfairy, she is flooding the forums with her obnoxious objections. She seems to hate short posts and off-topic/funny posts. Fair enough. She can ask for clarification, but the gratuitous heart symbols are obviously annoying to a lot of people (8 people upvoted the opening post of Free but it is very likely there are others out there) - and what is your response? Edit Free's post.

Free asked that long string of hearts be blocked, using long strings of hearts. This is a trivial and non-trivial problem, as noted by Free's post with heart space heart as only one way to get around the limitations. A thousand hearts in a row would leave a lot of hearts left in the string after the program does it thing. Free's post was "edit" in effect because of the very limitation he was seeking. Truely harsh critics here, complaining when people get what they want........

[Antrax]

The lengths you would have to go to, to stop someone from embedding a long string of hearts in their posts, would damage many of the capabilities of the forum for many users. I couldn't agree more with hotShot, and generally I'm not sure why some very smart people waste their time with such nonsense. Also, it makes me feel dirty but I do agree with Lurpoa to some extent wrt "wtp" posts, frequent hijacks to make in-jokes and the existence of a small group of posters that consistently back each other up on every issue.

[gwnn]

Antrax, on 2011-August-07, 08:16, said:

The lengths you would have to go to, to stop someone from embedding a long string of hearts in their posts, would damage many of the capabilities of the forum for many users.

Could you explain more clearly what do you mean by this? What are those "many capabilities" that would be damaged?

Antrax, on 2011-August-07, 08:16, said:

I couldn't agree more with hotShot, and generally I'm not sure why some very smart people waste their time with such nonsense.

Even though I wouldn't call myself very smart, I am tempted to reply to this: I am simply annoyed by someone calling a 1 worded post by me "forum abuse", and annoyed at that particular tone of voice. I can't help being annoyed. You are not annoyed, well done you. I am sure there are things out there that annoy you but not me - it's just the way the world works. You should accept that there are people who see certain things differently than you. Apparently 9 people agreed with Free, so wtp? Why is your view better than these 9 people's?

Antrax, on 2011-August-07, 08:16, said:

Also, it makes me feel dirty but I do agree with Lurpoa to some extent wrt "wtp" posts, frequent hijacks to make in-jokes

So far as I know, she did not reply to any wtp posts. Indeed jlogic, phil and I replied to a thread with 6 words total, but just tell me, which would you prefer: 1 worders or nothing? And I don't want to sound like a broken record about reasoning in bridge, I just want to say that I double on that hand because I think it looks more like a double than a 3♦ bid. Some other hands would look more like a 3♦ bid than a double.

Antrax, on 2011-August-07, 08:16, said:

the existence of a small group of posters that consistently back each other up on every issue.

I think you mean hotshot and Antrax who apparently upvote each other's posts Seriously though, yes indeed, there are groups of people who like each other's posts more than other groups, but isn't that just normal? And I might add that sometimes when a certain group of posters always agree with each other and another group of posters always disagree with the former group, it is simply because the former group is better in bridge than the latter. I guess it is elitist that smart people agree with each other and disagree with outsiders, but it is what it is. Please note that I would never include myself in the group of smart people, especially on BBF.

[Free]

Antrax, on 2011-August-07, 08:16, said:

The lengths you would have to go to, to stop someone from embedding a long string of hearts in their posts, would damage many of the capabilities of the forum for many users.

I don't know any useful capability for which you require multiple consecutive suit symbols. Please enlighten me.

[mtvesuvius]

Free, on 2011-August-07, 12:43, said:

I don't know any useful capability for which you require multiple consecutive suit symbols. Please enlighten me.

Annoying people is not a useful capability? Since when?

[matmat]

gwnn, on 2011-August-07, 11:03, said:

Long post redacted.

I need my downvotes back.

[Antrax]

gwnn said:

Could you explain more clearly what do you mean by this? What are those "many capabilities" that would be damaged?

There was a reason I didn't specify exactly what I meant. I'll PM it to gwnn, I'm not in the habit of helping annoying people be more annoying.

gwnn said:

You should accept that there are people who see certain things differently than you. Apparently 9 people agreed with Free, so wtp? Why is your view better than these 9 people's?

Should I ensure my view is better than that of 9 people whenever I want to express my opinion?

gwnn said:

So far as I know, she did not reply to any wtp posts. Indeed jlogic, phil and I replied to a thread with 6 words total, but just tell me, which would you prefer: 1 worders or nothing? And I don't want to sound like a broken record about reasoning in bridge, I just want to say that I double on that hand because I think it looks more like a double than a 3♦ bid. Some other hands would look more like a 3♦ bid than a double.

I would prefer nothing, but that's just the nature of the questions I ask, I suspect. I worry I'll be given an answer I don't understand but others do, at which point said others might not elaborate. But this is a different discussion that you guys had twice already, I think.
It's actually not that important to me, I'm pretty sure she's disingenuous when she complains about potentially unhelpful answers. So while I agree with her, I disagree with her motivation.

gwnn said:

Seriously though, yes indeed, there are groups of people who like each other's posts more than other groups, but isn't that just normal?

Of course it's normal, the thing people are best at is dividing themselves into groups and then hating people outside their group. Still, it makes the forum a less welcoming place than it might otherwise be.

