Limit creators to two inworld creations per day.

[Knowl Paine]

I'm opposed to setting limits.

 

 

There other day I was doing about 95 mph on the highway and turned to my grandmother who was a passenger and asked her if I was driving too fast. She didn't hear me because it was her first time on a motorcycle in the rain.

[Henry Darkthief]

 

---

Knowl Paine wrote:

I'm opposed to setting limits.

 

 

There other day I was doing about 95 mph on the highway and turned to my grandmother who was a passenger and asked her if I was driving too fast. She didn't hear me because it was her first time on a motorcycle in the rain.

---

Some limits you jsut can't avoid. I find that drinking a couple of dozen beer is one of those. :smileyvery-happy:

 

[Wilhiam Hydraconis]

A high count of threadcreations is righteously not considered to be a treat of excellence. Unless by those who can do no better.

Preposterous here are your tendencies in improving your rank on top of everybody else, which you apparantly cannot achieve by a high count of appreciated answers in the answer section of the forums, so you try to discredit the advocation of containing the overflow of the quantity of threads created elsewhere.

What's also preposterous, and equally presumptuous, is comparing yourself to Philip Linden, who did quite a bit more than just overflowing the forums with freshly created threads. People are not trying to kill Philips vision by advocating what you object to. Another presumptuous aspect is to compare your posts with creations inworld. I  doubt people inworld pay you for the 'products' you create here and if these 'products' would lower in numbers you could set a higher price for them by demand.

Creativity will not diminish by limiting quantity. Creativity is about quality. We don't hail production-machines for mass productions with prizes for creativity either.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Prokofy Neva]

What Griffin said.

[Prokofy Neva]

2 questions

1. Are you willing to self-limit your blog posts for the same reasons?

Der, of course I would, cupcake. I propose things that are about the rule of law, for the good of the whole user population. I don't propose things that are in my self-interest or those of any one grouplet.

2. Would you use a blog service that limited your blog posts?

Off-topic. Irrelevant to the issue here which is about posting comments, not blog posts.

I'm trying to understand what's really behind all this jockeying for position.Does it produce more sales?

 

[Griffin Ceawlin]

Judging from some of her recent posts, I think it's more about Rank. Why should a lowly pleb like me have the same rank as she?

There's also no Top Participant list any longer. As if anyone else cared.

[Cato Badger]

Creating mindless uninspiring unprovocative threads here is the equivalent of churning out plywood cubes as seats inworld. It's "creative" but it's pretty unimaginative. Having said that, I enjoy the creativity that a multi-cultural multi-lingual community can offer in the way of neologisms. malapropisms and general word-bending, much as I enjoy Abba's deeply meaningless lyrics. So what should I say to the OP for instigating this discussion? It's obvious: Bravado! Bravado!

[Mags Indigo]

@ Suspiria - I'm presuming you have 'created' this thread to demonstrate your opposition to limits on the number of threads that any person can being in a period of time. A number of people have given quite good answers (both for and against) to this subject and I 'm sure you have read through them all.

Most of all I see that you are displaying your own creative talents by bringing the interpretation of creativity to it's widest possible definition. I guess that in itself could be seen as being creative by some people - I'd still hesitate to put it on a parr with the creative juices of a Leonardo, Picasso or a Duffy. But that's due to my own narrow views no doubt.

Nice discussion :smileyhappy:

[Venus Petrov]

 

---

Suspiria Finucane wrote:

---

Venus Petrov wrote:

Anyone can dig out a definition from a dictionary.  I wanted to know how *you* defined creative since you are using it in a way that does not seem to fit the OED definition.  And, as far as Webster, well, this thread is an imitation.

ETA:  edit post to thread

 

---

Perhaps if you were more specific the first time, a person could correctly answer your question without repetitive posts.

Each person has their own definition of creativity. What you consider creativity, others may not and vice versa. Does everyone agree on the creativity or lack thereof on every painting in a museum?

