Remove EvidenceVsFaith

[Tiberius]

You yet again miss the point.

Someone who has 10 million posts and has 1000 'fluff posts' and someone else like "Wow....1000 'fluff posts' - what a spammer!" - but relatively speaking - that's nothing!!

But what we're saying is that relatively, you have a lot of fluff posts. As for the ratio averaging out, it really shouldn't if you actually post decent stuff.

If you post more decent posts than fluff posts, you will have a better ratio.

Anyway, I would categorize what you said above as a fluff post. You repeated your arguments again and again. Here are a few examples:

But my point was that it is of course relative

My point is that it is indeed relative.

So the fact I have absolutely more 'fluff posts' (simply because I have so many posts) doesn't mean I have relatively a lot - it may just look like I have 'a lot' (relatively) because I have so many posts.

So the fact I have many 'fluff posts' does not imply that I do it a lot if it's actually relatively a small(/er) amount, it's simply still absolutely a lot because I have 3000 posts

No my point is that the fact I have absolutely a lot of fluffs doesn't mean I have a high fluff ratio

Just try and write in a manner which is easy to understand and not repetitive. Read over your posts before you submit them (read them out loud) and see if they read well. If they don't, then take out the bits that cause the problem.

Oh, and when I said this: "EvF is quite possibly the only person who could win an argument just by typing so much the other person loses interest in the entire topic", I didn't mean it as a compliment. You shouldn't be proud of the fact that you can win arguments by simple writing pages of random thoughts that cause people to lose all interest in the debate.

[leo-rcc]

Bef is a good friend of mine, and the only reason I told him to post his complaint on the forum was because it was useless him complaining to me. This isn't a dictatorship, I'm not going to remove EvF solely on the basis that one friend doesn't like the way he posts.

So why didn't you tell your friend to PM EvF about it instead of making his very first message here one that I would never write as a first post on any forum no matter who the owner is?

I guess the reason why I was concerned is that a prospective member came here and didn't like how a member of staff was presenting himself,

And the report button is not a valid way of addressing that any more?

especially considering this forum is meant to be about serious discussion (unlike say, AtheistForums.com presents itself).

Let's not complain on the state of another ones garden when we have weeds to kill in our own shall we?

The last thing I want is people not joining this forum because a staff member and the person with the largest number of posts (over 1000 more than the next highest poster...me) is posting in a way in which people disagree. I hadn't heard of the term before now, but apparently it is "fluffing".

For the record, I can understand that, but the way you and bef went about it was 100% wrong IMO.

@Eilonnwy: For now I do not see the need for more mods, I think the mods/user ratio is fine the way it is. If EvF's writing annoys people so much call him upon it in either pm or a direct response.

[Demonaura]

I still disagree with the basic premise of the argument.

How exactly, do short posts, in the worst case the post simply being 'lol' reflect negatively? The person still expresses an opinion or an emotion. This isn't like the days where web space was hard to come by and we had to conserve.


I must admit as well, one person comes in and posts a bunch of slander and now everyones getting pissed at each other? Pathetic. If anyone here actually cared that much about a post EvF made it shouldn't have taken some friend of the admin to come in, hiding behind the admin the whole way, posting smack about members of the forum for them to act.

If nothing else though I think Eilon is about the only person I've seen offer a possible solution to this perceived problem (with Adrian in more mods/mod training). The rest of us (1)either see no problem in the first place, (2)apparently didn't respect EvF enough to talk to him normally, or (3)do have a problem with EvFs posting but, think Bef is a prick and see that as a bigger issue.


What I do take issue with is, and I take far more issue with this than short posts, is some guy regesters and starts stirring up crap, setting everyone against people and trying to start a damned witch hunt on a forum he does not personally contribute too or is even a member of. I don't care how much you lurk or if your the admins best friend, arguably the only reason anyone cares. Reguardless of valid points it's bloody rude and for me at least, definately not appreciated.

I listen to Adrian because he has shown to be worthy of respect in many reguards, coming into the community like this looks bad on everyone and lacks common decency. In addition to that it places Adrian in the position of between a RL friend and the community he built, forcing him into a moderator seat between us at best and changing the relationship between him and members (or his RL friend) negatively at the worst.

[Kyuuketsuki]

Bef is a good friend of mine, and the only reason I told him to post his complaint on the forum was because it was useless him complaining to me. This isn't a dictatorship, I'm not going to remove EvF solely on the basis that one friend doesn't like the way he posts.

