BTW, thank you for the proper spelling of “hypocracy”. I don’t know why so many people get that wrong, especially here in the Pit, where accusations of said word are so common. Just don’t call me a hippocrit.
There’s also a nice cover version by the Butthole Surfers.
Thank you… I guess. This has been bothering me too. I have been dropping by to make fun of some RO threads because they’re shit but the humor is entertaining and I agree with Giraffe’s attitude as a poster (to wit, mock not ban). But I don’t want to be lumped with all these douche bags crying “I’m doing it because the mod said so here!”
Good fucking riddance, crybaby. I was getting pretty sick of the “obligatory fuckwit” shit. It’s only “obligatory” if you’re a retard.
And take “Karana” with you, too.
Dear Lord, I am corrupted by teh internets. I read the word as “blow - seh” and was wondering what type of websites would cater to it. It wasn’t until I saw floral prints that I realized the mistake (after thinking of some very wrong imagery.)
1.2
out of a possible 10,000.
I think that he’ll be back. In fact, I am almost positive. Pretty much every time someone leaves like that, they’re back posting again soon enough.
Hopefully he’ll stop with the lame post rating thing. It was no more than a desperate attempt to have a catch phrase of his own. As bad as that stuff was, his contributions elsewhere were way better than average. We all have our flaws.
I would like to point out that I did not intend this to be a pitting of any one poster in particular. I hadn’t actually noticed who does that rating thing most often, just that it was part of a bothersome trend I DID notice.
[South Park] You killed Oakie, You Bastards! [/SP]
If you jump a thread just to make fun of the RO, how are you different? To me, that’s more annoying than the ratings.
Then allow me to solve this horrible problem for you. So long, and thanks for all the mayonnaise!
OK I’m back just because so many people emailed asking me to stay. How am I different than what? Oakie? Well, I have a different username, I’m still here and I have never rated a pit post. When I can think of more ways we’re different I’ll let you know!
I bet you did a “Hi Opal” once or twice though. Maybe even a 1960 twenty minute thing.
You’re not getting off that easy MAYOnnaise!
Hey, now that’s below the belt!
C’mon, now, we’ve ALL done a “Hi Opal” or two. I was in college, myself, in my experimental stage…
Now that it’s been a while since April Fool’s Day, I’m going to try this again.
OK, so first and maybe most importantly, you haven’t defined contentless posts. Please do so. It’s a vague and ambiguous term you’ve used and I’ve been pretty defensive thinking that I’m engaging in it, but since I don’t even know what they are, how would I know? How would anyone? Those people who are less introspective probably just said that this doesn’t apply to them, but somehow I’m thinking it might apply to me. But since you haven’t defined it, maybe it doesn’t apply to me or anyone.
The only clue I have is the example of the cell phone thread. And that’s just about people criticizing the form of the OP (in that case, too long) instead of the content. So is that really your use of contentless? Anyone who comments on the form of the OP instead of the content is off base? Does that include style, tone, rationale, reasoning for creating it, irrationality of the premise, context and a whole host of other things that are relevant in reading and understanding an OP? If someone creates a post pitting someone and they’re just doing it for vengeance for someone showing another they were wrong in another thread, does the first person pointing that out have a contentless post?
If that’s true, are you then saying that all contentless posts are immature (your OP described them as 4 year old behavior) and done away with? That sure would do away with a lot of content here. But it would also do away with anything not literal to the OP, making this place pretty boring. It would only consist of yes, I agree or no, I don’t and why at the most. And that surely hasn’t been my experience of the Pit. That sounds more like how the rest of the message board runs, but even that has more flexibility. One of the great things about the Pit is that it’s filled with things that are said as well as not said. There are inside jokes. There are histories. There are meta messages. Are those contentless also?
What’s the difference between an actual ad hominem attack and not an actual one? As far as I know, an ad hominem attack is an attack on the person to make an argument. Since insults to people and ad hominem attacks are allowed in the Pit, one of the reasons I said that your post was off the rails was because a moderator wouldn’t stop an ad hom. attack in the Pit as that’s the reason for its existence. . . to Pit other people. Now, ad homs are not allowed in other parts of the message board, but we’re discussing the Pit here.
That’s always an option. But just as you couldn’t just let posts go that bothered you and had to create a thread to Pit them, others like to be able to post their opinion about what they think about certain kinds of posts also. Other people have pointed out the irony of this, so I won’t belabor that here.
Since you started this thread, I’ve found myself second-guessing myself about whether I should post. And I’m kinda tired of it. So unless you can come up with something pretty specific about what it means to be contentless (and I’ll be waiting for that), I’ll just go about posting and you can come and tell me why my posts don’t meet with your standard. And then I’ll argue with you about it right there without having to make blanket generalizations about whether certain posts are contentless and less worthy of posting than others.
