Bungie.net Community
This topic has moved here: Subject: Brew-HaHa
  • Subject: Brew-HaHa
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3
Subject: Brew-HaHa
  • gamertag: trayne
  • user homepage:

Tact is for those who aren't witty enough to be sarcastic.

No use cryin' over Spillt Milk

Uh.

-- Wayne thinks Steve missed the point of this thread entirely.

  • 03.01.2007 5:59 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Mythic Member
  • gamertag: Mabian
  • user homepage:

"Whatever exists, whatever in creation exists without my knowledge exists without my consent. These anonymous creatures may seem little or nothing in the world. Yet the smallest crumb can devour us. Any smallest thing beneath yon rock out of men's knowing. Only nature can enslave man and only when the existence of each last entity is routed out and made to stand naked before him will he be properly suzerain of the earth."

I would so love to see those gone. If someone has said something that mirrors my own thoughts on the matter perfectly, I just don't post. Quoting it just brings up a point again that everybody should have read already. "QFT"ing it would make me feel dumb. And posting "I agree," or several paragraphs that boil down to "I agree," is not really helping at all either.

But I am still going to side with the Nays. If someone just quotes an incredibly long post, I think it should be editted, and the poster given a warning, but just a short post with "QFT," "I agree," or absolutely nothing does little harm to our fair forums. Maybe if it becomes a very serious illness, like tuberculosis. But right now it's just allergies, or maybe a head cold.

Dear Weggie,

I wish to apologize for my earlier behavior. My solemn duty was to make such a response, lest fun be removed from the site. -Mabian

  • 03.01.2007 6:09 PM PDT

"FOR YOUR OWN PROTECTION: Ensure brain is engaged before putting keyboard into gear."
Need a ninja?
Got a cheater? [email]h2cheats@microsoft.com[/email]
Forum Rules.
FAQ.
I'm certifiable.

Posted by: shiv master
Uh.

-- Wayne thinks Steve missed the point of this thread entirely.

I don't believe so, as the main function of the commentless quotes I've seen has been to agree with the poster of the quoted material, but if I have you could at least point out what the point is for those of us apparently not following.

Or you could follow up with a monosyllabic response that is entirely without meaning, if you prefer...

-- Steve's wondering if the latter should also be on the ban-menu, if commentless quoting is too.

  • 03.01.2007 6:18 PM PDT

Spillt Milk--Where our weekends are so far advanced they encompass the entire week.
"When the stress burns my brain just like acid rain drops, Mary Jane's the only thang that makes the pain stop." The Best Group "The Gunslingers"

Posted by: Anton P Nym

-- Steve's wondering if the latter should also be on the ban-menu, if commentless quoting is too.


Why would you need to put a latter on the ban-menu? Is there something special on the top shelf or something?

  • 03.01.2007 6:23 PM PDT
  • gamertag: trayne
  • user homepage:

Tact is for those who aren't witty enough to be sarcastic.

No use cryin' over Spillt Milk

Posted by: Anton P Nym
Posted by: shiv master
Uh.

-- Wayne thinks Steve missed the point of this thread entirely.

I don't believe so, as the main function of the commentless quotes I've seen has been to agree with the poster of the quoted material, but if I have you could at least point out what the point is for those of us apparently not following.

Or you could follow up with a monosyllabic response that is entirely without meaning, if you prefer...

-- Steve's wondering if the latter should also be on the ban-menu, if commentless quoting is too.


Well, given that Steve still hasn't grasped the point of this thread, I think it was fair for me to assume that a polysyllabic post might yet again be misinterpreted.
*crosses fingers*

The point of this thread is that most of the bnet community take themselves and this forum way too seriously. I thought my letter to weggie laid that out nicely. What's the purpose of complaining about IBTL?
Let's just go ahead and make commentless quoting bannable too.

[Edited on 3/1/2007]

  • 03.01.2007 6:26 PM PDT

Old school Bungie, born and raised,
In the Septagon is where I spend most of my days.
Relaxin', maxin', posting all cool,
Talking about Halo, life and some school.
Got in one little argument, and the mods got scared,
they said "You're gonna get banned and your member title'll be bare!"

