Links and quotes in OPs, and shit

[Meister]

Just wanted to get a few voices on our policy of having to have full quotes in OPs, and also elaborate on the reasons for it a little more in-depth than is possible in the actual rules threads. Seems pretty clear it's not exactly a point everyone's in agreement on.

(And incidentally guys, it's not a little frustrating when you're unable to point out really minor things like this one without people being all like "that rule is useless anyway, you know we wouldn't have listened so what's the point" pretty much immediately. Thought we were past that kind of antagonism as a whole. This forum runs incredibly well day to day because everyone gets along, it's gotta be possible for a guy to point out the bits where it doesn't.)

So the policy is pretty much: when you start a thread based on something you found on the net, don't just put a link in a new thread and call it a day. Little more specific and strict in the news forum, but that's the basics. Effects, from where I stand, include:

- it keeps us a forum where people go to share their own thoughts and ideas, and not just stuff they found. Or basically, keeps us from being reddit. We don't need to be reddit 'cause there already is one. Really this is the big one as far as I'm concerned.

- it ensures that when something that's linked goes down, everyone reading the thread can still get the same idea as everyone else what the original topic is.

- keeps people from having to visit sites they don't wanna, or from having to watch a long video just to learn the point of the thread is actually a side remark at 7:10. Slight exaggeration for effect, of course.

- in the case of News, it gives that forum something to set it apart from General. Higher standards, if you will.

- it's just basically polite, when you want to talk to people about something, not to thrust it in their face and go "isn't this the worst thing you've ever seen, I'm so goddamn mad about the part in the middle" before they've had a chance to look at it, but to say "hey, I found this, take a look, what do you think? The part in the middle is pretty terrible, isn't it?"

Buuuut that's my take on the subject of Discussing Things on the Internet. So let's hear yours.

[McTahr]

I think my opinion on this is Non shouldn't have been caustic about it. We are kind of supposed to hopefully maybe be remotely civil at times to each other.

But more to the point: If all we're posting is a link, why aren't they just posting in the interesting internet crap thread and calling it a day? Put your own opinion/take/etc. Don't let the link be the entire basis of discussion.

[Terex4]

I like having entire articles (or at least the key points that the thread was opened to discuss) quoted. Naturally, there are exceptions to every rule like the monster article Non just posted where it would have been ridiculous to double-post in order to get around the character limit.

In cases like that, *link* "Too large to fit in a single post" is sufficient for my tastes.

Originally Posted by Meister

- keeps people from having to visit sites they don't wanna, or from having to watch a long video just to learn the point of the thread is actually a side remark at 7:10. Slight exaggeration for effect, of course.

This is why I'm not opposed to pieces of an article being posted if the point is to discuss that/those particular part(s).

My opinion is that discussing your thoughts more completely in the OP is a more important issue as long as there is at least a link or relevant snippet of article to go with it. A matter of picking battles if you will.

[Kim]

Originally Posted by Meister

- it keeps us a forum where people go to share their own thoughts and ideas, and not just stuff they found. Or basically, keeps us from being reddit. We don't need to be reddit 'cause there already is one. Really this is the big one as far as I'm concerned.

Put simply, maybe I want to discuss something I find on the internet with this forum specifically rather than every douchebag on Reddit. It happens.

- it ensures that when something that's linked goes down, everyone reading the thread can still get the same idea as everyone else what the original topic is.

Not really expecting this article to go down before the thread dies or is locked but hey what do I know.

- keeps people from having to visit sites they don't wanna, or from having to watch a long video just to learn the point of the thread is actually a side remark at 7:10. Slight exaggeration for effect, of course.

Which would be great if I didn't want to discuss the entire article as opposed to one paragraph, because if I wanted to discuss one paragraph I would have quoted that one paragraph.

And hey maybe I want people to support a site that posted a pretty ace article.

- in the case of News, it gives that forum something to set it apart from General. Higher standards, if you will.

Because generally speaking people like having a subforum for all the political discussions because when it leaks out other areas get caustic and people throw fits and talk about how NPF is ruined forever. Slight exaggeration for effect, of course.

