[mtvesuvius]

sathyab, on Feb 21 2009, 03:01 PM, said:

jdonn, on Feb 21 2009, 01:01 PM, said:

awm, on Feb 21 2009, 12:03 PM, said:

And after people complained about the amount of italics and bold face in my posts, I have cut down on those (admittedly not to zero, but cut down).

So since, by the current poll results, 26 people like such answers outright, 8 people sometimes do, and 10 people don't, is it fair to say it's reasonable for people to keep doing it?

Yes, people have spoken in this regard, although as I noted earlier, I am not sure you would get as many votes in favor of one-liners had the question been posed as "How would you like a dismissive reply to a serious post of yours ?".

Had there been only one or two votes against one-liners the only practical solution would have been to advise them to grow a thicker skin and endure it. But that number is a sizeable minority, so we might want to look for a solution that accommodates both positions.

In an unmoderated group such as this, the rights of those who post something that might be objectionable is protected, whereas the rights of those who don't want to see such objectionable material is not protected at all. You have to allow individuals to exercise control over replies to their posts. Making this a moderated group will solve some problems, but create quite a few of its own. I believe there is a better solution, below.

Examples of this kind of control already exist. On both BBO and OKBridge, a host that serves a table can be selective about who gets to play or kibitz at his table. Chat from kibitzers can be filtered on a per-player basis. It shouldn't be too hard to extend this model to this forum.

Why fix something if it aint broken? Some people value one liners, the others should just read on to the next post. In addition, the rephrasing you are suggesting is like false advertising. It's like instead of saying "Would you like some mushroom sauce?" you say "Would you like some fungus?"

[sathyab]

mtvesuvius, on Feb 21 2009, 03:11 PM, said:

Some people value one liners, the others should just read on to the next post.

So you don't have any problem with SPAM at all then ?

[mtvesuvius]

sathyab, on Feb 21 2009, 03:17 PM, said:

mtvesuvius, on Feb 21 2009, 03:11 PM, said:

Some people value one liners, the others should just read on to the next post.

So you don't have any problem with SPAM at all then ?

SPAM is worthless garbage sent by people and companies that you don't know. One liners are simply someone's opinion, they cared enough to share their opinion... Whether it's right or wrong, rude or considerate. If you don't find them valuable, just read on or you can ask them to elaborate, I'm sure they would be happy to.

[sathyab]

mtvesuvius, on Feb 21 2009, 03:20 PM, said:

sathyab, on Feb 21 2009, 03:17 PM, said:

mtvesuvius, on Feb 21 2009, 03:11 PM, said:

Some people value one liners, the others should just read on to the next post.

So you don't have any problem with SPAM at all then ?

SPAM is worthless garbage sent by people and companies that you don't know. One liners are simply someone's opinion, they cared enough to share their opinion... Whether it's right or wrong, rude or considerate. If you don't find them valuable, just read on or you can ask them to elaborate, I'm sure they would be happy to.

The companies or individuals who send you SPAM might disagree with you. They care to share and boy do they share They'd tell you the same, just use the DELETE key.

[mtvesuvius]

sathyab, on Feb 21 2009, 03:24 PM, said:

mtvesuvius, on Feb 21 2009, 03:20 PM, said:

sathyab, on Feb 21 2009, 03:17 PM, said:

mtvesuvius, on Feb 21 2009, 03:11 PM, said:

Some people value one liners, the others should just read on to the next post.

So you don't have any problem with SPAM at all then ?

SPAM is worthless garbage sent by people and companies that you don't know. One liners are simply someone's opinion, they cared enough to share their opinion... Whether it's right or wrong, rude or considerate. If you don't find them valuable, just read on or you can ask them to elaborate, I'm sure they would be happy to.

The companies or individuals who send you SPAM might disagree with you. They care to share and boy do they share They'd tell you the same, just use the DELETE key.

So then next time the prince of Nigeria e-mails you asking for your help in transporting 10 million dollars, you can e-mail him back and ask him to elaborate on why he thinks you should do so, and to explain why other alternatives are wrong .