Posted by: shiv master
If you think about it, it makes more time and/or more keystrokes to copy, paste, and post someone's one-liner than it does to type your own version.


3 buttons: "Reply">"Quote">"Submit"

This is much faster than: "Reply">*Click in input field*>*Type desired message of varying length*>"Submit"

That is all.

  • 03.01.2007 6:33 PM PDT
  • gamertag: trayne
  • user homepage:

Tact is for those who aren't witty enough to be sarcastic.

No use cryin' over Spillt Milk

Posted by: prometheus25
Posted by: shiv master
If you think about it, it makes more time and/or more keystrokes to copy, paste, and post someone's one-liner than it does to type your own version.


3 buttons: "Reply">"Quote">"Submit"

This is much faster than: "Reply">*Click in input field*>*Type desired message of varying length*>"Submit"

That is all.


Can't...see...forest!
Too...many...trees.

  • 03.01.2007 6:37 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Waaaait

This was a joke from the start?

  • 03.01.2007 6:39 PM PDT

"FOR YOUR OWN PROTECTION: Ensure brain is engaged before putting keyboard into gear."
Need a ninja?
Got a cheater? [email]h2cheats@microsoft.com[/email]
Forum Rules.
FAQ.
I'm certifiable.

Posted by: shiv master
I thought my letter to weggie laid that out nicely. What's the purpose of complaining about IBTL?

IBTL is spam. It's even more pointless than QFT and its ilk, because it communicates even less. It's just as pointless as "First" posts which are now also treated as spam.

I have no problem with people having fun on the forums but piling up empty posts doesn't help others have fun here, and things are murky enough with the volume of posts we have without encouraging behaviour that can only make it harder to find actual content. Let alone anything specific...

(Incidentally, that's also why the forums are separated into themes and why we're (trying to be) diligent in moving threads to where they belong.)

Let's just go ahead and make commentless quoting bannable too.
Actually, that'd be fine by me if we could find some way to enforce it without completely sucking up all the time us Ninjas spend on the forums.

-- Steve's hoping the New Hawtness (v.2) will let him spend less time lurking in shadows with shuriken to hand and more time actually conversing meaningfully on the forums.

Edited to fix egregious grammar. Seriously

[Edited on 3/1/2007]

  • 03.01.2007 6:42 PM PDT

It was a cold day near the southern base in Blood Gulch. Cortana and I were relaxing over a game of Go Fish, WHEN OUT OF NO WHERE 700 BANSHEES CAME FLYING IN!!! I GRABED MY SPARTAN LASER AND LET HELL REIGN DOWN UPON THEM. I HOPPED IN THE NEAREST WARTHOG AND TOLD CORTANA TO GET IN.

Posted by: shiv master
Posted by: Anton P Nym
Posted by: shiv master
Uh.

-- Wayne thinks Steve missed the point of this thread entirely.

I don't believe so, as the main function of the commentless quotes I've seen has been to agree with the poster of the quoted material, but if I have you could at least point out what the point is for those of us apparently not following.

Or you could follow up with a monosyllabic response that is entirely without meaning, if you prefer...

-- Steve's wondering if the latter should also be on the ban-menu, if commentless quoting is too.


Well, given that Steve still hasn't grasped the point of this thread, I think it was fair for me to assume that a polysyllabic post might yet again be misinterpreted.
*crosses fingers*

The point of this thread is that most of the bnet community take themselves and this forum way too seriously. I thought my letter to weggie laid that out nicely. What's the purpose of complaining about IBTL?
Let's just go ahead and make commentless quoting bannable too.

I could be misinterpreting this post, although I don't think I am. Let's look at the original post, shall we?
Posted by: shiv master
With all the recent 'ado' regarding bumps like 'IBTL' and the like, I've noticed that no one has mentioned the practice of one's reply consisting entirely of a quote and nothing more.

If you think about it, it makes more time and/or more keystrokes to copy, paste, and post someone's one-liner than it does to type your own version. If you simply have so little to say that you have to steal someone else's line, don't post.
This is even worse than most spam because it requires absolutely no creativity whatsoever and should be a blacklistable offense.
At least spam can be funny.