I realize that I’m not LifeOnWry, but I did give you one example, at least it is for me. Perhaps you could let me know (or ignore me if you wish) what you thought of that. Thank you.
OK, first - The fact that I have posted a thread to complain about contentless responses isn’t anything even remotely like irony. I HAVE ignored those posts in those threads. I don’t respond to contentless posts. I do come across a lot of them in the course of reading the Pit forum, and they annoy me. I started a Pit thread to comment on the TREND, not the individual posts or posters.
Second, if you’re second-guessing everything you post because you’re concerned that it might be considered contentless, that is exactly what I hoped would happen as a result of this thread. Not singling YOU out personally - unless I have personally engaged with someone, it’s unlikely that I’ll notice the posting habits of any one poster. I’m not the only one who dislikes that type of post, as is obvious from reading this thread. However, if the opinions of others don’t bother you, then don’t worry about it. Post as much contentless crap as you like.
My definition of contentless post: a post that has nothing to do with the subject matter of the OP. I am not talking about the random, natural hijacks that happen in the course of a conversation. I am talking about posts that say, for all intents and purposes, “I have read the above OP and I have nothing to say about it. I just want you to know that.” Or “I give it a 6/10 because this is the Pit and you’re obliged to say use the term fuckwit here and you spell badly.”
I don’t know what it is you don’t get. There’s been nothing vague or obscure in anything I have said here, and everyone else who has commented here seems to understand what I mean (whether they agree with me or not.)
Then you must have missed this in response to your OP:
A trend is made up of individual posts and posters. And you seem unable to even comment on which they are. Oddly, one of the only people that was rating Pit threads in the way you describe was Oakminster and when he announced his departure, you noted that you weren’t singling him out. As far as I know, he was one of the very few if not the only one that was rating Pit threads in that way. So even this trend is very vague if you’re only talking about one person creating a trend.
I’m not second-guessing myself because I know that what I’m posting is wrong. I just don’t know what you and everyone here seems so upset about so I’m trying to figure it out by second-guessing. But since this is so vague, it’s hard to be sure.
Let’s take an example.
The OP author is a guest that posts a contradiction in his OP. The first poster points this out. The OP author changes tone from being the parent to a child going to school within the OP. Is pointing out the contradiction a contentless post? Since the OP was first posted, the author hasn’t shown back up to clarify. Is calling the OP author back to babysit the thread so that the people responding can know who they’re talking to . . . a parent or a child. . . is that a contentless post?
The rest of the people in the thread continue talking about cell phones and schools without regard for who the OP author is or what this really is about. Because now for them, it’s simply about their own experience. At this point, the OP author is forgotten entirely. Bringing that to anyone’s attention. . . is that contentless? What was the content. . . the title? Wasn’t the content what was going on in the OP? Except we don’t know what that is.
And so since I don’t know what you mean by only talking about the subject matter, I have to ask myself these questions. I doubt anyone else is, but since I’m new, I’m trying to figure out what others are saying, and you’re purporting to represent others. Seeing as how vague this OP is, it’s pretty hard to know what you all are saying or if there’s even any consensus within the group you’re purporting to represent.
By your definition, except for the rating part, I haven’t seen anyone do that. So you’re talking about a non-existent group by your definition.
It’s pretty vague and obscure to define a class of post that doesn’t exist (as far as I interpret your definition) and then complain that there are too many of them.
I suspect that the people who have agreed with you are just having ideas in their own head of what you mean. . . that’s the beauty of being vague. . . and just saying that they don’t like that either.
You’ve had at least one other person, WhatExit? in this thread asking for examples about what you mean, for which you provided one. If you can so easily define what you mean by contentless posts, why didn’t you answer my questions in the last post about what they included?. . . the part about tone, style, etc.
I also have to agree with something that featherlou says here:
Your take on it seems to be that you just keep quiet when you don’t like something except when you start a thread like this one talking about trends (that I don’t see). But perhaps it would be more useful if you made your objections to the posts you’re unhappy about or at least collect the links so that when you decide to post about a trend, we could all be a little more sure about what you’re talking about.
One of the things that surprised me about your thread was that I hadn’t seen your username in the Pit since I’ve been here. I went back to search and found that before you started this thread, you’ve been in the Pit in three other threads this past month. I doubt these are the threads that bugged you.
**
faithfool**, I’d prefer to discuss the OP without this particular complication here. If I get a chance, I’ll discuss your post in this thread in the RO thread.