Should number of posts disappear when you have 1000 posts?

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

candletrader

Once you have 1000+ posts, do you think its a good idea to just have "1000+ posts" under your name instead of actual number of posts?

I voted for the 1st option...
 
i don't think counting posts above 1000 does any harm.

it's fun to know who has how many posts.

i highly doubt that anyone posts simply to get his total number of posts up.
 
well this is quite the about face isn't it...

from "no no, we must count EVERYTHING"

to "nah, there's no need to count 'em at all.."


geez.
 
Quote from daniel_m:

well this is quite the about face isn't it...

from "no no, we must count EVERYTHING"

to "nah, there's no need to count 'em at all.."
More...
well, at least you affected change!
 
Quote from daniel_m:

well this is quite the about face isn't it...

from "no no, we must count EVERYTHING"

to "nah, there's no need to count 'em at all.."


geez.
More...

You are talking rubbish...

Either you must regard number of posts as a measure of activity (and therefore count all posts) OR you should simply ignore the posts made after a certain cut-off point....

Your suggestion about blocking out posts made in various sections smells of count-censorship and is just not workable...
 
So far the YES's are winning... I had voted for option 1... I believe that after 1000 posts, we should simply get recognition via "1000+ poster"... but Daniel's asinine suggestion about not counting posts in such and such a forum is rather silly and not very workable either...
 
Quote from candletrader:



Your suggestion about blocking out posts made in various sections smells of count-censorship and is just not workable...
More...

not workable?
as if! it would be a breeze!

(and it seems the majority is agreeing)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top