View previous topic | View next topic

QI forums: views to replies ratio

Page 1 of 2
Goto page 1, 2  Next


Should QI forum posts be replied to?
Yes
33%
 33%  [ 2 ]
No
50%
 50%  [ 3 ]
Dont know
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Dont care
16%
 16%  [ 1 ]
Total Votes : 6

PDR
1250386.  Sun Sep 24, 2017 2:14 am Reply with quote

<uninterested grunt>

PDR

 
Alfred E Neuman
1250414.  Sun Sep 24, 2017 6:05 am Reply with quote

jn1057 wrote:
Should responses be expected by the post author, should readers reply in order to evoke further discussion, should tangential replies be given, etc


So I can post any old crap and there is a duty on the community to humour me? Seriously, if you actually believe that, then why haven't you been working through those unanswered posts doing the right thing? One a day since you started this thread and you'd have let 10 000 people off the hook. Of course, that opens the door for someone else to come along and accuse us of being derelict in our duty because only one person replied.

To me, if a few thousand people view some posts and no one bothers to reply to any of them, that tells me more about the quality of the posts than the forum members.

 
PDR
1250415.  Sun Sep 24, 2017 6:12 am Reply with quote

<vaguely approving grunt>

PDR

 
tetsabb
1250435.  Sun Sep 24, 2017 10:48 am Reply with quote

Yeah. 😉

 
Paul-R
1259239.  Thu Nov 02, 2017 9:11 am Reply with quote

I have been a member of boards where lurkers are encouraged to reply either by the carrot or (on one occasion) the stick. These always result in lots of boring, pointless posts and well over 50% of the active members leaving the board.

 
GuyBarry
1259262.  Thu Nov 02, 2017 11:31 am Reply with quote

Paul-R wrote:
I have been a member of boards where lurkers are encouraged to reply either by the carrot or (on one occasion) the stick.


How does that work then? The "carrot" would mean giving some specific incentive to lurkers if they reply, which I suppose is just about possible, although I've never been on a forum that gave out money to posters or anything like that.

But the "stick"? If you don't know who the lurkers are, how can you possibly punish them for not posting? It's fairly routine for administrators to remove the accounts of people who haven't posted for a set length of time. I don't see what other measures could be taken.

 
Alfred E Neuman
1259302.  Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:22 pm Reply with quote

GuyBarry wrote:
But the "stick"? If you don't know who the lurkers are, how can you possibly punish them for not posting? It's fairly routine for administrators to remove the accounts of people who haven't posted for a set length of time. I don't see what other measures could be taken.


Block access so that they can't read parts of the forum?

 
Paul-R
1259340.  Fri Nov 03, 2017 5:43 am Reply with quote

The "stick" on the site I was talking about was to limit their access to the main board and spam board.

Carrot is easy, varied from giving extra posting privileges, allowing access to "secret" boards, allowing links in signature, and on one board, actual physical prizes.

 
Jenny
1260537.  Wed Nov 08, 2017 4:57 pm Reply with quote

Sounds like far too much hard work for my tastes.

 
crissdee
1260562.  Wed Nov 08, 2017 6:22 pm Reply with quote

And with all due respect to the many good friends I have made on these boards, and the hard work that goes into making it all happen, it seems to be placing rather too much value on posting stuff than it really merits.

 
fwk
1260571.  Wed Nov 08, 2017 6:51 pm Reply with quote

Some people can have inflated post numbers if they regularly post in 'One Word Story' and 'Word Associations!', naming no fwks. I think some forums block off certain boards until you've made a small number of posts to fence in spambots and make them easier to discover.

 
Paul-R
1260625.  Thu Nov 09, 2017 6:29 am Reply with quote

Looking at the members list, I notice that a hell of a lot of people have registered but never posted. Although I disagree in forcing people to post in general, perhaps making registration not finish until they have introduced themselves in the "Knock Knock" thread would be a good idea. That way they break their posting virginity, and having done it once will be more likely to do so again.

 
GuyBarry
1260773.  Thu Nov 09, 2017 12:11 pm Reply with quote

Since it's possible to read this forum without registering, I'm not sure why anyone would want to register without posting in any case. (This applies to several other forums of which I'm a member.)

 
suze
1260786.  Thu Nov 09, 2017 12:27 pm Reply with quote

Paul-R wrote:
Looking at the members list, I notice that a hell of a lot of people have registered but never posted.


While there certainly are people who have registered and then just never posted, I suspect you'd find that most of these have attempted to post.

Their attempted posts have either been deleted as spam, or have failed to post because they were identified as spam on pressing Submit. I won't go into precisely how that works and actually I'm not sure if we're still doing it, but we used to have a system where first posts went through an (invisible and automated) pre-screen before they actually posted.

You might ask why we retain all these people on the member list, why we don't just delete them and make the member file smaller, but there is a good reason for that. If we were to delete them, they could use the same email address to register again; if they stay on the system then they can't.

 
Paul-R
1260798.  Thu Nov 09, 2017 12:58 pm Reply with quote

Damn, wish I'd thought of that. I have a warehouse full of penis pumps and counterfeit Viagra to sell. :-)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Hey, just thought......I have TWO email addresses, so it is not too late.

 

Page 1 of 2
Goto page 1, 2  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group