Perhaps if you didn't want to limit creativity, more people would come forward with their ideas sparked by another. Why intimidate people because you don't agree with their definition of creativity.

I, for one, would rather see ideas than stifle them. Why do you want to stifle ideas and the creative process?

---

 

I disagree with your definition of 'intimidate'.  This is a discussion.  I am no more intimidating you than you are me.  Consider the proposal.  Limiting threads in the SL forum (not Answers or anywhere else) to two per day would likely result in higher quality threads.  One would take better care in what one chose to post.

I was on the opposite side of this argument a few days ago.  I have been looking at it from the other side.  I can see some positives.

[Peewee Musytari]

 

---

Suspiria Finucane wrote:

I see, so to you creation is not creation?

Is one kind of creation better than another?

Are you belittling the people who author creative threads?

Is it up to you to decide what is to be created and what is not?

This is exactly the kind of censorship I am referring to in the OP. 

---

Didn`t you create threads pushing for stricter modding of spammers?  Maybe they consider their spam to be creative.

 

 

[Suspiria Finucane]

 

---

Griffin Ceawlin wrote:

Apples and oranges.

---

How is limiting thread posts and limiting blog posts apples and oranges? Both are limiting posting capabilities.

 

[Suspiria Finucane]

 

---

Prokofy Neva wrote:

2. Would you use a blog service that limited your blog posts?

Off-topic. Irrelevant to the issue here which is about posting comments, not blog posts.

 

---

It's hardly off-topic. A thread is basically the same as a blog post. You post a topic for readers and allow comments on that topic. How exactly is it irrelevant when it's the same thing.?

 

[Suspiria Finucane]

 

---

Venus Petrov wrote:

 

---

Suspiria Finucane wrote:

---

Venus Petrov wrote:

Anyone can dig out a definition from a dictionary.  I wanted to know how *you* defined creative since you are using it in a way that does not seem to fit the OED definition.  And, as far as Webster, well, this thread is an imitation.

ETA:  edit post to thread

 

---

Perhaps if you were more specific the first time, a person could correctly answer your question without repetitive posts.

Each person has their own definition of creativity. What you consider creativity, others may not and vice versa. Does everyone agree on the creativity or lack thereof on every painting in a museum?

Perhaps if you didn't want to limit creativity, more people would come forward with their ideas sparked by another. Why intimidate people because you don't agree with their definition of creativity.

I, for one, would rather see ideas than stifle them. Why do you want to stifle ideas and the creative process?

---

I disagree with your definition of 'intimidate'.  This is a discussion.  I am no more intimidating you than you are me. 

---

 

Since I said people and not you orI in particular, it has nothing to do with the individual but more with the body as a whole. You and others wish to punish the entire community because you disagree with one poster. It rings of discriminatory practices to me.

*General reply*

It's a shame Dr. King was shot for his ideas against discrimination that were unpopular by hate groups. I truly hope LL doesn't adapt hate policies.

 

[Suspiria Finucane]

 

---

Mags Indigo wrote:

@ Suspiria - I'm presuming you have 'created' this thread to demonstrate your opposition to limits on the number of threads that any person can being in a period of time. A number of people have given quite good answers (both for and against) to this subject and I 'm sure you have read through them all.

Most of all I see that you are displaying your own creative talents by bringing the interpretation of creativity to it's widest possible definition. I guess that in itself could be seen as being creative by some people -

I'd still hesitate to put it on a parr with the creative juices of a Leonardo, Picasso or a Duffy

. But that's due to my own narrow views no doubt.

Nice discussion :smileyhappy:

---

I believe that ideas need to be discussed in order to look at the pros and cons of any negative/positive contribution that affect an entire community or society.

I'm still at a loss however as to why people are ridiculing/judging the creativity of an individual instead of discussing the pros and cons of limiting threads which is what the OP is about.

I for one, don't relinquish my support for a cause due to ridicule. Ridiculing a single poster is jejune behavior at best IMO.