So why didn't you tell your friend to PM EvF about it instead of making his very first message here one that I would never write as a first post on any forum no matter who the owner is?

For the record, I can understand that, but the way you and bef went about it was 100% wrong IMO.

For now I do not see the need for more mods, I think the mods/user ratio is fine the way it is. If EvF's writing annoys people so much call him upon it in either pm or a direct response.

I have to agree with Leo here ... I'm sure there are lessons we can learn form this, changes in the way we do things but regardless of whether he was correct or not your friend came in like a troll with the apparent intent to cause a flame war (and judging by the way this seems to be splitting us apart, it rather seems he succeeded).

Kyu

[Eilonnwy]

1) There is no such thing as "constructive fluff" posting. If a topic is ready to die, let it die.

2) I said from the beginning that this issue was handled entirely wrong and should have been handled privately. Nice that nobody noticed.

3) I never said we needed more mods, I said the current mods need to do more SINCE we've increased the number of mods.

4) Thank you Demonaura. I try. -_^

[Demonaura]

I do have some responces to that eilon,

1. I'm not under the impressions is about threadnomancy (thread necromany) but, people taking issue with short posts with little message in them.

2. Here I agree with you and have stated in my own posts, totally with ya here.

3. Sorta combined what you said with others I think, I do think some sort of mod training could be beneficial reguardless (if nothing else they will know all the functions, and their expected roles clearly)

4. Your welcome. I think people seem to have gotten past the 'oh look another troll' feeling we all got when Bef first showed up and are starting to act more reasonably. Including Leo's post that I totally missed which was a good show.

[Edwardo Piet]

But what we're saying is that relatively, you have a lot of fluff posts. As for the ratio averaging out, it really shouldn't if you actually post decent stuff.

If you post more decent posts than fluff posts, you will have a better ratio.

Well if you define 'fluff posts' as spamming posts such as 'lol' posts, I have to disagree. An awful of my posts are arguments, posts like this one.

I don't think I exactly have that much of a 'fluff ratio' if you define 'fluff posting' like that.


On the other hand:

Anyway, I would categorize what you said above as a fluff post. You repeated your arguments again and again. Here are a few examples:

But my point was that it is of course relative

My point is that it is indeed relative.

So the fact I have absolutely more 'fluff posts' (simply because I have so many posts) doesn't mean I have relatively a lot - it may just look like I have 'a lot' (relatively) because I have so many posts.

So the fact I have many 'fluff posts' does not imply that I do it a lot if it's actually relatively a small(/er) amount, it's simply still absolutely a lot because I have 3000 posts

No my point is that the fact I have absolutely a lot of fluffs doesn't mean I have a high fluff ratio

Just try and write in a manner which is easy to understand and not repetitive. Read over your posts before you submit them (read them out loud) and see if they read well. If they don't, then take out the bits that cause the problem.

On the hand, if you indeed define 'fluff posting' like that then you would in other words be objecting to my whole writing style. Because pretty much everything I write is indeed 'fluff posting' if you define it as the both.

So all I wonder is: Why has it taken 9 months and almost 3000 of my posts to inform me of this 'issue' if it really is such an issue? (And 'such as an issue' as Bef makes it out to be). I just wonder...? Why wasn't I 'informed' of this before? If it's really such a 'issue'?

I try my best to consolidate my posts and as I have said before - I can't always get rid of the repetitions because it often ends up destroying my argument and I end up writing nothing (I believe I've told you this on MSN too), I get mental blocks, writers block - because I'm not sure which repetition to delete. So to make sure I'm understood I leave them in....if I ever catch any unnecessary repetitions (that are also obvious to me I mean) then I try to delete them.

And, importantly: I would have to change the entire way I write since when I was 13 and first used the net - I've never managed to do it another way, I always get mental blocks, writers block - and I can't think of anything remotely interesting, useful or helpful if I don't do it this way (the way I always have). I've tried it before on several occasions - I have no idea how I'd be able to do it another way (without simply clogging up entirely because of mental blocks; because of writers block). That being said - I'm trying my best to slowly improve.

Oh, and when I said this: "EvF is quite possibly the only person who could win an argument just by typing so much the other person loses interest in the entire topic", I didn't mean it as a compliment. You shouldn't be proud of the fact that you can win arguments by simple writing pages of random thoughts that cause people to lose all interest in the debate.

