Compulsory "Post What You're Listening to" winge thread

[GommeInc]

There's at least triple if not more points of discussion in those threads per page, they also are not spammable in the same way.

Not the same way, but spammable in a different way. There have been the odd occasion where a member will add their background in quick succession, with a different background. You have to ask, "does anyone care?" Personally it's not really the be all and end all knowing or not knowing what some has as their desktop background - the same goes for the music thread. It is a topicless thread with about as much point as the "Post what you are listening to" thread - one posts what your desktop background is while the other asks what you are listening at that specific moment in time There isn't much discussion, other than "where do you download backgrounds?" which is reminiscent of similar one-off questions of "where do you download your songs from. iTunes? Oh." So both as boring and careless-able as each other. Double posts seem non-existent too.

The trouble with the music thread is that it could be topical but the fact it's in the music forum where people already discuss specific songs takes away any discussion, but without it there wouldn't really be any way of knowing what people are listening to, because some may not care about posting such things in their own threads.

To kill off it's post count doesn't seem to of been answered either, other than a half-baked response of "if it can keep the post count then the spam forum should have a post count too", when everyone and their unborn children knows that the spam forum doesn't really act the way it should do Half of the forums useful discussions and "pointful" threads are in that forum, and it has it's own sub-culture and sub-community to boot.

[FlyingJesus]

I don't think anyone's suggesting that spam ought to have a post count (except for when we asked if it were possible to just have a report of how many posts we all have in there as a one-off thing, but that's not the same) and there's no suggestion to take away the thread, merely to change it so that post counts don't rise in it

[GommeInc]

I don't think anyone's suggesting that spam ought to have a post count (except for when we asked if it were possible to just have a report of how many posts we all have in there as a one-off thing, but that's not the same) and there's no suggestion to take away the thread, merely to change it so that post counts don't rise in it

When I brought up the usefulness of a post count you stated:

surely adding to the post count is useful? It shows that members are active in one aspect of the forum community, which is what a post count is there to do.

That logic suggests that the most active area, spam, ought to also have post count enabled

But that's merely arguing pedantics Spam = pointless yet the Habbox version of Spam isn't, so to bring up Spam was in itself pointless to this discussion, because many of the threads in the Spam forum promote active discussion and have a point of some sort. I'm not sure why having a post count for this thread is so damaging as seems to be the argument here. It's not that popular as threads go, it has its uses and it's not abused. Post counts mean very little these days, it's just a number.

[Chippiewill]

Not the same way, but spammable in a different way. There have been the odd occasion where a member will add their background in quick succession, with a different background. You have to ask, "does anyone care?" Personally it's not really the be all and end all knowing or not knowing what some has as their desktop background - the same goes for the music thread.

Unlike the music section the technology moderators seem much more attentive at catching people who post with just changing backgrounds, the only person who seems to get away with it is Recursion and he puts in the effort to change the OS each time round.

It is a topicless thread with about as much point as the "Post what you are listening to" thread - one posts what your desktop background is while the other asks what you are listening at that specific moment in time There isn't much discussion, other than "where do you download backgrounds?" which is reminiscent of similar one-off questions of "where do you download your songs from. iTunes? Oh." So both as boring and careless-able as each other.

The discussion in the thread is far more diverse, often discussing things seen in the picture, for example the OS they're running, whether it runs well, or pointing out to someone that running IE6 is a dumb idea etc.

The trouble with the music thread is that it could be topical but the fact it's in the music forum where people already discuss specific songs takes away any discussion, but without it there wouldn't really be any way of knowing what people are listening to, because some may not care about posting such things in their own threads.

Sorry, but if we're going to speculate then there's no point debating this.

[GommeInc]

Sorry, but if we're going to speculate then there's no point debating this.

