Get rid of post your... junk threads

[The Don]

It's unfair on users with smaller postcounts that are more active within the community that these particular users are being allowed to post this tripe and without actually involving themselves. The unfairness is not a question of who is allowed to post but of the manner in which we are rewarding posts.

No, it's not. As i've said previously there is literally nothing preventing others from posting in those threads apart from themselves. You also get rewarded for longer posts as they earn extra tokens so if anything people are rewarded for making longer posts and getting involved in the community rather than the opposite.

[Kyle]

yes but it's clearly not enough of a reward if people still stick to those threads

[The Don]

People continuously abuse the system and they get rewards from it!

The rewards they get are negligible compared to the amount of time and effort needed to reap them. 5 tokens are issued for every post. The smallest amount of credits that you can purchase with tokens is 5 credits for 1000 credits. That means it takes 200 posts to gain 5 credits, that’s equivalent to 50p. One of the users people have been using as an example is shockwave. Last week he made 12 posts, at that rate it’s going to be a fair few months before he earns that sweet 50p.

It promotes inactivity!

Hardly, people will post in whatever threads they want. People replying with short replies in certain threads isn’t going to lower the activity of the forum or reduce the quality of posts outside of those threads. It would actually be promoting inactivity to deter users from posting in those threads. Not everybody wants to take part in heavy discussion and we shouldn’t force people to either. If people are happy posting that they just listened to their favorite song, or what they watched on tv that day then why does it matter to you? Ignore the threads if they are that much of a hindrance to you.

It’s unfair on people for them to get easy post count!

Oh no! They’re getting imaginary points. There’s nothing preventing you from posting in those threads if you really care that much about post count. People are rewarded with more tokens for the bigger posts they make, so people are incentivised to make longer posts rather than the opposite.

[Kardan]

People continuously abuse the system and they get rewards from it!

The rewards they get are negligible compared to the amount of time and effort needed to reap them. 5 tokens are issued for every post. The smallest amount of credits that you can purchase with tokens is 5 credits for 1000 credits. That means it takes 200 posts to gain 5 credits, that’s equivalent to 50p. One of the users people have been using as an example is shockwave. Last week he made 12 posts, at that rate it’s going to be a fair few months before he earns that sweet 50p.

It promotes inactivity!

Hardly, people will post in whatever threads they want. People replying with short replies in certain threads isn’t going to lower the activity of the forum or reduce the quality of posts outside of those threads. It would actually be promoting inactivity to deter users from posting in those threads. Not everybody wants to take part in heavy discussion and we shouldn’t force people to either. If people are happy posting that they just listened to their favorite song, or what they watched on tv that day then why does it matter to you? Ignore the threads if they are that much of a hindrance to you.

It’s unfair on people for them to get easy post count!

Oh no! They’re getting imaginary points. There’s nothing preventing you from posting in those threads if you really care that much about post count. People are rewarded with more tokens for the bigger posts they make, so people are incentivised to make longer posts rather than the opposite.

Then let's activate post count for spam and forum games as well then - that will promote more activity surely.

[The Don]

Then let's activate post count for spam and forum games as well then - that will promote more activity surely.

To be honest I wouldn't care if it was made active for those sections. I doubt it will happen though.

[Yawn]

lets not act like shockerz has just 5c worth of pointless posts when he has over 1k posts in wat did u last watch alone

and its not rly the point that we can post there as well. its pointless posting and a massive spam thread, NO ONE should be posting in it and getting tokens/post count. its stupid to allow these ppl to literally boost their postcount with minimal effort (which also happens to be against the rules ). they are too lazy to even post in this very thread which directly concerns them

there are plenty of threads for laidback and lighter posting which at the same time isnt pointless. the posts are spam and should be treated like it

-.-

[Blinger]

Does shockwave post anywhere but the selfie thread and the whatchya watchin' one? I don't even know his name apart from them.

I say let them keep the posts, it's not really affecting anyone tbh.

[FlyingJesus]

It was added, as Kyle mentioned, as a loophole to allow some of these threads to remain. Love how you say the rules are wrong when it was added specifically to allow exceptions to the short replies part which means it's in the correct place. But you clearly know better than the rules so whatever.

I'm not saying the rule is wrong at all (yet again you need to read the words in my posts before replying to them) I'm saying that a note about pointless posting ought to be put in the same place as the pointless posting rule since it makes sense there and does not make sense in its current position. The wording is very specific in mentioning pointless posts and not crap threads. Try again

Not everybody is looking for drawn out discussions and if people want to participate in the lighter threads by posting what they're listening to or what they're watching then why shouldn't they?

Literally no-one is trying to stop people from making posts other than you with your ridiculous suggestion which you are still to defend rather than deflecting through bringing up points that aren't being put forward by anyone. You are genuinely the only person in this entire thread who has advocated for a plan that blocks people from posting

[The Don]

I'm not saying the rule is wrong at all (yet again you need to read the words in my posts before replying to them) I'm saying that a note about pointless posting ought to be put in the same place as the pointless posting rule since it makes sense there and does not make sense in its current position. The wording is very specific in mentioning pointless posts and not crap threads. Try again



Literally no-one is trying to stop people from making posts other than you with your ridiculous suggestion which you are still to defend rather than deflecting through bringing up points that aren't being put forward by anyone. You are genuinely the only person in this entire thread who has advocated for a plan that blocks people from posting

Yeh because deterring people from posting is so much better than limiting the amount of posts in a thread. And how on earth are you not insinuating the rules are wrong when you're saying things 'ought' to be in other places. It is amusing watching you recycle the 'but that's not what it saying' card.

[passion]

This is a community website. Like any others, people want to be included and or involved. One of the ways to do this is to establish yourself on said site. Now one of the ways to do this is by having a higher post count. Whether people want to accept it or not, someone with high post count (and the rep and tokens that come with this) are treated differently to a "newb". So, by allowing people a handful of threads where they can boost their post count could help activity in the long run. Habbox strikes the balance just right. I recently signed up to a new official fansite (HabHome) which is very active but they have things like posting competitions where people spam the entire forum for a prize. Habbox is nothing like this which is a positive thing. Removing post count from these threads would be a negative thing though for the reasons aforementioned.