Bungie.net Community
This topic has moved here: Subject: Does simply quoting a user add to the discussion?
  • Subject: Does simply quoting a user add to the discussion?
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • of 4
Subject: Does simply quoting a user add to the discussion?

/^\___/^\
| |[... ..]| |
| \------/ | ODST For Life
| . \__/. |
-\____/

Posted by: x Foman123 x
Posted by: dazarobbo
Now after this, please don't come into this topic and start doing it just to be ironic/annoying.

I was waiting for someone to do that.

I think that just quoting someone adds far more to a conversation than the average "Like" "Thumbs up" or "+1" button. While it doesn't add anything to a conversation, it can keep a thread alive until someone can add something more. Imagine what that "ODST Sucks" thread on the ODST forum would be like if no one made a redundant post.

  • 05.17.2012 3:40 PM PDT

If you're passionate about the thing you're talking about, I'll always lend an ear.

Posted by: some1 with guns
[/quote]
Imagine what that "ODST Sucks" thread on the ODST forum would be like if no one made a redundant post.

A decent thread with some valid points that is not full of pointless drivel.

  • 05.17.2012 3:42 PM PDT

Posted by: AngryBrute1
Oh yeah, since somebody does not believe what YOU believe; that makes us vapid...
I cannot grasp that what you call "Something happened to nothing, and that nothing became something, and it was smaller than than a period."

It does in the fact that the person being quotes obviously worded an opinion very good, and others with the same opinion quote them because they wouldn't have worded it as good.

  • 05.17.2012 3:50 PM PDT

/^\___/^\
| |[... ..]| |
| \------/ | ODST For Life
| . \__/. |
-\____/

Posted by: ninjakenzen
Posted by: some1 with guns
[/quote]
Imagine what that "ODST Sucks" thread on the ODST forum would be like if no one made a redundant post.

A decent thread with some valid points that is not full of pointless drivel.

Right, but there would be three posts, counting the OP. 1 for the people who like ODST regardless of the cost, 1 for the people who thought it was overpriced, but still play it, and 1 for the people who either can't get past the cost and/or don't like the game.

  • 05.17.2012 3:51 PM PDT

Perpetual Ninja in training.

"If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe."

DMH

Los Paranoias

Just a quote? No, that does nothing. Even if they would just add the simple QFT, that would add SOMETHING to the discussion. But a boring old quote does nothing.

  • 05.17.2012 3:53 PM PDT

In memory of those fallen in the defense of Earth and her colonies.

March 3, 2553


Posted by: dazarobbo
Posted by: Eric Duffy
no
Now after this, please don't come into this topic and start doing it just to be ironic/annoying.

And no, IMO.


It does make it easier for referencing people.

  • 05.17.2012 11:57 PM PDT

Posted by: Big Black Bear
Your post makes it sound like "space on the page" is a limited commodity.... It's not.
When you open a topic, can you see all of the posts within it on the screen? No, because the space to display posts is limited by both your hardware (monitor size) and the site (paging). In that sense, I would rather have as many different viewpoints on my screen at the one time than to have to wade through multiple pages of people making no new contributions.

Posted by: Big Black Bear
Posting my opinion in whatever way, shape, or form I feel most appropriate does not impede anyone else's ability to do the same.
Of course it doesn't, but is it fair that their new/substantial/different contribution to the topic is lost amongst empty quotes of other posts that have already been presented? In fact, here's a good exercise: go to this topic and identify (roughly) how many responses there are to the OP's question/the topic, how many are not, then get an idea of how much space the latter take up which the former could be occupying. Is that idea not a better way to have a discussion structured?

Posted by: Big Black Bear
With that being the case.... Rather than answer your question, let me ask a different question:

Am I not entitled to participate in a discussion, even if I offer no new perspectives from those who have already posted?

And if I am entitled to simply add my opinion, what differece does it make whether I use the same words someone else did or choose some different combination or words?

Now, I'll circle back and answer your question... Why is it a good thing? It's a good thing because it allows everyone the right to participate in a discussion, regardless of whether their point has already been made and regardless of their ability to articulate that point.
Yes, you are most welcome to participate, but why am I - the reader of the topic - going to bother reading what you've written if it's similar to or exactly the same as what someone else has written (which I've probably already read)? If you really wanted to further the discussion, you would - and should IMO - post a different viewpoint.

