Double Posting

[Adebisi]

I generally dislike double posting - people who post two or more messages right after each other. Since there is now an option to have an avatar after 300 posts, it is a good way for people to quickly get that avatar. It also takes up more space and divides the topics into pages quicker.

Take a look at this for example:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=1028105#post1028105
Is it really necessery to make five posts after each other just to say a few sentences?

As CFC generally has tight rules, why not have tight rules on double posting as well? There is no need to make two posts after each other, when you can edit your posts!

 

[Dralix]

In defense of the poster, I can understand the desire to make quoting multiple posts simpler for yourself. I personally just copy the text and the quote tags and edit them appropriately. It's a bit of a pain, but that is my choice.

Sometimes though people post twice or three times in a row just to add afterthoughts to what they already posted. That is a great candidate for the edit function.

 

[Adebisi]

Originally posted by Dralix
In defense of the poster, I can understand the desire to make quoting multiple posts simpler for yourself.

Yes, but five posts in a row is not necessary. Altough the poster in my link is of course not the only who does this.

Originally posted by Dralix
I personally just copy the text and the quote tags and edit them appropriately. It's a bit of a pain, but that is my choice.

So do I. I open all posts I want to quote in a new window, and paste the formatted quotes into the window I'm replying with. I've noticed that Graedius does this too.

 

[Padma]

Personally, I don't have *too* much of a problem with the example presented. Responding to multiple disparate posters at once can be somewhat confusing, both for the poster and the reader.

I agree with Dralix, however, about those "Oh, yeah. I just thought of something else" posts. In Civ3 forums, it is not uncommon for me to edit the first post, delete the 2nd, and give the offender a slap on the wrist and/or instruction on how to edit.

 

[cracker]

I would use the example presented as one of those examples that definitely should not occur. Most if not all of the 5 posts were just of the type of post that said "Oh yeah that's a good post>"

Different forums have different standards of behavior and it takes time for good practices to take hold.

If those posts would have been in another forum, they would have perhaps been editted down to one consolidated set of comments to address exactly the issues that you raised.

Some people don't like this approach and tend to throw a temper tantrum when three or four of their rapid fire posts are consolidated. I hope this behavior will become less common as more people appreciate all the wasteful negative consequences that spam and flooding can have on the overall discussion processes.

 

[Adebisi]

Hear hear!

Considering how spam-filled OT is, I definitly think the mods should crack down on this. Almost all threads are several pages long - not very easy for new people to get into.

 

[WillJ]

Maybe he didn't know how to quote more than one person in one post. But of course this isn't the only case. Also, sometimes I double-post instead of editing the original one if I want it to be noted that there's been a new post (especially if the threads a bit far down), instead of someone seeing that WillJ is still the last poster, and therefore assuming that nothing has been added. But if the thread's still active, it's of course pretty much pointless to do this.

Originally posted by Adebisi
Hear hear!

Considering how spam-filled OT is, I definitly think the mods should crack down on this. Almost all threads are several pages long - not very easy for new people to get into.

However, cutting down on this wouldn't really make threads any shorter (well, maybe just a wee bit shorter, but nothing really noticeable).

Originally posted by Adebisi
So do I. I open all posts I want to quote in a new window, and paste the formatted quotes into the window I'm replying with. I've noticed that Graedius does this too.

Why not just use the back button? That's what I always do.

Sometimes (actually, more like often) I think people overreact to spam. Polyposting is usually unnecessary, and can get slightly annoying, but it's nothing too bad. I mean, first of all, successive posts by the same poster instead of having it all in the same post adds server load only by an extremely small amount, AFAIK. In fact, if the only thing that posts contribute to server load is the content (text, smilies, and images), it makes no difference whatsoever. And if someone does it to increase postcount, what's wrong with that? Obviously anyone who doesn't care about postcount shouldn't care about this. I guess if someone posts 15 posts in a row (well, 5-7 is good enough), it's a problem (mostly because of the avatar and sig appearing so many times), but I see very little wrong with double/triple-posting. If a mod has a minute to spare, and feels like editing it, good for him (or her), but I don't think it's a serious issue.

However, someone please correct me if I'm wrong about the server load thing, or if there's some other problem I've overlooked.

 

[Silverflame]

Although the link is a good example of how double posting can be bad, you might want to check the date those things were posted before jumping on them. Like XIII has a bunch of those PS2 RPG threads in All Other Games with him having 23 out of the 25 posts, but he usually posts once or twice a day

 

[Lefty Scaevola]

I tend to post in the quickest, least keystroke manner, like the example of the quote of five different posts. However I hav never had more than tree such quotes, and raely more than two.

 

[Archer 007]

I would like to aplogize for that. I just am not able to remember well enough to copy and all. This problem is not helped by having a slow computer, so going back and forth in probolmatic.

 

[Adebisi]

Originally posted by WillJ
However, cutting down on this wouldn't really make threads any shorter (well, maybe just a wee bit shorter, but nothing really noticeable).

It would make the threads not split into multiple pages so soon.

Lefty, does that mean this is how it will stay?

 

[WillJ]

Originally posted by Adebisi
It would make the threads not split into multiple pages so soon.

Why does that matter?

 

[ivory]

Originally posted by archer_007
This problem is not helped by having a slow computer, so going back and forth in probolmatic.

WillJ, I think that answers your question.
Also, not being able to see as much unique content as possible and having to do a lot of scrolling due to double posts and large sigs is not very social imo.

 

[WillJ]

Originally posted by ivory
WillJ, I think that answers your question.

Ah yes, I've been spoiled by DSL so long that I've forgotten the pain of waiting for pages to load with a dial-up connection.