I didn't take it as an insult either though. I believe my arguments were strong, and whether you lost interest or not - I am yet to hear you refute them. I do my best with my writing skills, I try to simplify and shorten what I do - but I get writers block, mental blocks and end up deleting the good stuff too.

Yes I've repeated myself here too (on about the mental blocks and writers block more than once) but that's because it's relevant to this quote too. I'm not going to be 'original' when it isn't any more effective - In other words I'm not going to be 'original' just for the sake of it.

It's like when creationists that ask the same questions - I give the same answers. What's wrong with repetition if it's still valid and relevant and gets the point across? I think it's better than being original if it's merely for the sake of being original.

Sometimes I reply to 1 quote and in the next quote (or more) the same response is pretty much relevant, yet still slightly different simply because the quote was different.

EvF

[Eilonnwy]

So what is a fluff post?

A fluff post is a post that doesn’t add any value to the thread. Stuff like ‘nice post’, ‘that’s cool’, ‘that’s helpful’,'thanks for sharing'. Now I’m sure we’ve all made our fair share of fluff posts (myself included) and that’s okay. A fluff post here and there is not a problem, but if the majority of your posts are fluff, you’ll certainly catch our attention. You’ll be warned first, then receive an infraction, then banned if the behavior continues...

http://www.sitepoint.com/forums/showthread.php?t=583351

Bad arguments are not fluff posts. There are two separate issues, the fluffs and the really badly formulated arguments.

Just because these issues are being brought to you now after 9 months of being on a forum doesn't make the criticisms invalid. They are being brought to you now, so you should listen. I get this feeling that you read what's being said and get immediately defensive. You don't seem to register what's being said and fling up barriers to try to invalidate them. I also think there is a lack of comprehension here, it just reminds me of when you didn't understand how someone could lose an argument even if the evidence is on your side. It took many posts before you finally "got it".

You still haven't learned the art of arguing, you just kind of throw up a lot of stuff and see what sticks. And then in replies, you give the impression that you haven't really digested and understood what's being said and then continue to fling the same arguments.

Adrian and I aren't trying to ridicule you or say you a horrible person, because you're not. The issue was brought up and we are responding. So it might serve you to stop trying to hide behind the weak defenses that "everyone fluff posts, I don't have a high ratio, I'm only being told now 9 months later" and actually take the constructive criticism and do what you can to improve yourself. We only want to see you become a better contributor and you have to understand that you are held up to a higher standard when you are a moderator.

[Edwardo Piet]

Ok three things:
1. I know that the criticisms can of course still be valid after 9 months without them - I didn't say that.

I am just seriously asking, wondering: If this is really such an issue, why has it taken 9 months and nearly 3000 months to be told? I'm not saying they're invalid...I'm just wondering....how can people be oblivious for that long and for that many posts? I'm just wondering...

2. I'm not being defensive in the sense I'm not remotely annoyed or pissed off. If by defensive you mean that I simply disagree with what some has been said (or I at least have questions and a separate opinion' then by that definition I guess I'm 'defensive'.

3. Finally and most importantly: The constructive criticism I've been given and that's fine. And you can, of course, keep at it too. I do try my absolute best to improve myself. I've just got so much going on in my head at once, when trying to improve one area I forget the next (and my 4 second memory is really bad, so that doesn't exactly help) - so if you're suggesting I'm not making an effort then you couldn't be more wrong.

And any effort I don't make....I try to. I do my best. I've got a lot going on in my head.

But anyway additional advice is fine. Whether I'll agree or not is a different matter.

P.S: If I don't agree with a comment it doesn't mean I'm not listening. And if I misunderstand something it's not intentionally.

P.P.S: I don't see what's weak by pointing out that I don't believe I have a high fluff ratio if that's one of the issues. And as I said - I still just wonder why it has taken 9 months of me being here and nearly 3k posts to be informed of this issue if it's really such an issue? I'm just wondering: How could it not be noticed?? I've been like this the whole time for the whole 9 months. I'm just wondering: What's suddenly changed, or how was everyone so 'unaware' this whole time or...if they were aware - why wasn't this brought up as an issue, earlier?

EvF

[LukeMC]

I am just seriously asking, wondering:

...I'm just wondering....

I'm just wondering...

And as I said - I still just wonder why it has taken 9 months

I'm just wondering: How could it not be noticed?? I've been like this the whole time for the whole 9 months.

I'm just wondering: What's suddenly changed, or how was everyone so 'unaware' this whole time or.

That made me lol But I have no point to make.
[/LukeMC's fluff]