• Making Facepunch better - Don't post about ratings
    5,003 replies, posted
[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;48158917]Don't intentionally be thick. For example, every article on The Economist is more or less an opinion piece. However, it is also news at the same time, because the article itself is news. Is this disallowed? These is absolutely no obvious separation between what an opinion piece and news actually is.[/QUOTE] I've seen a lot of opinion pieces posted in SH, they all have "Opimion:" before the title and are usually somebody's thoughts on a relevant subject and/or somebody of relevance's thoughts.
[QUOTE=Cmx;48158885]If there was only some way of showing what you think of a thread or post without having to post, Maybe some kind of poll of what you and other posters think of it. When you click it, it could say "don't post about this" I dont know if they would implement this polling system to SH though.[/QUOTE] Honestly, if the forum doesn't know that I, personally, agree with this post, then why even bother discussing things online? Why should I have to engage in discussion when it's just better to vote in a meaningless poll? Or maybe it's more interesting to make a post about the discussion at hand and then add some insight or reasoning or perspective? Going "I AGREE WITH THIS POST," or "THIS POST IS STUPID", like a robot either in a post or a rating is vapid bullshit that accomplishes nothing except give people an outlet to have an opinion without actually having to form or articulate details or reasoning behind their opinion. Like, okay, someone makes an interesting post. You agree with it. Why? Do you agree with the whole post? Do you only agree with one part of the post? You think someone else's post is stupid. What makes it stupid? What contrary evidence do you have to support the claim that it's stupid? In both cases it's more interesting and better for discussion to engage and discuss the matter than to just click the thoughtless button that makes points for you.
Then don't have it in your rules that opinion pieces are disallowed. Clarify the rules and say that they have to be by relevant people on relevant events, and that blogs are disallowed.
People are always going to want this opinions to be heard in some way. Ratings are the best way to do it, they're there for a reason. If nothing else ratings should be enabled on OP posts so that people don't feel the need to express their opinion on it in their otherwise relevant post.
[QUOTE=RejectedPost;48158893]I wonder why not-news would be banned in a news subforum. Real brainteaser, that one.[/QUOTE] The news node has opinion pieces in it all the time, not really sure why they should allowed in one and not the other (even if the news node is bot run anyway)
[QUOTE=Cmx;48158953]The news node has opinion pieces in it all the time, not really sure why they should allowed in one and not the other (even if the news node is bot run anyway)[/QUOTE] The news node is just bots reposting news from websites so it's not really a relevant topic there.
[QUOTE=Cmx;48158953]The news node has opinion pieces in it all the time, not really sure why they should allowed in one and not the other (even if the news node is bot run anyway)[/QUOTE] I don't get why News Node was allowed to survive the cull. I'd rather have any of the old subforums than that piece of crap, most of it is spam by terrible sources, and the BBC articles are usually not too interesting either.
I got a great suggestion; banning those who keep talking about ratings. There's an additional 5 posts talking about ratings on this page alone. :rolleye:
I've noticed something about the user agent. I'll post on my Surface (running Window 8.1) and the user agent shows it correctly, but sometimes it changes into unknown after some time.
I guess you could say some issues have [I]surfaced[/I]. [editline]9th July 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=FlashMarsh;48158969]I don't get why News Node was allowed to survive the cull. I'd rather have any of the old subforums than that piece of crap, most of it is spam by terrible sources, and the BBC articles are usually not too interesting either.[/QUOTE] I think it's pretty alright for the steam news, because it's easier than reading it in the steam interface, and I can see comments to it so I know which deals to avoid or buy.
[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;48158841]Why are opinion pieces officially banned in SH? These surely warrant discussion as much as anything else, and I almost never see this being enforced. Most news has some kind of slant to it anyway.[/QUOTE] Because I dont want to read some nobody's blog. I dont care about the 3million different views on a subject. I dont think the mods want some shady ass opinion site being pasted around. SH isnt for advertising for some indie bloggers.
[QUOTE=Code3Response;48159172]Because I dont want to read some nobody's blog. I dont care about the 3million different views on a subject. I dont think the mods want some shady ass opinion site being pasted around. SH isnt for advertising for some indie bloggers.[/QUOTE] And almost every opinion piece posted here has been full of sourceless truthfacts, or even used as a source on what happened.
I don't feel that "news articles are opinionated" is justification for posting blog posts because reputable news organizations at least try to post sources and keep quality in check. News may have an opinion that sways how the article is worded or written, but we shouldn't say "well let's just post 100% opinion pieces" because of that.
I can't think of a single time I thought "Gee I sure wish some blogger could clarify the situation here", and I don't think we're losing anything by keeping them banned because the reliable blogs are such a retardedly small fraction of the "news" blogs out there.
[QUOTE=Oscar Lima Echo;48159275]I can't think of a single time I thought "Gee I sure wish some blogger could clarify the situation here", and I don't think we're losing anything by keeping them banned because the reliable blogs are such a retardedly small fraction of the "news" blogs out there.[/QUOTE] I LITERALLY just fucking posted that blogs shouldn't be allowed. I'm talking about opinion pieces from legitimate sources.
