Yes, there should be a limit! Why? Because top billing goes to the most active on the site. People like me who post only once in a while get stomped all over by others who post a zillion. I won't mention any names, but recently I posted a good article and someone came back in and posted not one, not two, not three, not four, but FIVE friggin' articles all over top of mine shoving it down to the bottom I felt on purpose. It pissed me off! You can see by comments that I said I am considering removing this blog and reposting back to the top again. Without a front page it is easy for other members to squash each other daily.In order to prevent this, we should limit our posts instead of flooding them out there where they get lost waaaay down at the bottom!Yeah, I am a little sensitive about this. Heck, even this poll is stomping on my latest article! I thought these COTO things were suppose to be located somewhere else?
Levin, speaking only for myself, I scan the titles of all articles and visit the ones of interest. Makes no difference how far down it has fallen. I'm not interested in many (most) of the posted articles, but I see that comments do get fairly scarce on the lower ones.
I voted for three or less but really think less is better. My philosophy on this site was to ask the authors to provide their perspectives on any repost or linked article.We were the team that was going to unspin the spin. I don't care if someone posted five a day if they would read and disect the propaganda crapso we could all get educated and respond. I am so far more interested in what you all have to say over the pundits and shills.
I agree, that if you post an article of another author it's definitely a good idea to introduce it with personal comments and opinions. It helps stimulate discussion and encourages others to put in their two cents worth.
Two or three makes sense. And yes, I have seen what Levin is talking about, and I do think at times it was on purpose.
Three or less seems fair to me. In fact, less is more IMHO. Mass posting by one member on any given day defeats the entire purpose of giving everyone a voice.But it would be nice if more would post at least one a day. We don't want a feast or famine situation to develop either.
"someone came back in and posted not one, not two, not three, not four, but FIVE friggin’ articles all over top of mine"Definitely a half-vast left-wing conspiracy. (It wasnt Me was it ?)
I wouldnt mind a 2 or 3 limit, but it would be good to have a daily open thread for posting interesting junk and chit-chat. And have the replies not wander off under the margin.
How many active members are there? Roughly. How many articles are displayed (current setup & variable range settings) and how many would be a good number to prevent too much scrolling?How else can a "front page" be set up?Is one needed?Spamming should be prevented but it is sometimes necessary to post more than one or two articles in one day. I would go for two a day but I know I'll regret having said this. How is "a day" measured /defined? When it's 9 a.m. here, it's midnight in Anchorage. Could I get away with double the amount of articles by strategically posting 3 (e.g.) before midnight in Anchorage and 3 after midnight? Or is WP set up to begin counting 24 hours from the second I post my 3rd article?I have a feeling this is going to lead to a screaning process, eventually. Not sure I would want to go through that again.All the same, I appreciate being asked before any such rule is implemented.
Look to your right Tony. Anyone who doesn't say no posts is active. Hopefullyother will join.40 is the number of posts per page. This could be reduced if we don't get excessive volume.This is not going to be enforced rigorously but we should read the comments and consensus and let our judgement be the decider. I'll have to start calling you and Loman the gloomy brothers.
Most popular is hits and comments Levin. Quality rises to the top here.
One per day per person. Some folks here do nothing other than sit at their computers all day reposting stuff that you can find on a vast variety of other sites. And only a small percentage post original content. To have variety means views from many voices, not just a few.
If you look at what I have posted here, everything is my own original stuff. But on my site, I do post links and full article reposts - most of the time I have gotten permission from the author to repost, but with a link to the original at the beginning, not the end (and even before the break).I don't know why I do that. I think reposting article is ok. It's helpful actually because everyone doesn't have the same knowledge base to pull from, or really enough time sometimes to check out all these other sites.But I would like to see more original work here though. I mean, I have read some really good work by contributors here. Just don't have time these days trying to fight just to keep food on the table.
Agreed. While I do see the value in links for the sake of being informed, there's a lot of talent here that should put their energy into original work if they want to make COTO a draw for outsiders - instead of spending their day making insipid and boorish comments (you excluded :)
I disagree with this statement: "Quality rises to the top here."Look at what is most popular... a blog about a formerly banned member that offers nothing in the way of educational information. It is merely a discussion thread.So the only truth I can conclude is that it is not quality that rises to the top but whatever is most popular regardless of what it is about or the quality of it or lack of quality of it, and this is just an observational opinion.
I meant to refer the articles, Levin. Indeed the personal COTO News attractmuch attention. Like a train wreck in some ways. I stand corrected.
thank you for le compliment. It took me no less than 12 hours to understand it. I'm improving ;-) .