Displaying the Post Counts and Locations of "Guests"

[aldiboronti]

@IvoryTowerDenizen

Help me understand, then. If the information for guests is that easily available, that simple to find, then what is the argument for not showing the info after all?

Ed already made the argument in this post above.

[IvoryTowerDenizen]

@aldiboronti

Ed already made the argument in this post above.

missed that- still seems like the ad/no ad would be a sufficient potential benefit and using titles to distinguish between paying/nonpaying members would be enough to show the different classes of members. One person’s opinion.

[Omniscient]

@Ed_Zotti

With all respect, what are you talking about? You do realize you can get post count and location (if the user has revealed this) by (a) clicking on their user name, (b) mousing over “view public profile,” and (c) clicking on that, right? I timed it just now; this takes literally four seconds.

Three points.

1. I was not aware that location was available from the profile. I almost never look at a persons profile since, frankly, I don’t give a rats ass what their homepage, AIM screen name and interests are and who their friends happen to be. I assume I’m not alone in the fact that I was unaware that location was available there, a point enforced by by a brief skimming of this thread.

2. While it’s not terribly cumbersome to access the public profile, it becomes exceedingly tedious when you have to do it 10, 15, 20 times in the course of reading a 1 page thread. If there’s a thread of marginal import and I’m late getting to it I’m likely to just say screw it and not check over and over and avoid the topic. Something that benefits no one.

3. I’m paying my subscription. I’m the one who wants the feature. I use this board a lot and a minor feature like this impacts me frequently. Guests, by and large, use the MB less often and have less staying power. They are probably much less interested in gaining full context and are much less likely to see benefit of having location visible. More to the point, knowing another person’s location is more important than having people know mine (I’d be considerate enough to make reference to my location when the thread called for it, Guests seem much less likely to do so). It seems very obvious to me that people will pay to get information, not advertise their own information. Now, trivial self-promotion like sharing homepages, social networking sites, signatures, avatars and post count are indulgent details that have little intrinsic value and are the types of bells and whistles that might command a subscription. Not displaying location seems to punish the people paying the freight for no benefit.

[DSYoungEsq]

@Omniscient

Three points.

1. I was not aware that location was available from the profile. I almost never look at a persons profile since, frankly, I don’t give a rats ass what their homepage, AIM screen name and interests are and who their friends happen to be. I assume I’m not alone in the fact that I was unaware that location was available there, a point enforced by by a brief skimming of this thread.

2. While it’s not terribly cumbersome to access the public profile, it becomes exceedingly tedious when you have to do it 10, 15, 20 times in the course of reading a 1 page thread. If there’s a thread of marginal import and I’m late getting to it I’m likely to just say screw it and not check over and over and avoid the topic. Something that benefits no one.

3. I’m paying my subscription. I’m the one who wants the feature. I use this board a lot and a minor feature like this impacts me frequently. Guests, by and large, use the MB less often and have less staying power. They are probably much less interested in gaining full context and are much less likely to see benefit of having location visible. More to the point, knowing another person’s location is more important than having people know mine (I’d be considerate enough to make reference to my location when the thread called for it, Guests seem much less likely to do so). It seems very obvious to me that people will pay to get information, not advertise their own information. Now, trivial self-promotion like sharing homepages, social networking sites, signatures, avatars and post count are indulgent details that have little intrinsic value and are the types of bells and whistles that might command a subscription. Not displaying location seems to punish the people paying the freight for no benefit.

1. You have been a Charter Member since we went to Pay-to-Post.

2. Therefore, you have routinely paid your $7.50 per year (a trivial sum, really) to continue having that designation.

3. At no point during said period have you been able to see the location of Guests.

4. Therefore, you really don’t think it’s that important that they show the location of Guests.

5. Given this is true, why all the whining about the issue? Yes, there are some for whom it would be a nice feature. But management seems to think there are advantages for not having it. The proper answer is, thus, <shrug>.

[Omniscient]

@DSYoungEsq

1. You have been a Charter Member since we went to Pay-to-Post.

2. Therefore, you have routinely paid your $7.50 per year (a trivial sum, really) to continue having that designation.

3. At no point during said period have you been able to see the location of Guests.

4. Therefore, you really don’t think it’s that important that they show the location of Guests.

5. Given this is true, why all the whining about the issue? Yes, there are some for whom it would be a nice feature. But management seems to think there are advantages for not having it. The proper answer is, thus, <shrug>.

:rolleyes:

1. I felt the need to start a thread in ATMB asking for the change, therefore I think it’s important.

Once more for good measure. :rolleyes:

Yes, please continue the snark as opposed to actually making an argument or addressing my actual comments on the issue. Very helpful, as usual.

[RaftPeople]

@DSYoungEsq

The proper answer is, thus, <shrug>.

This is a good example of egocentric thinking, that there can be 1 proper answer. A “proper” answer can only judged to be proper if all parties are considering it within the same context. From the perspective of trying to convince management that the issue is more important than they may currently realize, then the proper answer is not to just shrug it off. There are other perspectives in which your answer would be considered proper.