Now, speaking conceptually here, if you still want to participate, why does your participation need to take the form of a post? CAVX made the point that in a real-life discussion, when someone makes expresses a point of view that others agree with, they will say "I agree" or something equivalent. So why do those "I agree"s need to be expressed as a post amongst the different opinions being discussed?

  • 05.18.2012 12:25 AM PDT

Hi, I am GrandmasterNinja the founder of a group called The Shadow League.If you are looking for a fun but serious group to join, this is your chance. If you do decide to Join, please PM me back to I can alert the Moderators of a new member. Remember, Honor The Code.

Join Here

BIGDADDY786


Posted by: dazarobbo
Posted by: Big Black Bear
Your post makes it sound like "space on the page" is a limited commodity.... It's not.
When you open a topic, can you see all of the posts within it on the screen? No, because the space to display posts is limited by both your hardware (monitor size) and the site (paging). In that sense, I would rather have as many different viewpoints on my screen at the one time than to have to wade through multiple pages of people making no new contributions.

Posted by: Big Black Bear
Posting my opinion in whatever way, shape, or form I feel most appropriate does not impede anyone else's ability to do the same.
Of course it doesn't, but is it fair that their new/substantial/different contribution to the topic is lost amongst empty quotes of other posts that have already been presented? In fact, here's a good exercise: go to this topic and identify (roughly) how many responses there are to the OP's question/the topic, how many are not, then get an idea of how much space the latter take up which the former could be occupying. Is that idea not a better way to have a discussion structured?

Posted by: Big Black Bear
With that being the case.... Rather than answer your question, let me ask a different question:

Am I not entitled to participate in a discussion, even if I offer no new perspectives from those who have already posted?

And if I am entitled to simply add my opinion, what differece does it make whether I use the same words someone else did or choose some different combination or words?

Now, I'll circle back and answer your question... Why is it a good thing? It's a good thing because it allows everyone the right to participate in a discussion, regardless of whether their point has already been made and regardless of their ability to articulate that point.
Yes, you are most welcome to participate, but why am I - the reader of the topic - going to bother reading what you've written if it's similar to or exactly the same as what someone else has written (which I've probably already read)? If you really wanted to further the discussion, you would - and should IMO - post a different viewpoint.

Now, speaking conceptually here, if you still want to participate, why does your participation need to take the form of a post? CAVX made the point that in a real-life discussion, when someone makes expresses a point of view that others agree with, they will say "I agree" or something equivalent. So why do those "I agree"s need to be expressed as a post amongst the different opinions being discussed?


I think the "I agree" can ONLY be expressed as a post on this site, and that's the problem. If you did agree to something, and it was a pretty good post, but nobody has yet to add on to it. The only way to bring it to attention is to plainly quote it.

  • 05.18.2012 2:19 AM PDT

Key

If we just had a like feature, then we wouldnt need to be having this discussion. Quote-posting would be illegal and expressions of agreement would take on a more organized form and everyone who doesn't hate "facebook features" would be happy.

And, for any of you who can't quite put two and two together with what I'm saying (I'm sure there's one or two), the reason I'm saying this is because quote-posting, QFTing, etc. is to "liking" as a Rube Goldberg Machine built to turn the page of a book is to just turning the page of a book.

[Edited on 05.18.2012 3:42 AM PDT]

  • 05.18.2012 3:20 AM PDT

Posted by: dazarobbo
Posted by: Big Black Bear
Your post makes it sound like "space on the page" is a limited commodity.... It's not.
When you open a topic, can you see all of the posts within it on the screen? No, because the space to display posts is limited by both your hardware (monitor size) and the site (paging). In that sense, I would rather have as many different viewpoints on my screen at the one time than to have to wade through multiple pages of people making no new contributions.
So, are we now saying that posts on the first page of a discussion should be given some priority over others? Does that mean I shouldn't bother posting at all once a topic gets past that point, since people will need to "wade through multiple pages" just to get to my post?