Now, someone will undoubtedly want to be cute and do it in this very thread. We all know it's coming so I'll even provide you with an easily quotable one-liner.

Idiots quote me please!

It mentioned nothing about people taking the forums too seriously. At all. Anywhere. If anything, I'd say that it's people like you who take the forums too seriously. Sure, a post containing nothing more then a post is irritating, but a bannable offense? Come on. There are situations where it's applicable, too. For instance, in a poll. Let's say you have the options "Yes", "No" and "Mabye". One person states "I voted yes for such-and-such reason." Wouldn't it be logical for someone else who voted yes for the same such-and-such reason to quote that?

Also, if your first post wasn't the "point" of this thread, then it's gone off topic. Which, I dare say, qualifies it for being locked. Mabye you should stay on topic?

  • 03.01.2007 6:43 PM PDT

Old school Bungie, born and raised,
In the Septagon is where I spend most of my days.
Relaxin', maxin', posting all cool,
Talking about Halo, life and some school.
Got in one little argument, and the mods got scared,
they said "You're gonna get banned and your member title'll be bare!"

Posted by: shiv master
Can't...see...forest!
Too...many...trees.


Can't...function...on forums!
Too...many....D-bags....

  • 03.01.2007 6:43 PM PDT

*Sgt

The fact that it is a quote should have nothing to do with whether or not it is considered "bad." If its an (at least reasonably) legitimate response, then there shouldn't be any problem. Maybe I read your post wrong.. but what I got out if it was that you wanted to blacklist people who respond with just a quote? The only way I could see that happening was if the same quote were used over and over to the ridiculousness amount of "inbtl" etc.

quote pyramids and.. those things are understandably stupid though

[Edited on 3/1/2007]

  • 03.01.2007 6:44 PM PDT
  • gamertag: trayne
  • user homepage:

Tact is for those who aren't witty enough to be sarcastic.

No use cryin' over Spillt Milk

Posted by: Pink Menace
Posted by: shiv master
Posted by: Anton P Nym
Posted by: shiv master
Uh.

-- Wayne thinks Steve missed the point of this thread entirely.

I don't believe so, as the main function of the commentless quotes I've seen has been to agree with the poster of the quoted material, but if I have you could at least point out what the point is for those of us apparently not following.

Or you could follow up with a monosyllabic response that is entirely without meaning, if you prefer...

-- Steve's wondering if the latter should also be on the ban-menu, if commentless quoting is too.


Well, given that Steve still hasn't grasped the point of this thread, I think it was fair for me to assume that a polysyllabic post might yet again be misinterpreted.
*crosses fingers*

The point of this thread is that most of the bnet community take themselves and this forum way too seriously. I thought my letter to weggie laid that out nicely. What's the purpose of complaining about IBTL?
Let's just go ahead and make commentless quoting bannable too.

I could be misinterpreting this post, although I don't think I am. Let's look at the original post, shall we?
Posted by: shiv master
With all the recent 'ado' regarding bumps like 'IBTL' and the like, I've noticed that no one has mentioned the practice of one's reply consisting entirely of a quote and nothing more.

If you think about it, it makes more time and/or more keystrokes to copy, paste, and post someone's one-liner than it does to type your own version. If you simply have so little to say that you have to steal someone else's line, don't post.
This is even worse than most spam because it requires absolutely no creativity whatsoever and should be a blacklistable offense.
At least spam can be funny.

Now, someone will undoubtedly want to be cute and do it in this very thread. We all know it's coming so I'll even provide you with an easily quotable one-liner.

Idiots quote me please!

It mentioned nothing about people taking the forums too seriously. At all. Anywhere. If anything, I'd say that it's people like you who take the forums too seriously. Sure, a post containing nothing more then a post is irritating, but a bannable offense? Come on. There are situations where it's applicable, too. For instance, in a poll. Let's say you have the options "Yes", "No" and "Mabye". One person states "I voted yes for such-and-such reason." Wouldn't it be logical for someone else who voted yes for the same such-and-such reason to quote that?

Also, if your first post wasn't the "point" of this thread, then it's gone off topic. Which, I dare say, qualifies it for being locked. Mabye you should stay on topic?