[DSYoungEsq]

Look, in your case, RaftPeople, complaining has some value; you aren’t a member, and you could arguably assert that, if they did it, you’d be more willing to be a member.

In the case of the person I was addressing, I was pointing out the logical inconsistency of continuing to whine about something that’s not important enough to discontinue membership over. Whole different critter.

[Sapo]

@aldiboronti

Ed already made the argument in this post above.

Yes, and several posts came in response to that making the argument of why his argument was not a valid one. There has been no response to those even though he has been back to the thread.

[Omniscient]

@DSYoungEsq

In the case of the person I was addressing, I was pointing out the logical inconsistency of continuing to whine about something that’s not important enough to discontinue membership over. Whole different critter.

In what way, shape or form was this silly argument made in your comment?

[Oakminster]

@Sapo

Yes, and several posts came in response to that making the argument of why his argument was not a valid one.

We’ve been over this one before. Ed gets eleventy-billion votes on policy matters. Doesn’t matter what anybody else wants, thinks, hopes, or dreams.

[Sapo]

@Oakminster

We’ve been over this one before. Ed gets eleventy-billion votes on policy matters. Doesn’t matter what anybody else wants, thinks, hopes, or dreams.

Yes, of course. Except that this time it is not about convincing him to do what we want but about convincing him to do what he needs. He has a policy that does the exact opposite of what he wants it to do. This is not “I know you like it red but we want it blue”. This is “please don’t shoot your foot”.

[RaftPeople]

@DSYoungEsq

Look, in your case, RaftPeople, complaining has some value; you aren’t a member, and you could arguably assert that, if they did it, you’d be more willing to be a member.

In the case of the person I was addressing, I was pointing out the logical inconsistency of continuing to whine about something that’s not important enough to discontinue membership over. Whole different critter.

1. “important enough” is a subjective evaluation. It’s not possible for you to determine what is “important enough” for a different person. This is that whole “egocentric” thing.

2. Even if Omniscient wasn’t willing to discontinue membership over the issue, continued communication has been shown to be an effective method of causing change, lack of communication rarely results in desired change.

[Oakminster]

@Sapo

Yes, of course. Except that this time it is not about convincing him to do what we want but about convincing him to do what he needs. He has a policy that does the exact opposite of what he wants it to do. This is not “I know you like it red but we want it blue”. This is “please don’t shoot your foot”.

I’m not persuaded there is any pressing need to do this. A very vocal few keep whining about it. Most either don’t care, or at least quit beating the dead horse.

[Omniscient]

@Oakminster

I’m not persuaded there is any pressing need to do this. A very vocal few keep whining about it. Most either don’t care, or at least quit beating the dead horse.

Guess what, not a single person gives a rats ass what you are persuaded of. You take a morbid pleasure in pissing into the wind around here so I’m unclear why you think this is about you.

[Oakminster]

@Omniscient

Guess what, not a single person gives a rats ass what you are persuaded of. You take a morbid pleasure in pissing into the wind around here so I’m unclear why you think this is about you.

I’m really awesome. You should know that by now. But this isn’t about me. It’s about whiners thinking if they bring up the same stupid question for the umpteenth time, they’ll get a different answer. I find it highly amusing.

[Fake_Tales_of_San_Francisco]

I am considering subscribing, since I do like this board and find it very useful. But I find threads like this odd. Being able to display my post count (which would be incredibly small) and showing my location is not and is never going to be on my list of reasons why I would. Post count is irrelevant, but location is information you want to view at a glance when skimming through threads. Makes no sense to me to hide it in the hopes that someone will be daft enough to subscribe because they want people to know how witty they are/where they live.

[Princhester]

@DSYoungEsq

3. At no point during said period have you been able to see the location of Guests.

4. Therefore, you really don’t think it’s that important that they show the location of Guests.

During pay to post there were few guests. Post pay to post, there are a lot of guests. Your argument is broken.

[Sapo]

@Oakminster

I’m not persuaded there is any pressing need to do this. A very vocal few keep whining about it. Most either don’t care, or at least quit beating the dead horse.

A few being vocal about what they care I understand. What I just never got is the few that are vocal about what they don’t care. Why is it so important to some to pip in every time to say “I don’t care”? If you don’t then just don’t.

[Yookeroo]

@DSYoungEsq

But management seems to think there are advantages for not having it.

Management is wrong. Unless there are “advantages” they aren’t sharing with us. The reasoning Zotti has given us is really quite stupid.

@Sapo

Yes, of course. Except that this time it is not about convincing him to do what we want but about convincing him to do what he needs. He has a policy that does the exact opposite of what he wants it to do. This is not “I know you like it red but we want it blue”. This is “please don’t shoot your foot”.

Right. Of course, telling him that hasn’t worked out in the past, so it is probably futile to expect him to change his mind on this issue.

[Sapo]

@Yookeroo

Management is wrong. Unless there are “advantages” they aren’t sharing with us. The reasoning Zotti has given us is really quite stupid.

Right. Of course, telling him that hasn’t worked out in the past, so it is probably futile to expect him to change his mind on this issue.

Hope springs eternal…