The Fountainhead of Youth:


Recommended Posts

I agree with Michael. The signal to noise ratio on OL is getting too low, it's the tragedy of the commons all over again.

I completely agree...and also agree that voluntarily utilizing the blog features on this forum more often is the perfect solution. Power-plays rarely end well...(trust me, I know).

RCR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 100
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Regulating “balance” sounds about as effective as a governmental directive in Atlas Shrugged. “Okay, you more brainy types, why aren’t you posing more serious philosophical topics?” And/or: “Okay, you more brainy types, why aren’t you making more use of the Living Room, the Romance, the Creative writing OL categories?

Who decides and regulates this? We, the voluntary participants of OL? Maybe we need Christian on the directive. :turned: Suggestion: write an article or start a topic that has intellectual content or intent. I have done my share. Have you? Another suggestion: Don't visit this thread or others like it. Or does that make too much sense? :turned:

Edited by Victor Pross
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Judith,

My problem is with volume, not so much content.

There are tools for people to look and see how many posts they make in a day. When a person make 20-25 posts in one day and most all of them contain a serious discussion of ideas or present articles or things like that, this is not balanced, I admit, but it is good, since real content is present. (This would be a problem if the content was promoting Scientology or something like that, though. This is an Objectivist forum.) Some people have done this from time to time, but they never keep it up so this side has never been much of an issue.

When a person make about 25 posts in one day and most all of them are nothing but banter or personal opinions (like, "I agree," and nothing more, for instance) this person's posts appear on tools that other members use to see what the recent discussions are. The banter simply crowds out the more serious posts and completely invalidates the tools. When this becomes a steady habit, some posters (whom I value) give up and simply stop.

For the record, I have nothing at all against banter or personal opinions.

I suggest the following. At the bottom of the page, there is a feature called "Today's Top 10 Posters." All a person has to do is consult that to see if he is going overboard with number of posts in relation to others. As an example, if he is making about 25 posts a day and most of the other 9 posters are making 4 or 5 (while a couple are making about 10), this is an indication that there might be a balance problem.

Then a poster can look at his own profile by clicking on his name and going to his profile page. On the right top, there is a drop-down menu called "Profile Options." One of the options is "Find member's posts." When a person clicks on that, his posts appear in chronological order from the latest to the earliest in a manner that is really easy to consult. All are date and time stamped. Then all he has to do is examine them for content. If he sees that he is hogging the board with nothing but banter and trivia, he can correct himself. This is a really good way for him to measure his participation, both quality-wise and quantity-wise. (This feature can be used with posts of others, too.)

I don't want to make hard and fast rules about this and, like I said, I HATE the role of traffic cop. I myself like to banter. Some posters only make a few posts in a day and their participation is nothing but banter. I don't mind that at all since they do not flood the board.

I do mind a high volume of posts without content. This is an ordinal measurement, so it is in relation to the general traffic, not any specific number of posts. If there were several high volume posters going off in different directions (some light and some heavy), this problem would not be much of a problem.

My own posts tend to be about 2/3 serious and 1/3 banter, but this varies depending on the day. I find this to be a pretty good general balance.

I don't want to be a buzzkill, but I don't want anyone else to be a buzzkill either. When there is a space used by many people like a discussion forum, the key word is, once again, balance.

Also, I see that most people don't really understand the blog feature on OL. It's a good tool for sharing personal day-to-day stuff with a small group of friends. As I understand it, the OL blogs are not completely cut off from the discussion board, either. There are several features interconnecting them.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have done my share. Have you?

I think I've done more than my share of serious posts in the sections metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, aesthetics, the library, music, science & mathematics and chewing on ideas, and my signal to noise ratio is significantly higher than yours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have done my share. Have you?

I think I've done more than my share of serious posts in the sections metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, aesthetics, the library, music, science & mathematics and chewing on ideas, and my signal to noise ratio is significantly higher than yours.

Oh god, that's funny.

RCR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Power-plays rarely end well...(trust me, I know).

No, I don't trust you... See for example The rational discussion of art, that was definitely an improvement over its predecessor. And for years I've been member of a discussion forum with moderation in the form of one or two warnings and no participation for a week if you still persisted in your misdemeanor after the warnings. It worked like a charm. But when the list got a different owner which was much more permissive, it went to the dogs, and finally I quit the list, as it had become a chaos; the nice and interesting people all had left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kori,

LOL...

Don't go there. You know you are special.

About the blog thing, I think I might open my own blog to archive my more important posts. It looks like a great reference tool in addition to other possibilities.

Michael

Special? HEY! Everyone else around here/at school calls me that too...and they make me wear a helmet! *pouts* Special K...that's what they call me...humph!

Anyway, back to this topic. I may pull up some old pictures of me when I was a youngin (do you have to be over 20 to post in here? lol). I look pretty much the same now though.

(You didn't think I was really gonna stop posting, didja? BWAHAHAHA!)

Edited by Kori
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have done my share. Have you?

I think I've done more than my share of serious posts in the sections metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, aesthetics, the library, music, science & mathematics and chewing on ideas, and my signal to noise ratio is significantly higher than yours.

