Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Feedback & Suggestions' started by solarz, May 30, 2018.
My idea to fix this issue.
A better idea to fix this issue! Bravo Sampan! Bravo!
I would absolutely agree that the ability to access high quality, hard-to-get information on certain subject matters is a vital part of SDF. What I question, however, is the value in a barrage of news articles that can be easily accessed from Google News.
There's nothing wrong with posting an interesting article from Google now and then, but when someone makes such posts on every thread and does so every hour (or so it seems), then wouldn't you agree that it becomes clutter the forum can do without?
Now I read. LOL Sarcasm
Just making a point on why this is annoying.
You hit the nail on the head. A news article without that "LOL" and/or sarcasm is much easier to take. In the end, LOL and sarcasm only indicate an attitude without actually saying anything about the issue. It is one way of "throwing the stone while hiding the hand".
I still think the best way to avoid this is to insist that people follow the existing rule: a comment/direct opinion with every article posted.
But yes, if someone posts something I otherwise would not find, or that would not otherwise make it to this forum, I'm willing to overlook an uncommented article, translation, rumor, or whatever.
So when are we going to get a thread inside each section (Army, navy, air) labeled "News and newsworthy photos"? So then all the discussions about separate weapon systems and geostrategical changes can be left alone in their respective threads? That way both the people who go to forum to participate in the discussions and the people going to forum to look for news can be (mostly) happy.
There is an existing forum rule against posting useless one-liners. I think this rule should extend to copy/pasting google'd articles without any other comment.
At the very least, when you paste an article, explain why this article is relevant to the topic and worthy of attention!
Almost 21,000 posts in six years. In part why I don't frequent here much anymore.
Needs another hobby.
Jura and all,
I believe I fall into the same boat ref this issue. The biggest thing I see here is that many threads don't have routine discussion, and that often these 'walls of text' form the majority of posts.
Posting an article provides an opportunity to be informed in something either that is breaking news, or not posted / broadcasted through 'other media', this should allow conversations, in threads otherwise dearth of it, and in future provides a repository of information to search for making arguments.These postings in my opinion don't cloud the threads from conversation, as they occur at a rate less then once daily per thread.
As to conversation that is much coveted, I myself have little to add over the general statistics, or story that is presented within the article that wouldn't be considered speculation, or reinforcing 'one liners' for the articles. I simply don't have the professional knowledge on PRC, and come here to be informed and stay informed. Reading articles, and selecting interesting ones to post on relevant threads, assist, reading others posted articles that I may have missed is even better. Perhaps solarz you could suggest some good PRC news aggregators, perhaps my reason for posting, and I will happily restrain my postings.
Well cheers everyone,
i actually put him on ignore a while back because of those LOL comments.
TBH the way a forum is setup is not suitable for what we’re trying to achieve.
Either we restrict to primary sources and block most mainstream news or we need to move to reddit style and have subsections under subsections.
I added my own, non-targeted, feedback on page one of this thread (quite awhile ago now by the way), and your reply quoted it saying only this:
I followed up seeing I was quoted by you but never directly addressed and asked:
And you never responded. Why do you expect me to respond to you when you do not give me the same courtesy? It's even more rich for you to come back all this while later quoting myself and another and calling us cowards, considering that context. Or do you consider yourself above moderation and free to hurl personal attacks?
Anyway, I add my feedback earlier, had no intention of attacking anyone or dragging out the point, and will now be disengaging from this latest temper tantrum. Cheers.