Isn't that what you've been doing the whole time, speculating? :S I thought it was damn right obvious, seeing as it's been stated countless times the "what are you listening to" thread serves one of a few purposes of the music forum - discussions cannot be done with it to the same extent as the desktop backgrounds thread because the whole point of the music forum is to discuss music, but at the same time people are not going to spam the music forum with threads based on what they are listening to, when one thread will suffice - especially one that doesn't appear to have any issues So it's not speculation per se, because it's virtually impossible to have a strong discussion in that thread because then the forum will suffer - what you are doing, suggesting the thread will survive without a post count is speculation too, you do know that? Heck, the whole point of discussing ideas is the central point to what speculation means - "Guessing" what/if/will/why/how - so what you said here was pretty silly in retrospect

So to answer to your point "there is no point debating this because it's speculation" - Good, then you agree the thread should not be touched because discussing changes based purely on guess work is incredibly bad. It's impossible to predict to 100% accuracy what will happen when something is changed, so what you've been doing the past 5 or 6 pages is based on speculation - guess work on how to change the thread etc. So really you've been wasting your time, seeing as you disagree with yourself and the prospects of "change"

[FlyingJesus]

What speculation are you on about? The change we're advocating is to do with something that is current and visible. It's very simply:

Xis the case >Y ought to be the case instead for Z reason{s}> This is how to go about it

Any discussion about whether the thread will "die" as a result and what may go on in the music section after the change might be of interest but really has nothing to do with the suggestion itself, as it doesn't affect the base point that the change ought to be made and that there's an easily viable way of doing so without messing up the look or usability

[GommeInc]

What speculation are you on about? The change we're advocating is to do with something that is current and visible. It's very simply:

Xis the case >Y ought to be the case instead for Z reason{s}> This is how to go about it

Any discussion about whether the thread will "die" as a result and what may go on in the music section after the change might be of interest but really has nothing to do with the suggestion itself, as it doesn't affect the base point that the change ought to be made and that there's an easily viable way of doing so without messing up the look or usability

I'm shocked you do not know what speculation is :S The speculation is that you assume that the change will result, in absolute certainty, in the thread maintaining or receiving greater interest than at its current state. Speculation is, in its basic form, guessing that a change will result in the desired outcome, yet there is no proof it will. There is a lack of evidence or fact is based on incomplete evidence. You are a proposing a change, you, myself and the rest of the forum who have found themselves here are speculating over the prospects of changing the forum - what the desired outcome might be, what they should be etc. etc.

Infact, reading over Chippiewill's initial post in this thread, there doesn't appear to be any suggestion as to what is wrong with the thread other than it lacks any point - when many people here have posted that it does have a point and the very thread itself makes it obvious - it's to post what music you are listening to. The question seems to be: "How can you justify a thread with less productive discussions than spam." The answer is simple: Does it need to?

I think this thread has got to be the worst thread when it comes to discussing the "what are you listening to" thread. If anything, it's questioning the point of having a forum in the first place. Forums are places you share and discuss topics, yet the suggestion here is we remove the sharing aspect and have a boring discussion forum where any lack of discussion results in punishment.

There is a lack of evidence that people are posting to increase their post count, which has been stated a few times:

Post #15
Post #16
Post #17
Post #44

It's pure speculation at the moment. Some even contradict each other. Would removing post count promote active discussion? Hopefully not, because the Music forum will suffer because any music discussions should hopefully be turned into threads, which is the case now. Active discussion will, deceptively, make the forum look less active because there will be less posts being made IF post counts were disabled.

It's probably why management are ignoring this thread or not acting upon the lack of suggestions, because there doesn't appear to be any problems as of yet. IF people were posting to increase their post count (which seems to be main problem here) then disabling it could work or moderators could actively use Rule A7 to combat the spam problem, but as of yet there is no clear evidence. Plus you have to measure up post count to the ranking system, which is I assume why people are upset because its an easy way to advance through the ranking system. Most of the people in that forum seem to have VIP so the User Ranking Systems seems to be a bit useless, as the benefits of increasing your post count are non-existent, plus you have to spam a lot to reap the benefits. Heck, if you do spam a lot the only time you get any benefits of the ranking system is when you reach Habbox God, the other ranks are not that useful unless people care that much about the size of their avatar and the bonus rep - 15 to 30 points is useless as rep goes these days anyway. That's like saving 25p towards a car - you've got a lot of work to do.