No, of course not... That's silly, isn't it? Because we operate under an expectation that people (at least, most of them) will read through the entire discussion. So, whether my post is on page 1, 2, or 10, it should be seen by anyone who is interested in seeing it. And if people need to pass by a few posts that only contain quotes to get to it, so be it... They should be just as easy (or easier, actually) to ignore than any other post that they may not be interested in.

Posted by: dazarobbo
Posted by: Big Black Bear
Posting my opinion in whatever way, shape, or form I feel most appropriate does not impede anyone else's ability to do the same.
Of course it doesn't, but is it fair that their new/substantial/different contribution to the topic is lost amongst empty quotes of other posts that have already been presented? In fact, here's a good exercise: go to this topic and identify (roughly) how many responses there are to the OP's question/the topic, how many are not, then get an idea of how much space the latter take up which the former could be occupying. Is that idea not a better way to have a discussion structured?
Is it fair? Of course it is... That's my whole point.

Despite how you may prefer things to work, better posters (those who present new, well thought-out perspectives) are not given priority over any other posters on this site. We are all on equal footing and should be given equal opportunity to post. The only question that's left is whether we post within the confines of the rules or not. And to that point... The example you gave is a bad one because the quote-posts are not on-topic, which makes them against the rules for that reason.

Posted by: dazarobbo
Posted by: Big Black Bear
With that being the case.... Rather than answer your question, let me ask a different question:

Am I not entitled to participate in a discussion, even if I offer no new perspectives from those who have already posted?

And if I am entitled to simply add my opinion, what difference does it make whether I use the same words someone else did or choose some different combination or words?

Now, I'll circle back and answer your question... Why is it a good thing? It's a good thing because it allows everyone the right to participate in a discussion, regardless of whether their point has already been made and regardless of their ability to articulate that point.
Yes, you are most welcome to participate, but why am I - the reader of the topic - going to bother reading what you've written if it's similar to or exactly the same as what someone else has written (which I've probably already read)? If you really wanted to further the discussion, you would - and should IMO - post a different viewpoint.

Now, speaking conceptually here, if you still want to participate, why does your participation need to take the form of a post? CAVX made the point that in a real-life discussion, when someone makes expresses a point of view that others agree with, they will say "I agree" or something equivalent. So why do those "I agree"s need to be expressed as a post amongst the different opinions being discussed?
You seem to be reaching the same conclusion as many others in this thread already have - we need a "like" button, or some equivalent. I agree that would go a long way towards settling this issue. Unfortunately, we do not have that functionality yet and must instead base our discussion on the current reality of the situation.

I interpreted the question in the OP to mean "should simply quoting a user be against the rules" (since that's what most conversations in this forum tend to boil down to). And, until we come up with more options for users, my answer is no.

[Edited on 05.18.2012 6:47 AM PDT]

  • 05.18.2012 5:07 AM PDT

"We live in a special time; the only time where we can observationally verify that we live in a very special time" - Lawrence Krauss.

I was a finalist :P


Posted by: dazarobbo
Yes, you are most welcome to participate, but why am I - the reader of the topic - going to bother reading what you've written if it's similar to or exactly the same as what someone else has written (which I've probably already read)?

In order for you to make the decision about proceeding onto the next post, you have to first get an understanding about what the beginnings of the post talk about. If it's a quote-post, you'll quickly notice it before moving on; and I think that's the objective for said types of posts - you'll see and take in how many people actually agree with a statement almost autonomically as you continue to scroll down to view other perspectives which may be brought forward. It gives you an idea as to how many people agree with a particular point, which may cause you (or other users) to take in such a specific point more critically.

If you really wanted to further the discussion, you would - and should IMO - post a different viewpoint.
The number of viewpoints one can provide are finite to many particular issues; with few points for and against. The more viewpoints which are given in a discussion, the less of a chance that one has the ability to come up with a differing viewpoint; hence a person will most likely agree with a prior point and quote-post it to show their stance in a discussion which takes place. Quote-posts are ultimately inevitable.

  • 05.18.2012 5:39 AM PDT

Check out The Game Lounge

It really depends, if someone is asking a question, and you quote a user with the same answer that you were going to give, you are providing them with "your" answer with less typing. Thus, answering their question more quickly, and letting him/her go on with their life.