So, with people bringing up wanting dual columns back in earlier pages, I would like to point out that I [I]still[/I] accidentally click on Hardware and Software instead of News Node every so often because of its pants-on-head placement between it and SH.
[QUOTE=Pretty Obscure;48159323]So, with people bringing up wanting dual columns back in earlier pages, I would like to point out that I [I]still[/I] accidentally click on Hardware and Software instead of News Node every so often because of its pants-on-head placement between it and SH.[/QUOTE] For what it's worth, the [url=https://greasyfork.org/en/scripts/7473-facepunch-frontpage-double-column]dual column userscript[/url] should still work.
[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;48159312]I LITERALLY just fucking posted that blogs shouldn't be allowed. I'm talking about opinion pieces from legitimate sources.[/QUOTE] Yeah and I LITERALLY wasn't fucking replying to you. Calm down. [editline]9th July 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Pretty Obscure;48159323]So, with people bringing up wanting dual columns back in earlier pages, I would like to point out that I [I]still[/I] accidentally click on Hardware and Software instead of News Node every so often because of its pants-on-head placement between it and SH.[/QUOTE] To me the single column makes sense on a smaller screen, but on, say a 39 or 50 inch it feels like a lot of wasted space. [QUOTE=DrTaxi;48159340]For what it's worth, the [url=https://greasyfork.org/en/scripts/7473-facepunch-frontpage-double-column]dual column userscript[/url] should still work.[/QUOTE] Neato.
[QUOTE=Oscar Lima Echo;48159345] To me the single column makes sense on a smaller screen, but on, say a 39 or 50 inch it feels like a lot of wasted space. [/QUOTE] I have a large screen and I didn't notice the transition from double column to single. [del]The only subforum which required me to scroll down is the programming subforum.[/del] I liked double column but it wasn't an issue for me in either style. It'd probably be a safer bet to keep it as one column for the sake of mobile browsing or something. [editline]why the hell do I need something in here to make an editline[/editline] I just check and realized pretty much everything but the half of the gmod subforums and ddt doesn't fit so absolutely no prob with a single column subforum list
Here's an idea for SH: an "Older Headlines" subforum for stuff that would otherwise be too old to be put in regular SH. It'd also help if say a debate got kicked off but nobody realized how old an article was until said debate was already underway, and with the elimination of Mass Debate...
[QUOTE=wickedplayer494;48159538]Here's an idea for SH: an "Older Headlines" subforum for stuff that would otherwise be too old to be put in regular SH. It'd also help if say a debate got kicked off but nobody realized how old an article was until said debate was already underway, and with the elimination of Mass Debate...[/QUOTE] Why do we need to post old articles at all? [editline]9th July 2015[/editline] Nobody wants to read news that's really old.
[QUOTE=Starlight 456;48159550]Why do we need to post old articles at all? [editline]9th July 2015[/editline] Nobody wants to read news that's really old.[/QUOTE] that's not even news
Going back to the idea of "we removed slow subforms" - why are slow subforms [I]bad[/I]? I doubt they cost more money for Garry to host. Did removing them encourage faster threads about the same topics in other sections (eg film threads are now in GD)?
[QUOTE=thrawn2787;48159579]Going back to the idea of "we removed slow subforms" - why are slow subforms [I]bad[/I]? I doubt they cost more money for Garry to host. Did removing them encourage faster threads about the same topics in other sections (eg film threads are now in GD)?[/QUOTE] I wont speculate on the reason, but I saw that a lot of subforums ended up making very specific threads for everything, but the biggest thread just turned into a chat thread while the other threads slowed down to a few posts now and then because the discussions that belonged there happened in the chat thread instead.
If I remember right, all the subforums were causing technical problems with the forum itself.
[QUOTE=Starlight 456;48159806]If I remember right, all the subforums were causing technical problems with the forum itself.[/QUOTE] I'm almost 100% sure that wasnt it. It was more of a "why keep these subfourms around if there was only a few threads in them" deal
[QUOTE=The freeman;48158622]What's the problem with seeing how this pans out, by the way. Instead of castrating the mod team just see if it's still an issue in a month and start complaining then if it still is. People flipped that the forum went to 2 columns super hard, but apparently that layout was far better than having it be 1 column. People just realized that 2 columns made sense for the amount of subforums that Facepunch had at the time and rolled with it. Same sort of stuff happened when all the emoticons were culled, most people eventually realized that the forum actually got better without them.[/QUOTE] Cosmetic changes are different though. This is a feature removal. A widely liked and accepted feature.
[QUOTE=EnlightenDead;48159812]I'm almost 100% sure that wasnt it. It was more of a "why keep these subfourms around if there was only a few threads in them" deal[/QUOTE] When you put it that way, I'm glad they're gone. They were taking up unnecessary amounts of space.
I miss the TV section a lot, only because it was actually used and now its a mess to find and talk about TV shows in GD
[QUOTE=Code3Response;48159828]When you put it that way, I'm glad they're gone. They were taking up unnecessary amounts of space.[/QUOTE] A few were very active though, mostly the TV/Film and Creative sections.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.