[-:Undertaker:-]

That logic suggests that the most active area, spam, ought to also have post count enabled

Let's enable it then.

[FlyingJesus]

I'm shocked you do not know what speculation is :S The speculation is that you assume that the change will result, in absolute certainty, in the thread maintaining or receiving greater interest than at its current state. Speculation is, in its basic form, guessing that a change will result in the desired outcome, yet there is no proof it will.

The desired outcome is not having thousands upon thousandsof non-responsive, non-discussive posts counting as though they were useful and part of something proper. No speculation needed about that, and like I say the rest actually has nothing to do with that point

Infact, reading over Chippiewill's initial post in this thread, there doesn't appear to be any suggestion as to what is wrong with the thread other than it lacks any point - when many people here have posted that it does have a point

Chirs =/= many people

I think this thread has got to be the worst thread when it comes to discussing the "what are you listening to" thread. If anything, it's questioning the point of having a forum in the first place. Forums are places you share and discuss topics, yet the suggestion here is we remove the sharing aspect and have a boring discussion forum where any lack of discussion results in punishment.

I don't think not having a post count in such a thread qualifies as a "punishment", and that suggestion in the link as far as I'm aware has been revoked

There is a lack of evidence that people are posting to increase their post count, which has been stated a few times:

Post #15
Post #16
Post #17
Post #44

It's pure speculation at the moment.

Those things are speculation yes, but have nothing to do with the main point and are merely follow-ons

Some even contradict each other. Would removing post count promote active discussion? Hopefully not, because the Music forum will suffer because any music discussions should hopefully be turned into threads, which is the case now. Active discussion will, deceptively, make the forum look less active because there will be less posts being made IF post counts were disabled.

More discussion threads is a bad thing? As for less posts, I'd much rather have a smaller amount of interesting and discussive posts than a multitude of one line posts that no-one actually responds to. Otherwise we might as well be Twitter

Plus you have to measure up post count to the ranking system, which is I assume why people are upset because its an easy way to advance through the ranking system. Most of the people in that forum seem to have VIP so the User Ranking Systems seems to be a bit useless, as the benefits of increasing your post count are non-existent, plus you have to spam a lot to reap the benefits. Heck, if you do spam a lot the only time you get any benefits of the ranking system is when you reach Habbox God, the other ranks are not that useful unless people care that much about the size of their avatar and the bonus rep - 15 to 30 points is useless as rep goes these days anyway. That's like saving 25p towards a car - you've got a lot of work to do.

It's a bad time to be looking at the usergroups of people in any thread at the moment since VIP is on sale, so pretty much all active users have it for the time being. That aside, it's extremely clear that the thread doesn't exist for true interest as there is absolutely no response to anything from anyone within it. There are pages upon pages between even so much as an "oh I love that song!" post, so regardless of whether people are posting there to increase their counts or out of boredom it does not in any way qualify as an active discussion thread - that and only that is the real point

[Chippiewill]

It's probably why management are ignoring this thread or not acting upon the lack of suggestions, because there doesn't appear to be any problems as of yet.

Management have learnt to keep their noses out of the threads because they end up looking stupendously arrogant when they do *cough*oli*cough* and it ends up with severely biased discussion as soon as anyone from management takes a view because half of the forum act like sheep at that point.

IF people were posting to increase their post count (which seems to be main problem here) then disabling it could work or moderators could actively use Rule A7 to combat the spam problem, but as of yet there is no clear evidence.

Moderators are very, very, very extraordinarily lenient when it comes to rule A7 and that thread, directly concerning this little gem "~ Do not posts threads which only allow for short, one or two word answers and do not promote active discussion.".