[JLOGIC]

Pretty sure there is nothing wrong in replying with a one line/bid answer in reply to a bidding problem. People also make polls, is it not more useful when people reply with their answers rather than just vote (pretty sure BBF doesn't have public polls)? I feel like we had this debate a few years ago, yes a more detailed reply is better than stating what you'd bid, but I find it hard to believe that stating what you'd bid is worse than nothing to most people. What does it hurt? Likewise, a "3D wtp" is useful in that it states that the person thinks 3D is an obvious bid. What's the problem in that? Even if you in particular don't benefit anything from it, does it really hurt your experience so much that you'd rather have it not happen when others might benefit from it?

To be honest it feels like people whining about a non thorough answer feel entitled to one, and are really whining that they would have preferred a better answer.

Quote

the existence of a small group of posters that consistently back each other up on every issue.

What group is that? lol. I mean seriously do you think there is some conspiracy involved there, or is it more likely that some people often agree with each other (Yes, 7+ years of posting with other people will cause some amount of group think on some issues, that is normal. Likewise, good bridge players will often agree on bridge issues. Do you actually think anyone is backing other people up in bridge threads out of friendship? I am not sure if I'm included in this group you're talking about, but if so I think it's pretty obvious that I frequently post when I think my friends are wrong, in fact I'm more likely to and to put more effort into it when I think someone like gnasher or 655321 or whoever is wrong, not less likely).

Finally61 once said there was a mutual admiration society here. I don't really see it. When someone is wrong, people are likely to agree about it. Some people are often wrong. Etc, etc. I really doubt the causation of the same people backing each other up is friendship, it is just like mindedness which might lead to friendship.

Quote

Of course it's normal, the thing people are best at is dividing themselves into groups and then hating people outside their group. Still, it makes the forum a less welcoming place than it might otherwise be.

Hating? Really? Antrax I don't think you are a part of this group you are talking about, has anyone hated on you or made you feel unwelcome? As usual, I believe that the few people who end up outcast/ostracized have themselves to blame. They are not victims of some kind of bullying/conspiracy, as evidenced by the 99 % of other people who manage to not be.

[inquiry]

JLOGIC, on 2011-August-11, 23:46, said:

People also make polls, is it not more useful when people reply with their answers rather than just vote (pretty sure BBF doesn't have public polls)?

BBF does have public polls. The person setting up a poll can choose to make it public (or not).

[JLOGIC]

inquiry, on 2011-August-11, 23:54, said:

BBF does have public polls. The person setting up a poll can choose to make it public (or not).

My bad then! Must have been part of the new software

[the hog]

Does it really matter that Lurpoa uses lots of heart symbols? You can ignore her if it offends you.

[Antrax]

JLOGIC, on 2011-August-11, 23:46, said:

Pretty sure there is nothing wrong in replying with a one line/bid answer in reply to a bidding problem.

I'm pretty sure there's nothing wrong with that, as well. Still, I prefer longer answers, at the current stage in my development.

JLOGIC, on 2011-August-11, 23:46, said:

I find it hard to believe that stating what you'd bid is worse than nothing to most people. What does it hurt? Likewise, a "3D wtp" is useful in that it states that the person thinks 3D is an obvious bid. What's the problem in that? Even if you in particular don't benefit anything from it, does it really hurt your experience so much that you'd rather have it not happen when others might benefit from it?

I believe this was already answered in one of my previous posts. A short unsatisfactory (to me) answer reduces the odds of getting a long answer, and when I open topics I admit I care mostly about enlightening myself, rather than others.

JLOGIC, on 2011-August-11, 23:46, said:

To be honest it feels like people whining about a non thorough answer feel entitled to one, and are really whining that they would have preferred a better answer.

I appreciate your honesty, though I must admit I don't really understand how you tell apart a request from a whine.

JLOGIC, on 2011-August-11, 23:46, said:

What group is that? lol. I mean seriously do you think there is some conspiracy involved there, or is it more likely that some people often agree with each other (Yes, 7+ years of posting with other people will cause some amount of group think on some issues, that is normal.

Are you asking who they are so you can argue with me the group is accurate? It seems like you agree some amount of "groupthink" is natural, so what is the point of inquiring exactly who I have in mind?
I agree it's quite natural for friendships to develop and for friends to have each other's backs. Irrespective, this natural tendency also invokes a natural tendency for some people to feel excluded or ganged-up on. This can be viewed as an unfortunate necessity, or not. I choose the latter.

JLOGIC, on 2011-August-11, 23:46, said:

Hating? Really? Antrax I don't think you are a part of this group you are talking about, has anyone hated on you or made you feel unwelcome?

I don't think I've given anyone cause to hate me, but indeed I've often felt excluded. Some of my questions never received answers I found satisfactory, some of the jokes went over my head with the original poster not bothering to explain them even when asked about it, and at one point a member of the moderation team ignored me when I contacted him directly, and found no fault in that when called on it. It's not that I cry myself to sleep every night, and after posting here for a while I feel more welcome (and have learned to understand the idiosyncratic use of some acronyms and get some of the references), but certainly I've been welcomed more warmly to other forums on the internet.

[aguahombre]

I have made a note to myself. When I want to refer to people's views on perceived "cliqueism" (is that a word?) I will look under Suggestions for the Software and the thread on suit symbol abuse.

[mgoetze]

Antrax, on 2011-August-12, 09:07, said:

I believe this was already answered in one of my previous posts. A short unsatisfactory (to me) answer reduces the odds of getting a long answer, and when I open topics I admit I care mostly about enlightening myself, rather than others.

I'm sure you could work out a deal wherein you pay Justin per word, rather than his usual hourly rate.

Oh wait, you thought you were entitled to long, thoughtful answers to all your questions for free?