“Ridicule is the tribute paid to the genius by the mediocrities.” ~Oscar Wilde

 

PS Was Picasso revered in his lifetime as a great artist?  I also believe Leonardo da Vinci was ridiculed and persecuted for his ideas. In fact he had to hide most of his revolutionary ideas. I really thought civilization had advanced.

[Mags Indigo]

---

Suspiria Finucane wrote:

 I believe that ideas need to be discussed in order to look at the pros and cons of any negative/positive contribution that affect an entire community or society.

I'm still at a loss however as to why people are ridiculing/judging the creativity of an individual instead of discussing the pros and cons of limiting threads which is what the OP is about.

I for one, don't relinquish my support for a cause due to ridicule. Ridiculing a single poster is jejune behavior at best IMO.

“Ridicule is the tribute paid to the genius by the mediocrities.” ~Oscar Wilde

 

PS Was Picasso revered in his lifetime as a great artist?  I also believe Leonardo da Vinci was ridiculed and persecuted for his ideas. In fact he had to hide most of his revolutionary ideas. I really thought civilization had advanced.

---

 

Once again it's interesting to see how one observation can lead to something totally different. I guess that's how people are :smileyhappy:

[Venus Petrov]

 

---

Suspiria Finucane wrote:

---

I believe that ideas need to be discussed in order to look at the pros and cons of any negative/positive contribution that affect an entire community or society.

I'm still at a loss however as to why people are ridiculing/judging the creativity of an individual instead of discussing the pros and cons of limiting threads which is what the OP is about.

I for one, don't relinquish my support for a cause due to ridicule. Ridiculing a single poster is jejune behavior at best IMO.

“Ridicule is the tribute paid to the genius by the mediocrities.” ~Oscar Wilde

 

PS Was Picasso revered in his lifetime as a great artist?  I also believe Leonardo da Vinci was ridiculed and persecuted for his ideas. In fact he had to hide most of his revolutionary ideas. I really thought civilization had advanced.

---

 

I do not see any ridicule in this thread.  I see you characterize posters who express a different opinion as intimidators.   Let us look at pros and cons:

Pros to limiting threads:

Reduced chance for duplicate threads

Higher quality in creativity

More variety in posters (posters more likely to create threads because the lists are not overwhelmed with the names of a few posters)

Cons to limiting threads:

Posters must wait at most one day to post a new thread

Some posters may resort to use of alts to create more threads (although the negative of this is that the main avatar's thread count will not rise as quickly)

 

Just starter lists...feel free to add to them.

[Venus Petrov]

 

---

Knowl Paine wrote:

I'm opposed to setting limits.

 

There other day I was doing about 95 mph on the highway and turned to my grandmother who was a passenger and asked her if I was driving too fast. She didn't hear me because it was her first time on a motorcycle in the rain.

---

 

I am liking the sound of that statement.  Is that in general or just specific to this topic?

/me chuckles

[Venus Petrov]

 

---

Suspiria Finucane wrote:

 

---

*General reply*

It's a shame Dr. King was shot for his ideas against discrimination that were unpopular by hate groups. I truly hope LL doesn't adapt hate policies.

 

---

Are you comparing yourself to MLK now?

 

[Cato Badger]

@Suspiria: You asked "Was Picasso revered in his lifetime as a great artist?" Actually Picasso's talents were first recognised in 1900 - when he was 19, and he certainly was revered during his lifetime

[Cato Badger]

@Suspiria: You said: "Leonardo da Vinci was ridiculed and persecuted". I think you may be mixing him up with Leonardo di Caprio, as da Vinci's only serious criticism came from a bunch of invading French soldiers who used one of his sculptures for target practice. Now *that* is what I call *active* criticism of the arts.

[Cato Badger]

@Suspiria: You asked "How is limiting thread posts and limiting blog posts apples and oranges?" Well, the essential difference is one of control processes. Initiating a thread can be made to require a certain rank, and the location of posts and number can be controlled independently of posts to a thread, the vectors of which can be separately stored and accumulated. Completely different criteria can be applied to imposing restrictions or allowing privileges in one or the other operations, which is of particular import since the spammer seems only to be working currently at the level of creating threads, rather than posting to existing threads.