Evolution, my dear boy.
If you read the entire thread, the purpose should become clear to you.
Often, a point that is delayed can carry more weight.
Incidentally, this is why it can be both fun and prudent to read an entire thread before posting.

[Edited on 3/1/2007]

  • 03.01.2007 6:46 PM PDT

Posted by: Mabian

Dear Weggie,

I wish to apologize for my earlier behavior. My solemn duty was to make such a response, lest fun be removed from the site. -Mabian


Mabian, just remember you can't spell Funyun without the word "fun." Think about it.

  • 03.01.2007 6:46 PM PDT

If you don't got it, you want it. If you got it, you want more of it. Of course if you don't know what it is, it's hard to get any in the first place.

While I think in some rare instances it's appropriate, generally I dislike the practice when users don't add their own thoughts.

also, Llama's are delicious.

  • 03.02.2007 9:17 AM PDT

Old school Bungie, born and raised,
In the Septagon is where I spend most of my days.
Relaxin', maxin', posting all cool,
Talking about Halo, life and some school.
Got in one little argument, and the mods got scared,
they said "You're gonna get banned and your member title'll be bare!"

Posted by: RoboChocobo
While I think in some rare instances it's appropriate, generally I dislike the practice when users don't add their own thoughts.

also, Llama's are delicious.


I find this untrue, as the instances that it most commonly occurs are in threads that don't ask for enough response to require additional thought.

E.g., a thread with a context similar to "I want pelicans to be in multiplayer!" and little else deserves little more than a response on the lines of "Even the largest of maps couldn't support such a vehicle in a wide area of application".

Why, then, should other users who agree with the reply be forced to come up with their own message when there is little else to be said. Preventing users from straight-quoting posts would lead to flaming and spam. Many users would revert to "You're retarded" posts, and only function to facilitate the fall of the thread, and ultimately, the forums.

In summary, it is necessary to encourage the use of quoting in topics that require little additional effort, as it would reduce the persistance of the trash that often results from the users' thinking on their own behalf.

  • 03.02.2007 9:24 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Destinypedia - The Wiki for Bungie's Destiny
Posted by: DEATHPIMP72
Anyone but Foman. He smells like cheese.

I see no reason to make commentless quoting against the rules.

Especially considering how useful it is for moderators when they are locking threads.

  • 03.02.2007 11:12 AM PDT
  • gamertag: trayne
  • user homepage:

Tact is for those who aren't witty enough to be sarcastic.

No use cryin' over Spillt Milk

Posted by: prometheus25
Posted by: RoboChocobo
While I think in some rare instances it's appropriate, generally I dislike the practice when users don't add their own thoughts.

also, Llama's are delicious.


I find this untrue, as the instances that it most commonly occurs are in threads that don't ask for enough response to require additional thought.

E.g., a thread with a context similar to "I want pelicans to be in multiplayer!" and little else deserves little more than a response on the lines of "Even the largest of maps couldn't support such a vehicle in a wide area of application".

If that response sums up your feelings then, logically, a response akin to "I agree. The pelican's inclusion, though fun in theory, just simply isn't practical."

Why, then, should other users who agree with the reply be forced to come up with their own message when there is little else to be said.
I'm not suggesting they be forced. What I am suggesting is that, if they can't be bothered to reply in their own words, then they should refrain from posting all together.
Preventing users from straight-quoting posts would lead to flaming and spam. Many users would revert to "You're retarded" posts, and only function to facilitate the fall of the thread, and ultimately, the forums.

So you're saying that preventing commentless quoting will actually promote flaming and spam?
If there are actually people who will become so frustrated that they can't make commentless posts that they will break into a rash of flaming, wouldn't you agree that they should be banned anyway?

  • 03.02.2007 1:16 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Destinypedia - The Wiki for Bungie's Destiny
Posted by: DEATHPIMP72
Anyone but Foman. He smells like cheese.