  • 05.18.2012 8:11 AM PDT

"You build on failure. You use it as a stepping stone. Close the door on the past. You don't try to forget the mistakes, but you don't dwell on it. You don't let it have any of your energy, or any of your time, or any of your space." -Johnny Cash

I would think that it does. Even if you don't add anything after the quote, you're still voicing your opinion, thus adding to the discussion.

  • 05.18.2012 8:24 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: Eric Duffy
no

  • 05.18.2012 12:08 PM PDT

Looking for a more mature group of people to game with? If you answered YES, then Welcome Aboard!
Ancient Warriors... are a group of chronologically challenged gamers, age 30 and older. Founded by XX B Sea XX and Maddog1953, the current co-platoon leaders are Maddog1953, OCCR, Muad Dib 0528.
Our goal is to game with mature people and have fun!

Join Today!

All good points. I personally don't quote and then leave it at that. I feel that I must add something to the topic. But I don't really have have concern about people who post like that either.

  • 05.18.2012 12:26 PM PDT
  • gamertag: S034
  • user homepage:

Gettin' all Herodotean up in here!


Posted by: dazarobbo
When you open a topic, can you see all of the posts within it on the screen? No, because the space to display posts is limited by both your hardware (monitor size) and the site (paging). In that sense, I would rather have as many different viewpoints on my screen at the one time than to have to wade through multiple pages of people making no new contributions.
That seems like a gross over-exaggeration of how often people quote without adding anything.

Of course it doesn't, but is it fair that their new/substantial/different contribution to the topic is lost amongst empty quotes of other posts that have already been presented? In fact, here's a good exercise: go to this topic and identify (roughly) how many responses there are to the OP's question/the topic, how many are not, then get an idea of how much space the latter take up which the former could be occupying. Is that idea not a better way to have a discussion structured? I feel like that's a poor example, for two reasons. First, Urk (generally) makes snide or cutting comments that people love to quote because the quotes are funny and people think that they have funny things they can tack on to his zippy one-liners (usually they aren't funny, but that's beside the point). So really a better argument would be that nobody's allowed to quote Urk. I can't think of a single other user who types fewer words and gets quoted more often than Urk does. Second, that thread isn't a thread which really fosters discussion anyway. All the OP wants is a simple "ME!" There's no disagreements or differences of opinion even allowed if you're following forum rules properly. If you post "I don't," in that thread, it qualifies as spam (if you're following the rules to the letter) because the OP isn't asking who doesn't have the Haunted helmet, he's just asking who does.

Yes, you are most welcome to participate, but why am I - the reader of the topic - going to bother reading what you've written if it's similar to or exactly the same as what someone else has written (which I've probably already read)? If you really wanted to further the discussion, you would - and should IMO - post a different viewpoint. I think that this hits the nail of this thread on the head. Is it enough to simply be involved in a discussion, as an assenting opinion in the camp of someone more articulate? Or do we actually have to articulate things that move discussion forward? That could be tough for some people. Do we exclude them from the discussion because of that?

Now, speaking conceptually here, if you still want to participate, why does your participation need to take the form of a post? CAVX made the point that in a real-life discussion, when someone makes expresses a point of view that others agree with, they will say "I agree" or something equivalent. So why do those "I agree"s need to be expressed as a post amongst the different opinions being discussed? I would say that it's a matter of convenience at this point. As I said before, a quote-post is tantamount to a nod of agreement. Obviously we all want the agency to voice said agreement; it's an important part of discussion, and knowing that people agree with you, even silently, can mean the difference between giving up an argument and winning it.

The problem, however, is that the only real vehicle we have to voice said agreement, at this point, is a post. So ostensibly what you're suggesting is that we no longer voice our assent. I completely understand. Hell, I agree. These posts are annoying clutter that inject no new knowledge or ideas into the discussions they're in. But, for the time being, at least, I feel they're an important part of discussion because they're the only thing we have to publicly show our agreement. Our participation needs to take the form of a post because how else are we supposed to participate? If I don't post, nobody will even know I'm there, never mind that I'm paying attention. It's a cumbersome, convoluted way to go about it, don't get me wrong. But it is what it is. Until we have a better way to show we agree, we have to be able to do it this way.

