Close Topic Options

If I would bypass the minimum character limit in an open thread in the recirculation forum, would I get a warning?

The Recirculation Forum is not a "no-rules" zone, so yes, you would get a warning.

Might as well get rid of the minimum character rule at this stage of the game...

Just my two cents.

Nah, I think we need to keep it. We still get the occasional all-emoticon post or "LOL" without anything else of value. I think it helps keep substance to (most) posts.

The character limit prohibited me from simply posting "no".

Haha, now that's funny.

In all seriousness, though, I'd like to see reasons why the limit should be lifted. I could easily remove the limit, but the reason it was implemented in the first place was to curb the possibility of garbage posts. This is a discussion board, not a chat room, dammit!

I take this stuff seriously. If there's a good reason to change things, I will definitely consider it.

Easy.

It is a character limit imposed that in no way affects the quality of the post.

Anyone can make a garbage post a bit longer, go past 10 characters, and be OK.

Single emotie posts are garbage without the limit in place in any case, and so are image posts ( those are for a different discussion anyway ).

"I agree 100%"

Above post is long enough for chara limit.

"ROFLMAO! "

That one is as well.

To set a limit that serves no purpose means it might as well not be there in the first place.

The easiest example I can think of at this point would be setting a minimum speed limit on a freeway to make sure traffic moves along, but having it at 5mph.

But the speed limit on the freeway is designed for people to move along at at least the speed marked. You can be ticketed for obstructing traffic by driving more slowly.

I see no reason to remove the character limit. It prevents knee-jerk drivel. I believe an ignore system on a per-member basis can remove the drivel that gets through that.

Anything that gets through can easily be reported if it's violating a forum guideline. The character limit is not a system designed with the intention of cleaning up everything by itself. Of course there will be exceptions.

Went ahead and split this "character limit" discussion into its own topic.

Hence my point of having a limit in place that serves no purpose. Having a 10 character minimum character limit is as useful in its intended purpose as having a minimum speed limit on a freeway set at 5mph. It does not help the traffic move faster, just the same as having a 10 character limit does not ensure "content" in a post.

Anything that is a coherent sentence will be more than 10 characters. Just like how any car that is left to idle along will move faster than 5mph.

Especially considering the fact that the one below would get through it:

"Um "

I don't really care either way, it does not affect me ( or any poster using coherent sentences ) in any way, shape or form. I just wanted to point out how ridiculously ineffective it really is.

This post has been edited by Möbius on Dec 14 2012, 06:19 PM

I've been thinking about that actually. I wonder how difficult it would be to teach the character limit check to ignore anything that is between two colons with no spaces. That way it would count when I do this: and type something here, but it wouldn't count :asmileygoeshere:.

That would something more worthwhile to implement.

That would get rid of emotie only posts as empty posts.

for this i vote........................................................yes

"For this I vote" alone would have been enough.

So... get rid of it because it's perceived as useless? Do we have examples of it not being effective?

I mean, I know we've all had our moments of playing around with it and demonstrating how painfully easy it is to circumvent the limit, but that doesn't mean that it's ineffective. Getting around a simple code that just counts characters is not hard. I could literally make a post that shows up as nothing via invisible characters, and it would be considered legitimate.

But that's not the point. The vast majority of members have no interest in blatantly circumventing the system and thus the very simple guideline. We trust members to shy away from spamming the forum with useless garbage (short posts for the sake of being short, in this case), and they've been very good about it. I can't remember the last time we had to clean up something like that. Hell, the last viable report to the mod team was quite a long time ago, now that I think about it. Perhaps we're using the limit to curb hypothetical posts that aren't actually being sent, and so I'm defending a theory.

It's not only a perception, it's a fact. When it was up at 20, it was possibly curbing some posts that shouldn't have been there.

At 10 it is useless.

There is no need of an example of it not being effective, just as there is no need to remove it. There aren't any members purely trying to exploit any loopholes in the rules just for the kick of it, as there have been in the past, in any case.

Ok

I've had to deal with at least a couple instances of members circumventing the rule by including "character limit" or some stupid obvious thing in their post to exploit a loophole and get it through. Just for kicks? Probably not, but still just as annoying.

Lulz.

Does this mean that one-smiley posts are allowed now?

Do you see a green mod tag under your name? No? Then don't try it.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Or you could, and see what happens.

The guidelines are your best friend here. The mod team is charged with enforcing them. Read through them and understand what is and is not accepted here on IDW.