[jdonn]

sathyab, on Feb 21 2009, 03:01 PM, said:

But that number is a sizeable minority, so we might want to look for a solution that accommodates both positions.

I think the solution is to ignore posts that are in a format you don't like. Filtering posters doesn't solve anything imo. Other people will still quote people you have blocked, and posts that are in reply to those people will make no sense to you, or may even be misinterpreted to have a totally different meaning. I think that would be sticking your finger in the leak in the dam and watching six more leaks burst out.

I mean let's be real. Some people don't like any short post. Some don't like LOLs. Some don't like lots of bold or italics. Some don't like bad grammar. Some don't care about the opinions of young/old people (take your pick). Some don't like lots of emoticons or yellow smiley faces. Some don't like curse words. Some don't like tough problems posted in B/I. Some don't like crazy bidding ideas as the solution to problems. And for every person that doesn't like any of those things in particular, there are probably just as many who don't care and even more who like them.

Read the posts you want to. Don't read the ones you don't. If you accidentally read one you don't like, you should accept that you have lost 15 seconds of your life and move along to the next post. Any solution beyond that is making a mountain out of a molehill.

[sathyab]

jdonn, on Feb 21 2009, 03:34 PM, said:

sathyab, on Feb 21 2009, 03:01 PM, said:

But that number is a sizeable minority, so we might want to look for a solution that accommodates both positions.

I think the solution is to ignore posts that are in a format you don't like. Filtering posters doesn't solve anything imo. Other people will still quote people you have blocked, and posts that are in reply to those people will make no sense to you, or may even be misinterpreted to have a totally different meaning. I think that would be sticking your finger in the leak in the dam and watching six more leaks burst out.

I mean let's be real. Some people don't like any short post. Some don't like LOLs. Some don't like lots of bold or italics. Some don't like bad grammar. Some don't care about the opinions of young/old people (take your pick). Some don't like lots of emoticons or yellow smiley faces. Some don't like curse words. Some don't like tough problems posted in B/I. Some don't like crazy bidding ideas as the solution to problems. And for every person that doesn't like any of those things in particular, there are probably just as many who don't care and even more who like them.

Read the posts you want to. Don't read the ones you don't. If you accidentally read one you don't like, you should accept that you have lost 15 seconds of your life and move along to the next post. Any solution beyond that is making a mountain out of a molehill.

In the solution that I have in mind, other people can't quote any one that you have blocked in a given thread. Someone has to take the trouble of starting a new thread and manually duplicating all the replies in the new thread.

People do have preferences about who they'd like to hear from. That's the reason Caller-Id was invented. As a society we're moving toward a model where we exert our preferences in every thing we do. Why should the forum be an exception ?

[TimG]

sathyab, on Feb 21 2009, 04:11 PM, said:

In the solution that I have in mind, other people can't quote any one that you have blocked in a given thread. Someone has to take the trouble of starting a new thread and manually duplicating all the replies in the new thread.

I'm not sure what you are suggesting.

If I start a thread, no one that I have can post to that thread?

If someone I have blocked is quoted by someone who I do not have blocked, I can only read part of the post? That would likely make it difficult to figure out what is going on in the post. Or does the whole post get blocked because someone I have blocked is quoted? What of someone else quotes the quoted part?

[sathyab]

TimG, on Feb 21 2009, 04:48 PM, said:

sathyab, on Feb 21 2009, 04:11 PM, said:

In the solution that I have in mind, other people can't quote any one that you have blocked in a given thread. Someone has to take the trouble of starting  a new thread and manually duplicating all the replies in the new thread.

I'm not sure what you are suggesting.

If I start a thread, no one that I have can post to that thread?

If someone I have blocked is quoted by someone who I do not have blocked, I can only read part of the post? That would likely make it difficult to figure out what is going on in the post. Or does the whole post get blocked because someone I have blocked is quoted? What of someone else quotes the quoted part?

I don't have the solution figured out in exact detail. But this is a well understood problem in computer science: a cluster of nodes where a sub-set is either trusted or distrusted by another sub-set of nodes. Companies working on social networking have to go to elaborate lengths to solve this problem. But there are cheaper solutions which get you reasonably good approximate solutions.