"Thumbs up" button, anyone?

  • 05.18.2012 1:14 PM PDT

No. I admit that it can show other members' opinions on a subject, but it doesn't move the conversation forward at all.

  • 05.18.2012 2:49 PM PDT

Hi, I am GrandmasterNinja the founder of a group called The Shadow League.If you are looking for a fun but serious group to join, this is your chance. If you do decide to Join, please PM me back to I can alert the Moderators of a new member. Remember, Honor The Code.

Join Here

BIGDADDY786


Posted by: S_034

Posted by: dazarobbo
When you open a topic, can you see all of the posts within it on the screen? No, because the space to display posts is limited by both your hardware (monitor size) and the site (paging). In that sense, I would rather have as many different viewpoints on my screen at the one time than to have to wade through multiple pages of people making no new contributions.
That seems like a gross over-exaggeration of how often people quote without adding anything.

Of course it doesn't, but is it fair that their new/substantial/different contribution to the topic is lost amongst empty quotes of other posts that have already been presented? In fact, here's a good exercise: go to this topic and identify (roughly) how many responses there are to the OP's question/the topic, how many are not, then get an idea of how much space the latter take up which the former could be occupying. Is that idea not a better way to have a discussion structured? I feel like that's a poor example, for two reasons. First, Urk (generally) makes snide or cutting comments that people love to quote because the quotes are funny and people think that they have funny things they can tack on to his zippy one-liners (usually they aren't funny, but that's beside the point). So really a better argument would be that nobody's allowed to quote Urk. I can't think of a single other user who types fewer words and gets quoted more often than Urk does. Second, that thread isn't a thread which really fosters discussion anyway. All the OP wants is a simple "ME!" There's no disagreements or differences of opinion even allowed if you're following forum rules properly. If you post "I don't," in that thread, it qualifies as spam (if you're following the rules to the letter) because the OP isn't asking who doesn't have the Haunted helmet, he's just asking who does.

Yes, you are most welcome to participate, but why am I - the reader of the topic - going to bother reading what you've written if it's similar to or exactly the same as what someone else has written (which I've probably already read)? If you really wanted to further the discussion, you would - and should IMO - post a different viewpoint. I think that this hits the nail of this thread on the head. Is it enough to simply be involved in a discussion, as an assenting opinion in the camp of someone more articulate? Or do we actually have to articulate things that move discussion forward? That could be tough for some people. Do we exclude them from the discussion because of that?

Now, speaking conceptually here, if you still want to participate, why does your participation need to take the form of a post? CAVX made the point that in a real-life discussion, when someone makes expresses a point of view that others agree with, they will say "I agree" or something equivalent. So why do those "I agree"s need to be expressed as a post amongst the different opinions being discussed? I would say that it's a matter of convenience at this point. As I said before, a quote-post is tantamount to a nod of agreement. Obviously we all want the agency to voice said agreement; it's an important part of discussion, and knowing that people agree with you, even silently, can mean the difference between giving up an argument and winning it.

The problem, however, is that the only real vehicle we have to voice said agreement, at this point, is a post. So ostensibly what you're suggesting is that we no longer voice our assent. I completely understand. Hell, I agree. These posts are annoying clutter that inject no new knowledge or ideas into the discussions they're in. But, for the time being, at least, I feel they're an important part of discussion because they're the only thing we have to publicly show our agreement. Our participation needs to take the form of a post because how else are we supposed to participate? If I don't post, nobody will even know I'm there, never mind that I'm paying attention. It's a cumbersome, convoluted way to go about it, don't get me wrong. But it is what it is. Until we have a better way to show we agree, we have to be able to do it this way.

"Thumbs up" button, anyone?


*Thumbs up*

  • 05.18.2012 6:18 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Mythic Member
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

What about quoting yourself?

  • 05.18.2012 6:28 PM PDT

Then you're just desperate.
Posted by: Skibur
What about quoting yourself?

  • 05.18.2012 6:33 PM PDT

Gamers Anon

Achronos: And what's this about a "design team" I've been hearing? Apparently stosh is so awesome he's now considered a "team".