- it's just basically polite, when you want to talk to people about something, not to thrust it in their face and go "isn't this the worst thing you've ever seen, I'm so goddamn mad about the part in the middle" before they've had a chance to look at it, but to say "hey, I found this, take a look, what do you think? The part in the middle is pretty terrible, isn't it?"

Totally what I did.

Buuuut that's my take on the subject of Discussing Things on the Internet. So let's hear yours.

My take is that none of these have the slightest bearing one what I posted so I don't even get posting this in response to what happened. And it's all well and nice to have rules but it's also nice to be able to use your judgement and decide things on a case by case basis.

Looking at the last few threads I've started in news, I've generally been pretty good about following that particular rule, and it's not like I start threads there on a regular basis so it wouldn't exactly kill anyone to at least consider that maybe I might possibly have some sort of reasoning capabilities that lead me to behave differently in this specific instance.

I think my opinion on this is Non shouldn't have been caustic about it. We are kind of supposed to hopefully maybe be remotely civil at times to each other.

Yeah I was unnecessarily irritable and I'm sorry. I made an apology in the thread.

Originally Posted by McDonalds

If all we're posting is a link, why aren't they just posting in the interesting internet crap thread and calling it a day? Put your own opinion/take/etc. Don't let the link be the entire basis of discussion.

Originally Posted by Fenris is the OP post in that thread

- at least every third post has to have links! Tangential discussions about a particularly interesting one are still fine, just throw in some links for content too, and if your tangential discussion becomes longer than 10 posts or so you might want to consider starting a thread. Honestly though this one's not so much an enforced rule as a guideline.

Either change that or don't complain about me following it.

[synkr0nized]

Wait.
Are you using the random link dump thread as validation for making a separate thread to just dump a link and merely encourage others to read it?

I want to be clear on that instead of just making an assumption.

Because otherwise it looks like you and Meister more or less agree about the News subforum.

[McTahr]

Well, I guess those are all good points. The only thing is that we're not mind-readers. Reaching some kind of agreeable consensus is easier when we know the motivations beyond a three-sentence summary that is more you explaining it than why you brought it up or your particular opinion.

Like, supporting the hosting site is totes chic, and now that we know that 1) you couldn't actually quote the entire article, and 2) wanted to discuss it in its entirety, things are a mite more sensible.

Just you know, understand that the moderating team/userbase doesn't know those things off-hand, so we're trying to pro-actively create an environment where everyone is on the same page.

[Grimpond]

I blame jagos for the perpetuation of this unwholesome and totally terrible trend that has plagued our beloved interbuttz haven of giggles.

[Menarker]

Originally Posted by Meister

- it ensures that when something that's linked goes down, everyone reading the thread can still get the same idea as everyone else what the original topic is.

In this line of topic, sometimes links gets blocked due to regional differences, especially if said links are videos.

Alternatively, sometimes members try to access this site from a public computer that has otherwise blocked some particular sites like Youtube (usually for productivity purpose) or if a particular region has banned the site in question due to whatever regulatory or political reason that isn't already covered by our rules.

I'm in favor of at least a short minor summary or at least a little depth into the line of topic so others can look it up on google on our own.

[Kim]

If the complaint were that I wasn't descriptive enough in my summary I probably would have fixed that without any grumpy antics. I probably would have rolled with a "Fair enough" and fixed that right up. I can't be sure, but as far as I can guess that would have been my behavior. Just throwing that out there.

[akaSM]

Originally Posted by Menarker

In this line of topic, sometimes links gets blocked due to regional differences, especially if said links are videos.

Alternatively, sometimes members try to access this site from a public computer that has otherwise blocked some particular sites like Youtube (usually for productivity purpose) or if a particular region has banned the site in question due to whatever regulatory or political reason that isn't already covered by our rules.

I'm in favor of at least a short minor summary or at least a little depth into the line of topic so others can look it up on google on our own.

^This

Sometimes I try to access stuff from my college and I can't because of some weird site blocking policies. Sometimes they block sites that could make us "waste our time" like those related to games (sites with games, game news, stores and others) or youtube, even though there's a great number of useful videos for a med student there...but yeah, I don't want to get a slow connection because of someone who wants to listen to Justine Beaver (sp? )

Other times they block sites in a way I don't understand, like megaupload while rapidshare is working just fine o_O

And, NPF isn't blocked, not that I'm complaining