Better yet, why not use Facebook ? I'm new to Facebook, but I know that users who have your permission in a given network can write to and read from your "wall", which serves as a semi-public bulletin board.

[hotShot]

Blocking user is only half a good idea.

There are users where part of their posts are a great source of information while at other occasions they are just LOLing. If you block this user you lose all his posts.

[sathyab]

hotShot, on Feb 21 2009, 05:15 PM, said:

Blocking user is only half a good idea.

There are users where part of their posts are a great source of information while at other occasions they are just LOLing. If you block this user you lose all his posts.

That's the choice a user can make, if he has the tools to do so. At present, we don't have such mechanisms available.

[orlam]

awm, on Feb 21 2009, 12:03 PM, said:

Notice that it is possible to start polls in the forums.

If you want a vote on how many people would do one thing versus another, you start a poll. This is much easier and more concise than counting the "XXX WTP" and "Agree with YYY" replies.

If you want a discussion, it is annoying when instead of discussing the topic at hand, people use the space to tell you that your problem is not a problem, to LOL at you, and to kiss up to their favorite expert poster by agreeing with them, sometimes before they even posted a reply. Of course, it is also annoying when people change the subject and make long posts about something else in your thread.

And after people complained about the amount of italics and bold face in my posts, I have cut down on those (admittedly not to zero, but cut down).

Polls are not the same as know who would vote for which option. Even between Frances and Mikeh I would be curious which of the two thinks it is an obvious 3S bid, and who would bid 3H, as I may know from other posts from which general assumptions they might be coming from.

If you are annoyed because you frequently look up a thread where this only one new one-liner post, then maybe you are checking the forums too frequently.

[jdonn]

sathyab, on Feb 21 2009, 04:11 PM, said:

People do have preferences about who they'd like to hear from. That's the reason Caller-Id was invented. As a society we're moving toward a model where we exert our preferences in every thing we do. Why should the forum be an exception ?

Because an incoming phone call disturbs you from your day whereas you read the forums at your own leisure?

Because phone calls are directed at a particular number whereas forum posts are simply laid out for the public to read?

Because the forums are free to use???

I honestly can't imagine going through life spending much time worrying about stuff like this. Is this why people have so many heart attacks and so much stress in life? Sure I'm glad to have the convenience of caller id. But if it vanished tomorrow I wouldn't be lobbying to get it back. I would happily go through life answering the phone and accepting what comes.

Here's a thought. Decide whose opinions you like. Set up an email list with only those people where you send them any problem you like. Rinse and repeat. Enjoy.

[helene_t]

If someone can state his opinion in one line instead of ranting a whole page to achieve the same, then I appreciate it. Much like in conversations where the most powerful answer to a question is "yes" or "no", or the most powerful contribution to a debate may be a smile or a nod.

I suppose it's just a matter of taste but I happen to prefer short posts. I also happen to dislike rhetoric questions and but have no problems with sexually explicit content and sarcasm. I dislike colors and lots of questionmarks but have no issues with boldface, and smileys are generally a plus.

I certainly wouldn't favor censoring, or even encouraging self-censoring, based on my personal taste.

[sathyab]

jdonn, on Feb 21 2009, 06:28 PM, said:

sathyab, on Feb 21 2009, 04:11 PM, said:

People do have preferences about who they'd like to hear from. That's the reason Caller-Id was invented. As a society we're moving toward a model where we exert our preferences in every thing we do. Why should the forum be an exception ?

Because an incoming phone call disturbs you from your day whereas you read the forums at your own leisure?

Because phone calls are directed at a particular number whereas forum posts are simply laid out for the public to read?

Because the forums are free to use???

I honestly can't imagine going through life spending much time worrying about stuff like this. Is this why people have so many heart attacks and so much stress in life? Sure I'm glad to have the convenience of caller id. But if it vanished tomorrow I wouldn't be lobbying to get it back. I would happily go through life answering the phone and accepting what comes.