Oh boy, he went there...
Posted by: Negative 9

Posted by: Eric Duffy
no


I do not think it adds anything to the conversation and I have never done it in all my time on here.

  • 05.19.2012 1:01 AM PDT

Posted by: Big Black Bear
So, are we now saying that posts on the first page of a discussion should be given some priority over others? Does that mean I shouldn't bother posting at all once a topic gets past that point, since people will need to "wade through multiple pages" just to get to my post?

No, of course not... That's silly, isn't it? Because we operate under an expectation that people (at least, most of them) will read through the entire discussion. So, whether my post is on page 1, 2, or 10, it should be seen by anyone who is interested in seeing it. And if people need to pass by a few posts that only contain quotes to get to it, so be it... They should be just as easy (or easier, actually) to ignore than any other post that they may not be interested in.
I'm not saying the first few posts should be given priority, it's that they are already have an inherent, unfair "priority" because of their position in the thread, position on the page, position on the screen, and their relation to the entry points to a topic from the forum page. There are a mountain of posts between the OP and the last page in topics that probably contain a lot of good responses, but it's the fact that nobody will read them because they are there and not able to be moved/floated/bumped that they are lost. It's kind of like how nobody wants to be the person whose post ends up in the last position on the page, because few (if any) will see it when the new page starts.

And do you really expect people to read an entire discussion? I surely don't, and people occasionally people will openly admit they haven't when making a reply.

Posted by: Big Black Bear
Is it fair? Of course it is... That's my whole point.

Despite how you may prefer things to work, better posters (those who present new, well thought-out perspectives) are not given priority over any other posters on this site. We are all on equal footing and should be given equal opportunity to post. The only question that's left is whether we post within the confines of the rules or not. And to that point... The example you gave is a bad one because the quote-posts are not on-topic, which makes them against the rules for that reason.
Touché, but if there were another way for those posters to express their agreement/interest in urk's response in a way that wasn't a post, would that thread have not likely been more concise and readable?

Regardless, try this thread instead.

Posted by: Big Black Bear
You seem to be reaching the same conclusion as many others in this thread already have - we need a "like" button, or some equivalent. I agree that would go a long way towards settling this issue. Unfortunately, we do not have that functionality yet and must instead base our discussion on the current reality of the situation.

I interpreted the question in the OP to mean "should simply quoting a user be against the rules" (since that's what most conversations in this forum tend to boil down to). And, until we come up with more options for users, my answer is no.
Just so nobody gets the wrong idea, I too think that it shouldn't be against the rules because of how common and reactionary it is across forums (and it's a such a petty/non-malicious thing I'd prefer not to ban someone for). Rather, I'm approaching this from a netiquette point of view where it's more of a courtesy to people engaging in a discussion not to be constantly disrupted by duplicate posts.

  • 05.19.2012 3:12 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Noble Member

Im addressing your concern by quoting you, isn't that nice!

Posted by: Truth of TX
There are plenty of threads where users reply by quoting something said by someone else. No other added opinion or anything.
I've seen good threads gone to waste in the past due to quote pyramids, or a hefty amount of users simply quoting the first, or one of the early replies, in the thread.
Should it be mandatory to add to a few words of your own even after you've already quoted someone? Simply adding a little bit of your own thoughts shouldn't be too hard, even if what the user you quoted said exactly what you were thinking.

  • 05.19.2012 3:15 AM PDT

Sandswept Studios Design Director

Visit us and check out our games at Sandswept.net!

~~Pardon Our Dust.~~

Short answer: No.

Long answer: No, because it doesn't explain anything further. It bumps the thread, but doesn't promote discussion. It's the equivalent to posting "lol" in a thread. I suppose it informs people you thought it was funny, or when quoting someone, shows that you agree... But it doesn't add to the discussion itself.

It's the equivalent to someone nodding their head or laughing at something in a conversation. They're not adding, except my being part of the environment of the conversation.

Something like that.

  • 05.19.2012 4:19 AM PDT

cockburnicus@live.com
New Flood

Sometimes I want to speak my opinions on an issue. Sometimes someone has said it better than I ever could.

  • 05.19.2012 4:32 AM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • of 4