Welcome to Laser Pointer Forums - discuss green laser pointers, blue laser pointers, and all types of lasers

Buy Site Supporter Role (remove some ads) | LPF Donations

Links below open in new window

One post rule (w/ exceptions)

Should the one post rule be changed or done away with

  • Yes ...allow any number of posts in a row

    Votes: 3 16.7%

  • NO leave it alone

    Votes: 11 61.1%

  • Change to no more than a double, but no triple posts

    Votes: 4 22.2%
  • Total voters
    18
hakzaw1

hakzaw1

0
Joined
Apr 2, 2009
Messages
10,661
Points
113
I have tried being nice and using PM instead of making a posts about this.
many have told me that our rules suck-- I try to explain (long before I joined) that there needed to be a rule on double or more postings.. and the 'line' was drawn at ONE. IMHO it is no more work to use 'edit' than post again.

And we are fully aware that *some* new members are chomping at bit to increase their post count. but I will not paint all with the same brush.


how do you see this?

I am going w/#2 leave as-is
 
Last edited:





Hakzaw1 - I'm with you 100% - But, I can't say I've never done it, because I have.

For example, I've started a thread and kept a space at #2 for later, just in case.

Sometime a person will have an item for sale, with no comments and no bids. I get it when they bump it to the top of the list. That is not a problem for me.

I hate when people artificially post just to bump their posting numbers, I refuse to do that and I think those that do should not be on the site!

Took me FOREVER to reach 1000 posts - MANY MANY YEARS. - So, I think the rule of minimum 1 year for Veteran status, that was posted a while ago, was a great idea and helped a lot, but sometimes double posts are still a problem. IMHO.
 
could not agree with you more 'Ice'
& saving spot #2 for any good reason should stay on the 'exceptions' list.

AFAIK you can bump your F.$ale thread as often as your heart desires.
IF you have new and somewhat important to add AND want the thread subscribers know you MUST make a double. (or even a triple)

and if a post is deleted making yours a 'double' you do not need to combine them.

anyone want to add to this??
seems like I have missed one..(or moar)

next 'hak' poll-- the NO NECRO rule...& its exceptions
these are all from new members not liking hak's suggestions (no matter how sweet I make the request..) some def need thicker skin...
 
I believe the double post rule should apply but with exceptions and the use of etiquette. I myself have felt the need to double post, but I do at least acknowledge when I have. Members are not alerted when a post has been edited so it is easy for new content to be missed. If it’s your own thread, then the rule should be dismissed imo. Replying to multiple members however is not an example where double posting should be acceptable.

As for necroposting, if it is someone bringing an old thread alive with nonsense then they shouldn’t imo. If however a member adds something of worth to an old thread or they are the thread owner, then it is an example of positive necroposting. This saves multiple threads being created for the same topic.
 
I'm also with Curtis on this one. I also point out that it's a double post.
If the edit would be alerted then it wouldn't be such an issue I guess. I don't mind necro posts as its fun at times to read things when I wasn't a member or even if I was, re reading something isn't that bad and many times iv'e learned something new or re freshed my self on a subject.
Of course there are some ridicules ones where someone asks a 10 year old thread if the item is still for sale etc.:rolleyes:

Unless it was always like that but I like that with this new format you can edit a PM within 5 minutes. Many times iv'e sent PM's which I had more to add and didn't wan't to annoy the member with another PM. I haven't gotten a alert for an edited PM sent to me yet but i'm guessing the receiver gets an alert?

As far as voting maby 2 double post's and then the editing.
 
CurtisOliver said:
I believe the double post rule should apply but with exceptions and the use of etiquette. I myself have felt the need to double post, but I do at least acknowledge when I have. Members are not alerted when a post has been edited so it is easy for new content to be missed. If it’s your own thread, then the rule should be dismissed imo. Replying to multiple members however is not an example where double posting should be acceptable.

As for necroposting, if it is someone bringing an old thread alive with nonsense then they shouldn’t imo. If however a member adds something of worth to an old thread or they are the thread owner, then it is an example of positive necroposting. This saves multiple threads being created for the same topic.
Click to expand...


I agree with you and Len, editing is as easy as adding another post; a new member may not be familiar with the rules, or the edit ability, but an explanation ought to do it.
I'm no stickler for this and usually don't mention it, but when you you see some repeatedly triple and quadruple posting, it can be very obnoxious.

As for necroposting, I think the general consensus has always been that if you are posting additional, worthwhile material, it's ok to add to an old post.
 
I am a fairly new member and really enjoy this forum. I have heard people complain about double posting from time to time. Here's the thing: I am not 100% sure what that means. I have tried reading and searching for rules. A clear and simple explanation that is readily accessable would be helpful. I don't think the majority of offenders are deliberately breaking rules. Right here is an example. I am not sure whether to click the reply button from this previous message, reply to original message, or click "post reply".
 
It's not like members can't find the [Edit] button.
What is so hard about editing a Post you just made???
It is common Forum Ettiquete... Not Rocket Science.. IMO

Jerry
 
Anthony P said:
I am a fairly new member and really enjoy this forum. I have heard people complain about double posting from time to time. Here's the thing: I am not 100% sure what that means. I have tried reading and searching for rules. A clear and simple explanation that is readily accessable would be helpful. I don't think the majority of offenders are deliberately breaking rules. Right here is an example. I am not sure whether to click the reply button from this previous message, reply to original message, or click "post reply".
Click to expand...
Double posting IMO is a bit self-explanatory. It is when you post more than once in a row.

Reply on the others members posts, quotes that post in your reply. If you want to quote multiple posts, click reply on all the messages you want to quote. Post reply is how you post a reply. ;)
 
diachi said:
The etiquette has remained unchained for the last 10 years, not sure why we need to have a poll about it.
Click to expand...

Agree - no need to question what has been working very well for last 10+ years--the rules and practices are long established.

Unlimited posts in a row would ruin what is left of what was good/enjoyable about the LPF.
 
Last edited:
I used to mention double, triple and quadruple posting much more often than since the new format came. I often don't complain about it, like I used to, but it is still annoying. As far as necro-posting goes, it depends on the poster whether they think their post adds anything to the old thread. This is far more annoying to me that multiple postings are. It makes me waste time looking through an old thread looking for that tiny new bit of information that is rarely there at all. That can be 5 to 10 minutes I will never get back.
 
I've always considered 24 hours to be the standard before it is considered a double post. There have been many sales threads that the OP will bump to push it back up where people will see it again. If it has been 24 hours, I never thought of that as being a double post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top