Here's a thought. Decide whose opinions you like. Set up an email list with only those people where you send them any problem you like. Rinse and repeat. Enjoy.

Mailing lists do not scale well when the number of participants rises. They're being replaced by news groups even for intra-company communications. Mailing lists are used mainly to communicate critical messages while others are posted to news groups in several companies in Silicon Valley that I know of.

[glen]

TimG, on Feb 21 2009, 09:06 AM, said:

Way too long; didn't read past the 2nd sentence.

this

[the hog]

Fluffy, on Feb 20 2009, 05:24 PM, said:

Why ask this? Lol.

Actually, I know I post too much to problems without thinking enough, and could make my answers better if I just paused and took the problem more seriously.

But the short answers gather important info: what would the field do, this is a valuable info.

Also when someone has already raised the important points on a topic there is not much use of repeating it, but just agreeing wights more reason to them.

The few cases when experts agree with me, I realice that my points where valid, wich I am not always sure of.

People don't like to give a highly complicated problem to the crowd, and that the crowd doesn't waste more than 10 seconds to answer when they have spent hours thinking about the problem, but believe me, it is better to get 10 short answers than to get none (wich happens often on complicated card play problems, at least when the problem wasn't posted by fred, justin or frances).

Agree with Fluffy.

[Apollo81]

LOL posts: i dislike them, presumably the quoted post wasn't just trying to waste peoples' time, so if you're going to respond you might as well try to help the person learn something

WTP posts: i don't mind them, to me they translate to "because there's no other reasonable alternative". If lots of people are posting a different opinion, then the egg is on WTP's face after all.

one-liners: i don't mind them, i don't mind when people use them in response to my OPs, maybe i want to do a poll but i only want to count peoples' responses when they have to identify themselves

and i agree that often it's possible to apply the "i don't read this kind of post" filter, though this clearly doesn't apply to one-liners since you can't help reading them in their entirety

[sathyab]

mtvesuvius, on Feb 21 2009, 03:31 PM, said:

sathyab, on Feb 21 2009, 03:24 PM, said:

mtvesuvius, on Feb 21 2009, 03:20 PM, said:

sathyab, on Feb 21 2009, 03:17 PM, said:

mtvesuvius, on Feb 21 2009, 03:11 PM, said:

Some people value one liners, the others should just read on to the next post.

So you don't have any problem with SPAM at all then ?

SPAM is worthless garbage sent by people and companies that you don't know. One liners are simply someone's opinion, they cared enough to share their opinion... Whether it's right or wrong, rude or considerate. If you don't find them valuable, just read on or you can ask them to elaborate, I'm sure they would be happy to.

The companies or individuals who send you SPAM might disagree with you. They care to share and boy do they share They'd tell you the same, just use the DELETE key.

So then next time the prince of Nigeria e-mails you asking for your help in transporting 10 million dollars, you can e-mail him back and ask him to elaborate on why he thinks you should do so, and to explain why other alternatives are wrong .

I might take you up on the idea. Replying to a Nigerian price might be as productive as asking a wtp'er or LOL'er to elaborate. He could have elaborated if he wanted to, but he didn't. What part of "wtp" or "LOL" do you not understand ?

[1eyedjack]

"LOL" is just a rude way of saying "wtp".
"wtp" without expressing a preference for the right action is otiose.
"wtp + preferred action" is a valuable response, because it expresses an opinion on how clearcut v marginal the decision is.
"wtp + preferred action + reasoning" is a more valuable response (unless it repeats reasoning already stated).
"I agree" is a subtly different kettle of fish. It is shorthand for saying "I self-rate my opinion as being so valuable that my mere agreement adds weight to that with which I am agreeing". As Walddk says, it is an arrogant post. Its value, however, is variable, and depends on the opinion of the reader of the post as to whether he agrees with the self-rating of the poster. Every so often the "I agree" comment comes from someone whose opinion I value as much as does the poster. More often, (but not exclusively) those whose opinions really carry that weight also tend to have sufficient consideration for the reader to clarify their reasons.

Not sure why this thread is in the water cooler. Definitely bridge-related, of some interest judging by the number of posts, and no offensive material.