CenturionV
Warrior Forever
Really? time to buy myself 10 new online kevlar, flame resistant vests, I feel I'll need them.....Birdjaguar said:
Btw IglooDude you avatar ROCKS man!
On the Origin of Spam
- Thread starter WillJ
- Start date
Btw IglooDude you avatar ROCKS man!
OrpheusPrime
Gym Bastard & OT addict
CenturionV said:Really? time to buy myself 10 new online kevlar, flame resistant vests, I feel I'll need them.....
Btw IglooDude you avatar ROCKS man!
Don't forget your bible.
nonconformist
Miserable
Secret forum?
I demand to be part of your evil stonemason cult!
Er...I mean....
I demand to be part of your evil stonemason cult!
Er...I mean....
BasketCase
Username sez it all
My existence disproves this axiom; I'm a bad poster, but I'm still here.WillJ said:
Holy crap, I completely forgot about this thread. Well, some interesting points have been made. I'll just respond to everything fairly holistically, since quoting things and responding to them one-by-one would take too much effort, be too confusing, and require remembering specifics (I'm too lazy to re-read this thread 
).
First of all, I should point out that this progressive evolution can only be noticeable in the long-term. There may be all sorts of short-term mishaps and sharp upgrades, but the general trend is a gradual increase. It's like the stock market: day-by-day, it's up, down, up, down, up, down; but over the course of a century, it's on average up. Hitro mentioned that the quality of the forum deteriorated with the oncoming of the Iraq war. I have no idea if that's true, but even if it is, it's merely one "down," and the forum will eventually recover. (That might not be true, though, considering I'm not sure about the nature of what he's talking about.) And what exactly is the "long term"? Well, quite long, probably longer than CFC has been in existence.
Second, someone here mentioned forums devolving into a mess of spam and such, as young newbies arrive and annoy the mature veterans. Eventually, the spam overwhelms the veterans and they leave. This is quite possible, and so a forum needs to be well moderated to evolve. (Indeed, one of the factors I mentioned in the OP was moderators removing bad posters.)
Some have mentioned new posters, and how they keep the forum alive, not bring it down. This is certainly true. New posters are to forum evolution as mutations are to biological evolution; they're what drive it. (Keep in mind veterans were once newbies too!)
Marla pointed out that the better posters tend to be more successful, and thus leave the forum due to RL commitments. Makes intutive sense and seems to be perfectly true from experience. And others have mentioned smart posters getting frustrated and leaving or posting less. Also true. But I'm not sure these mean progressive evolution doesn't occur. In the short term, a poster leaving or even a "poster exodus" may diminish the quality of a forum, but the ideas implanted by that poster remain, and the other posters will grow from them. Keep in mind that in the long term, things are getting better because if you were to take any one time and compare it with an earlier time, that earlier time would have been affected by poster exoduses (exodi?) and such just as much as the given time; it's not like these problems actually get worse over time---that's what it'd take to diminish progressive evolution.
Someone mentioned that this forum will begin devolving once interest in Civ dies out (and the same goes for other forums and their areas of interest), and yep, that's perfectly true. But not after the forum has evolved for a while.
[Edit] Yom and others mentioned that some people aren't willing to listen to others' viewpoints and arguments. Unfortunately that's the case, but as long as SOME people will listen and the number of such people doesn't decrease, progressive evolution will result.[/edit]
And finally, punkbass mentioned that this isn't measurable or scientifically observable. True. I don't see how anyone could prove this scientifically. But hey, wild speculation is good enough for me. And as for what "quality" could entail... well that's subjective, but not arbitrary. The more you like something, the higher quality it has, and the quality of a forum would be the total likeness that the members have for it.
If I forgot to reply to anything here, just remind me.
).First of all, I should point out that this progressive evolution can only be noticeable in the long-term. There may be all sorts of short-term mishaps and sharp upgrades, but the general trend is a gradual increase. It's like the stock market: day-by-day, it's up, down, up, down, up, down; but over the course of a century, it's on average up. Hitro mentioned that the quality of the forum deteriorated with the oncoming of the Iraq war. I have no idea if that's true, but even if it is, it's merely one "down," and the forum will eventually recover. (That might not be true, though, considering I'm not sure about the nature of what he's talking about.) And what exactly is the "long term"? Well, quite long, probably longer than CFC has been in existence.
Second, someone here mentioned forums devolving into a mess of spam and such, as young newbies arrive and annoy the mature veterans. Eventually, the spam overwhelms the veterans and they leave. This is quite possible, and so a forum needs to be well moderated to evolve. (Indeed, one of the factors I mentioned in the OP was moderators removing bad posters.)
Some have mentioned new posters, and how they keep the forum alive, not bring it down. This is certainly true. New posters are to forum evolution as mutations are to biological evolution; they're what drive it. (Keep in mind veterans were once newbies too!)
Marla pointed out that the better posters tend to be more successful, and thus leave the forum due to RL commitments. Makes intutive sense and seems to be perfectly true from experience. And others have mentioned smart posters getting frustrated and leaving or posting less. Also true. But I'm not sure these mean progressive evolution doesn't occur. In the short term, a poster leaving or even a "poster exodus" may diminish the quality of a forum, but the ideas implanted by that poster remain, and the other posters will grow from them. Keep in mind that in the long term, things are getting better because if you were to take any one time and compare it with an earlier time, that earlier time would have been affected by poster exoduses (exodi?) and such just as much as the given time; it's not like these problems actually get worse over time---that's what it'd take to diminish progressive evolution.
Someone mentioned that this forum will begin devolving once interest in Civ dies out (and the same goes for other forums and their areas of interest), and yep, that's perfectly true. But not after the forum has evolved for a while.
[Edit] Yom and others mentioned that some people aren't willing to listen to others' viewpoints and arguments. Unfortunately that's the case, but as long as SOME people will listen and the number of such people doesn't decrease, progressive evolution will result.[/edit]
And finally, punkbass mentioned that this isn't measurable or scientifically observable. True. I don't see how anyone could prove this scientifically. But hey, wild speculation is good enough for me.
And as for what "quality" could entail... well that's subjective, but not arbitrary. The more you like something, the higher quality it has, and the quality of a forum would be the total likeness that the members have for it.If I forgot to reply to anything here, just remind me.
Similar threads