[Wilhiam Hydraconis]

---

Venus Petrov wrote:

Are you comparing yourself to MLK now?

---

You think that's a bit too much ?

I think she even compared herself up a 'few' steps as the Creationist of all creationists. :smileyindifferent:

ETA : No. I did not mean the reference to Philip Linden.

 

[Suella Ember]

 

---

Venus Petrov wrote:

I was on the opposite side of this argument a few days ago.  I have been looking at it from the other side.  I can see some positives.

---

 

It's interesting you say that because I find myself in a similar position, although I'm not yet prepared to say I fully support the idea of limiting people to a certain amount of new topics per day. I do however, see a lot of good arguments for it. 

It would undoubtedly help to keep the forums 'cleaner' and hopefully ensure that everything was of good quality. There can sometimes seem to be a tendency for people to start threads just for the sake of starting a thread and I've seen quite a few threads where I've though it was basically just a repeat of an existing thread worded slightly differently. I often wonder why that happens when, to me, it seems much more sensible to reply in the exisitng thread rather than start a new thread. 

There's probably a variety of reasons why people do that, some innocent, some not so innocent. I'm not going to get into that though!

It would be nice to be able to do something to try and avoid those issues of multiple repeat threads and new topics just for the sake of it. However (and this is where I'm still not fully swayed on the issue) I dislike having to restrict people who might genuinely have a reason to start a lot of threads just because of others who may be starting lots of threads less genuinely.

It's perfectly possible, for example, that someone might happen to have 3 or 4 really important things to highlight on a particular day which they couldn't do if they were only allowed to post 2 new threads. Although I suppose it's also likely that such instances would be quite rare because you can almost guarantee that if there is a really important issue to start up, someone else will start it up pretty quickly. Interstingly, I've always found that to be the case myself. I've only had cause to start 2 new threads here since it opened and, back in the days of Jive, I think I started maybe 10 threads max over the whole year or more we had it. The reason for that is, whenever I had something I wanted to talk about, I'd have a quick scan of the latest existing threads and 9 times out of 10 I'd find that someone had already started a thread on the topic so I'd add my comments to that rather than start a whole new thread!

So limiting the creation of new topics? It certainly has its benefits, but I also feel it's a measure that shouldn't have to be taken if there is effective and pro-active moderation in place to try to control spammy repeat threads and people who are posting new threads just for the sake of it. Having said that, it's not always a clear cut case when moderating such isssues and could cause more drama when people find themselves moderated for what might have been a relatively harmless thread, but one that was arguably an unecessary thread. 

Basically, it's yet another read why I have a love \ hate relationship with these forums and why I'm glad I don't have to make decisions on how to try and keep the natives under control! :smileyvery-happy:

 

[Cato Badger]

If you are only interested in provoking constructive discussion or obtaining informative responses then using several disposable alts (assuming individual avatars were retricted) would offer a convenient mechanism for creating threads. The problem of over-initiating threads only arises when, and because, an avatar thinks that they might advance themselves in formally recognised status if they create enough threads that generate traffic that is acknowledged by the ranking algorithm. While the calculation the algorithm uses is non-transparent and creation of threads and posting is unrestrcted, you will see the symptoms of public annoyance, of gaming of status, by those who have the time and the inclination.

[Suspiria Finucane]

 

---

Cato Badger wrote:

@Suspiria: You asked "How is limiting thread posts and limiting blog posts apples and oranges?" Well, the essential difference is one of control processes. Initiating a thread can be made to require a certain rank, and the location of posts and number can be controlled independently of posts to a thread, the vectors of which can be separately stored and accumulated. Completely different criteria can be applied to imposing restrictions or allowing privileges in one or the other operations, which is of particular import since the spammer seems only to be working currently at the level of creating threads, rather than posting to existing threads.

---

Assumptive interpretations can apply to any topic, however limits are limits and therefore similar, not dissimilar.