[awm]

What do you think about replies (usually to bridge-related threads) that say things like "Agree with Jlall" or "4NT WTP" without giving any further reasoning or explanation?

[Fluffy]

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).

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

Question dependent.

A one lines response is similar to a poll voting, nothing
more nothing less.

So to get a feeling, where the majority stands, this is good,
but those responses are not helpful to understand, why it is
a wtp, under which condition it is a wtp, but in most threads
there are posts, which explain the reasons behind.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[hotShot]

People should start a poll, if they what to see numbers.

If an interesting thread has a new post, it's frustrating to find another "Agree with..." post.

[helene_t]

Agree with Gonzalo

[Aberlour10]

helene_t, on Feb 20 2009, 06:26 AM, said:

Agree with Gonzalo

Agree with your smile

[hrothgar]

awm, on Feb 20 2009, 12:41 PM, said:

What do you think about replies (usually to bridge-related threads) that say things like "Agree with Jlall" or "4NT WTP" without giving any further reasoning or explanation?

WTP?

[Hanoi5]

Everybody should be permitted to answer whatever they want. If you need to know more you can say so in your topic. You can ignore these answers. You can also ask 'care to elaborate?'.

A 'I agree with...' answer is most annoying, especially if ...'s answer was a WTP answer. But again, just ask for more information and you'll probably get it.

[TimG]

One type of question where the "agree with" posts seem appropriate is the "just checking" or "sanity check" posts. If someone posts a questions like "Someone told me X, but I think they're wrong, I've always thought Y" all they are looking for is confirmation of their views and they'd be happy to see a bunch of WTP type posts.

[mtvesuvius]

I don't mind these answers, and I am not insulted if in one of my topics someone gives a wtp answer bacause that means that the correct answer was obvious and that I should just look a little closer to find it. Also, a "wtp" or "agree with..." can be useful (When I say "Agree with..." I usually add another reason or two) because some newer posters are less known and obviously less trusted, so it's reassuring to know that a known expert (Such as jdonn or JLOL or Frances etc...) agrees with the point that the other poster is making. Also it's good to know that if a well known poster agrees with my post then I have the idea correct, and don't need to change my line of thought on this particular type of problem. LOLs can be kinda rude, but unfortunately they are sometimes necessary because there is really no nice way to tell someone that their post it ridiculous or that their logic is seriously flawed, and I don't mind receiving a LOL every once and a while... Someone can even LOL my post in this thread if they want

This post has been edited by mtvesuvius: 2009-February-20, 09:27

[matmat]

no problem yet.

[jdonn]

NP w/ them.

[Codo]

I never use one-liners.

[mycroft]

Who cares?

[pigpenz]

they always seemed to work for Al Roth in Bridge World, but after a while they probably reflected more his arrogance

[TimG]

mtvesuvius, on Feb 20 2009, 10:23 AM, said:

it's reassuring to know that a known expert (Such as jdonn or JLOL or Frances etc...) agrees with the point that the other poster is making. Also it's good to know that if a well known poster agrees with my post then I have the idea correct, and don't need to change my line of thought on this particular type of problem.

I think what people find annoying is when the non-experts chime in with their "I agree" posts AFTER the jdonns and JLOLs of the forum have posted. It might be nice to know that you agree with a well known poster, but you don't need to announce it.

[mycroft]

Seriously, WTP? answers are "that was a dumb question, so dumb I'm not even going to think about why someone would ask it" - which isn't the nicest thing to say to people, *and no help*. In other words, if you're AOLing for emphasis (nothing I can add to what the 5 people above said, just emphasizing that they're right), fine. If all someone gets is "WTP" answers, they're likely to employ the fecal dismissive(*) to the forum, and eventually, the game.

* from Bowser and Blue's famous Canadian Language lesson. Available here (without attribution, which really bothers me, and missing the last two lines). Please note that the language may offend - so much so that the title of said Language Lesson isn't appropriate for this board, even.

[jdonn]

mycroft, on Feb 20 2009, 11:43 AM, said:

Seriously, WTP? answers are "that was a dumb question, so dumb I'm not even going to think about why someone would ask it" - which isn't the nicest thing to say to people, *and no help*. In other words, if you're AOLing for emphasis (nothing I can add to what the 5 people above said, just emphasizing that they're right), fine. If all someone gets is "WTP" answers, they're likely to employ the fecal dismissive(*) to the forum, and eventually, the game.

So you recomend patronizing people who post easy problems by pretending they are very difficult? And you believe people will stop playing bridge when they get wtp answers! At least that's what your last comment looks like to me.

I'm honestly not sure I care very much about such people.

[mikeh]

My view:

If someone has posted an answer that includes the explanation, then I will often say 'I agree with 'x'' or something similar. There are often divergent views, and knowing that some other players take one side or the other may help the OP or any other reader. And if the post with which I agree covered my points, anything I add would be redundant.

I rarely (my memory may be letting me down) post simple 'wtp' comments, at least not early in a thread. I think that this comment, along with LOL, should be reserved for posts clearly in the wrong forum (we've recently experienced that) or for people suspected of trolling. Otherwise, to my mind, the main 'benefit' derived from posting an 'LOL' or a 'wtp' is a feeling of superiority on the part of the poster.

I take almost all posts as legitimate questions. Some will seem to me to be very simple, and I am sure we all experience that to some degree. But the asking of the question tells us that someone else had a problem with the topic.

If someone goes to the trouble of asking a question, why answer it with LOL or wtp? How does that help the OP'er? It doesn't. It can only serve to make that person feel stupid or ill-informed... and may persuade them, as mycroft suggests, to quit posting and maybe quit the game. We'd be left with a small, smug, arrogant set of posters and a small, smug, arrogant set of players. That's why I think josh is wrong to not care about players who aren't as talented, as experienced, or as dedicated to the game as he is.

I have derived a lot of pleasure from the game. So have all of the experts who post here. I see answering questions as giving back... plus, I learn from the posts where others disagree with my ideas. How can I do either by posting 'LOL' or 'wtp'?

[kfay]

Personally I've found the recent surfeit of LOLs to be a little harsh at times. Although I agree with Kaplan that the occasional (semi-frequent?) isn't so bad. I posted a problem a week or two ago that got a lot and at first I was like 'damn, I suck' but then I took a step back and said 'yeah they're totally right I just didn't think about this AT ALL!!' and when you look at it in that context I don't think it's so bad.

But there is a bit of a gang-mentality of LOLs in a few threads that I doubt is pleasant for anyone to read, especially the recipient.

As for the generic one-liner I don't mind them at all. Sometimes it's a bit of a chore to read the novel-like post and when I see a bunch of 'wtp?' generally if you take 2 minutes to think about why there isn't a problem it's totally no big deal. Why should these people have to spoon-feed you an answer? If you really really don't get it, ask, otherwise think about it.

I guess in general I have no problem.

Well I guess I should add that in general I think that the 'LOLs' have nothing really behind them. But when they're genuinely malicious I think they are inappropriate and have no place in these forums. I know I'm guilty of a few myself, but I've always felt badly about them later.