Well, now I guess it's a problem. However, a double-post once in a while isn't too bad; it's just when it gets excessive. At least IMO.

 

[ivory]

I guess you 're also spoiled by a 1280*1024 desktop?
Did you know, WillJ, that if I maximize this window on my 1024*768 monitor (which I don't like doing since I mutitask a lot) so that the usable area is 1000*640 pixels (the toolbar icons are small, the scrollbars are narrow and the taskbar is hidden) and I have only one of your 700*100 signatures in view, it still takes up 10.9%?
If a signature contains something useful (like links), funny or pretty, I can live with it, but I can get annoyed if it is nothing more than graffiti.
No hard feelings btw.

 

[WillJ]

Originally posted by ivory
I guess you 're also spoiled by a 1280*1024 desktop?
Did you know, WillJ, that if I maximize this window on my 1024*768 monitor (which I don't like doing since I mutitask a lot) so that the usable area is 1000*640 pixels (the toolbar icons are small, the scrollbars are narrow and the taskbar is hidden) and I have only one of your 700*100 signatures in view, it still takes up 10.9%?
If a signature contains something useful (like links), funny or pretty, I can live with it, but I can get annoyed if it is nothing more than graffiti.
No hard feelings btw.

No, I use 800*600. I don't find it annoying (after all, it takes about .3 seconds to skip over it, if you want to). And if you do, you'll just have to live with it, cuz I ain't changing it! And how dare you not consider my sig pretty....

Anyway, why don't you keep the window maximized? I don't see how multitasking is any harder with the windows maximized, unless you're clicking-and-draging a lot for some reason.

Does anyone else find my sig annoying? If so, I didn't realize it's such a problem. If it's a serious issue I'd be glad to change it (or not have one at all).

 

[pdescobar]

Originally posted by WillJ
Anyway, why don't you keep the window maximized? I don't see how multitasking is any harder with the windows maximized, unless you're clicking-and-draging a lot for some reason.

OK, I'm flying off-topic but I had to respond to this. In Windows98, I use the TweakUI extra called Xmouse which brings focus to whatever window the cursor is over. As one might expect, the benefits of this can only be gained if you can actually see more than one window. If you do a lot of switching between tasks like I do, this can be quite a bit faster than alt-tabbing. For instance, I have recently been writing some perl scripts which read information directly from a civ3 scenario BIC/X and generate a webpage from it. I type code in emacs in one window, tip the mouse over an inch to a shell to run it, and tip the mouse again to a browser window to reload and check the results. It's far more efficient and less confusing for me to do it this way, with several partially overlapping windows, than to alt-tab between everything maximized. Of course, this is more useful on higher resolutions (FWIW I'm at 1024x768 which some don't consider high anymore )

Does anyone else find my sig annoying? If so, I didn't realize it's such a problem. If it's a serious issue I'd be glad to change it (or not have one at all).

I don't find it particularly bothersome. The main problem with your sig is that in order for it to properly display, you wind up with those silly [code] lines around it, but you can't stop that and the font size is minimal which helps compensate. Of course, I'm on a fast connection and have my own 5-liner so I have biases

 

[Frisian Warrior]

Also, not being able to see as much unique content as possible and having to do a lot of scrolling due to double posts and large sigs is not very social imo.

I basically agree with this. Scrolling is a pain, and large sigs break the flow of a discussion.

Your sig certainly stands out from the crowd, Will. The word annoying is too strong for me, but when I see it on every page where you share your wisdom with us, it does get a little bit ... allow me... a little bit boring. In case you do try something new, I have immortilazed it here:

 

[WillJ]

Originally posted by pdescobar
OK, I'm flying off-topic but I had to respond to this. In Windows98, I use the TweakUI extra called Xmouse which brings focus to whatever window the cursor is over. As one might expect, the benefits of this can only be gained if you can actually see more than one window. If you do a lot of switching between tasks like I do, this can be quite a bit faster than alt-tabbing. For instance, I have recently been writing some perl scripts which read information directly from a civ3 scenario BIC/X and generate a webpage from it. I type code in emacs in one window, tip the mouse over an inch to a shell to run it, and tip the mouse again to a browser window to reload and check the results. It's far more efficient and less confusing for me to do it this way, with several partially overlapping windows, than to alt-tab between everything maximized. Of course, this is more useful on higher resolutions (FWIW I'm at 1024x768 which some don't consider high anymore )

Hmm... sounds very useful (and thanks for explaining ). Is there anything similar for WinXP (and if so, where can I get it?)?

Originally posted by Frisian Warrior
Your sig certainly stands out from the crowd, Will. The word annoying is too strong for me, but when I see it on every page where you share your wisdom with us, it does get a little bit ... allow me... a little bit boring. In case you do try something new, I have immortilazed it here:

Thanks for immortalizing it! I wish there were a way I could make this sig only appear sometimes, and have another sig along with this one. (Edit: Oh yeah, I forgot about the "show signature" check-box in the post-reply screen. I think from now on I'll un-check it sometimes, so that you don't see five of my posts in the same thread, all w/ my sig. )

Hmm, maybe I should start thinking of things to change my sig to. (Edit: Or maybe not, now with my new "revelation.")

And sorry for my threadjacking.

 

[Knight-Dragon]

Originally posted by WillJ
Does anyone else find my sig annoying? If so, I didn't realize it's such a problem. If it's a serious issue I'd be glad to change it (or not have one at all).

Yes, it is annoying. 'Cause when I surf at work, I only keep a small window open on CFC occasionally, and your sig takes up half of the space...

Unlike pdescobar's which is filled with links, yours is merely decorative...