Dragonfly,

I didn't mean you. I know you have. Of course, we don't always agree, but you are one smart guy and it shows. I'll always give that to you. But I have never told anyone "Fuck off, asshole." So that's a plus for me. :turned:

Edited by Michael Stuart Kelly
Link to comment
Share on other sites

“When people look at their childhood or youth, their wistfulness comes not from the memory, not of what their lives had been in those years, but of what life had then promised to be. The expectation of some indefinable splendor, of the unusual, the exciting, the great, is an attribute of youth—and the process of aging is the process of that expectation’s gradual extinction. One does not have to let it happen."

AYN RAND.

Amen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Angie & Victor; Angie your picture is gorges. Michael; If all the pictures are as great as Angie I don't mind there being on the regular site.

That's very sweet of you, Chris. Thank you. Do you have any pix of you as a teenager or as a child? :)

I'm gonna have to side with Angie on this. There are tons of categories on here that have nothing to do with Objectivism: Sports, Music, etc. *shrugs* And I agree that probably nobody will look at it or respond if it's in a blog. :blink:

P.S. Ange, is that supposed to be your 80s hair? I thought it would be crazy but it doesn't look like that at all!

No, Girlie Girl, that is not my 80s hair. I was somewhat "civilized" there. LOL But I do have a few shots of some pretty scary stuff. Believe it or not, I have a picture of me when I went through my "goth" stage. I was very very young and looking for an identity, an identity in others; that is, until I discovered and found my identity at the age of 16. :) The pix that Victor put up I was 15, almost turning 16, first semester of my 10th grade year. The next semester 10th grade year pix shows how much I changed. I realized I had to stay true to myself. I had found myself and my identity and who I was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope more people post their cute photos of when they were youngsters. I guess the "teenager" photos and 20 and under rule no longer applies. hehehehe I also pulled up some photos of when I was very young. This is me at 6 and 8 I think.

2nd.jpg

3rd.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm gonna have to side with Angie on this. There are tons of categories on here that have nothing to do with Objectivism: Sports, Music, etc. *shrugs* And I agree that probably nobody will look at it or respond if it's in a blog. :blink:

P.S. Ange, is that supposed to be your 80s hair? I thought it would be crazy but it doesn't look like that at all!

No, Girlie Girl, that is not my 80s hair. I was somewhat "civilized" there. LOL But I do have a few shots of some pretty scary stuff. Believe it or not, I have a picture of me when I went through my "goth" stage. I was very very young and looking for an identity, an identity in others; that is, until I discovered and found my identity at the age of 16. :) The pix that Victor put up I was 15, almost turning 16, first semester of my 10th grade year. The next semester 10th grade year pix shows how much I changed. I realized I had to stay true to myself. I had found myself and my identity and who I was.

Ah, I see. I was gonna say, "Damn, you call that 80s hair?!" :lol: My two oldest sisters had these crazy bangs all through the 80s...so odd. I had them too, but not the crazy curled ones. Damn...the 80s just rub me the wrong way, I think I need to file a police report.

My goodness, a goth stage? I must see it! Did you by any chance look similar to this heah dude?

154742311_9a94ca03b9_m.jpg

:unsure: :devil: :lol:

I am going to try to find a pic of me at age 4 blowing out the candles on my Barney cake. Barney was the total shiznit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My problem is with volume, not so much content.

. . .

When a person make about 25 posts in one day and most all of them are nothing but banter or personal opinions (like, "I agree," and nothing more, for instance) this person's posts appear on tools that other members use to see what the recent discussions are. The banter simply crowds out the more serious posts and completely invalidates the tools. When this becomes a steady habit, some posters (whom I value) give up and simply stop.

I suppose it's all in how one reads the board. I always browse through the various headings and see which ones of interest have changed since I last read the board. Some I never read at all, so no matter how recently they've changed, I don't bother to go there. If others have a new date, I'll open it up and see what the thread is. If it interests me, I'll open it; if not, I don't. It's very simple and it takes no real time at all to weed out what's of interest and what is not. Provided the topic starter assigns a reasonably descriptive title, we can all weed out what we don't want to read. Sometimes I've been away for weeks at a time; it's still no problem to weed it out.

Judith

edit: I feel like I'm highjacking this thread. I've got tons of photos I could post, but that would require (1) scanning them to digital, and (2) finding somewhere to file them on-line so that I could post them. Lots and lots of effort!

Edited by Judith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Judith, you took the time to post in the Wal-Mart thread, so you damn well better post those pics! :lol: Go to photobucket to store them.

(P.S. I agree that the topics are easy to weed out, but I can see where Mike is coming from with regard to hi-jacking. I do it all the time and I'm sure it can get distracting to some peeps.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeff; You and your sister are very attractive people. I think saying anything more would get me in trouble with you and the authorities. Are you able to focus with the three eyes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeff, you should post your, "Game face, bitch" picture. I get a kick out of it. :lol:

Edit: Damn, these are all kind of shitty quality. Oh, well.

Me on the left, giving my sis a look like she's a nutjob.

ko001jo1.jpg

Me as a bumblebee.

ko002ay8.jpg

Me blowing out the candles on a clown cake. To my dismay, I couldn't find the Barney cake picture. :cry: :lol:

ko004kx3.jpg

Yeah, I had stringy bangs. What?!

Edited by Kori
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now