I think that it would just be too hard to differentiate between permissible and impermissible commentless quoting. There is a very fine line that would take far too much of the ninjas' time to distinguish. To use SS_Zag's point, the following commentless quote is clearly responsive to the original post and should be considered permissible:

Posted by: x Foman123 x
Posted by: prometheus25
Posted by: Halofanboi69
I want nookz! Everybody who thinks that there should be nookz in Halo 3, post here!

No, I disagree with you.



Now, observe that this commentless quote is very similar to the above example, but clearly is "spam":

Posted by: x Foman123 x
Posted by: prometheus25
Posted by: Halofanboi69
I want nookz in Halo 3

I disagree with you. Here are some reasons *gives reasons*



If commentless quoting were a bannable offense, the ninjas would spend far too much time trying to figure out what is and is not "permissible" commentless quoting. For this reason, it seems better to take the lesser of two evils and allow it. But that's just my opinion and I'm open to being persuaded.



[Edited on 3/2/2007]

  • 03.02.2007 1:54 PM PDT

Strange evolution how people have come to believe
That we are it's greatest achievement
We're barely, we're just a collection of cells
Overrating themselves

entropy > ninjas

  • 03.02.2007 1:55 PM PDT

Old school Bungie, born and raised,
In the Septagon is where I spend most of my days.
Relaxin', maxin', posting all cool,
Talking about Halo, life and some school.
Got in one little argument, and the mods got scared,
they said "You're gonna get banned and your member title'll be bare!"

All I was suggesting is, if allowing people to press three buttons to post their feelings keeps them content, then why risk the possibility of them flaming.

Also, such a problem you describe is far from the most important issue we need to tackle as a community.

  • 03.02.2007 1:58 PM PDT
  • gamertag: trayne
  • user homepage:

Tact is for those who aren't witty enough to be sarcastic.

No use cryin' over Spillt Milk

Posted by: x Foman123 x
If commentless quoting were a bannable offense, the ninjas would spend far too much time trying to figure out what is and is not "permissible" commentless quoting. For this reason, it seems better to take the lesser of two evils and allow it. But that's just my opinion and I'm open to being persuaded.


What is difficult about "Commentless quoting is bannable."
It's neither complex, or easily misunderstood.
It would take even the most intellectually challenged ninja all of 2 seconds to determine if the rule had been broken.

  • 03.02.2007 2:00 PM PDT

Old school Bungie, born and raised,
In the Septagon is where I spend most of my days.
Relaxin', maxin', posting all cool,
Talking about Halo, life and some school.
Got in one little argument, and the mods got scared,
they said "You're gonna get banned and your member title'll be bare!"

Posted by: x Foman123 x
I think that it would just be too hard to differentiate between permissible and impermissible commentless quoting. There is a very fine line that would take far too much of the ninjas' time to distinguish. To use SS_Zag's point, the following commentless quote is clearly responsive to the original post and should be considered permissible:

Posted by: x Foman123 x
Posted by: prometheus25
Posted by: Halofanboi69
I want nookz! Everybody who thinks that there should be nookz in Halo 3, post here!

No, I disagree with you.



Now, observe that this commentless quote is very similar to the above example, but clearly is "spam":

Posted by: x Foman123 x
Posted by: prometheus25
Posted by: Halofanboi69
I want nookz in Halo 3

I disagree with you. Here are some reasons *gives reasons*



If commentless quoting were a bannable offense, the ninjas would spend far too much time trying to figure out what is and is not "permissible" commentless quoting. For this reason, it seems better to take the lesser of two evils and allow it. But that's just my opinion and I'm open to being persuaded.



Speaking of permissable, I don't recall sanctioning the use of my name, Mr. Foman!

  • 03.02.2007 2:00 PM PDT
  • gamertag: trayne
  • user homepage:

Tact is for those who aren't witty enough to be sarcastic.

No use cryin' over Spillt Milk

Posted by: prometheus25
All I was suggesting is, if allowing people to press three buttons to post their feelings keeps them content, then why risk the possibility of them flaming.

So you're saying we should allow members to act in a questionable manner to prevent them from breaking the rules?
That's like allowing criminals to steal so that they won't commit murder.

Also, such a problem you describe is far from the most important issue we need to tackle as a community.

This is precisely the point I've been getting at all along.

  • 03.02.2007 2:07 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3