|
Title: What defines a HQ post. What defines a LQ post?? have your say inside come and h Post by: cryptohunter on December 31, 2018, 04:01:33 PM Perhaps we need to start at the beginning.
I see lots of threads how to get rid of low quality posts and reward high quality posts. Let's all try telling each other what they see as a low quality and high quality post. No need to make this personal or provide peoples posts we are just defining our ideas of either type of post and what we look for. I will listen to every post made here and see if we can examine it together and add it to either high quality or low quality. Let's begin, We will turn these into more nicely written and presented points when they are done.. English language experts/boffins help will be appreciated :) We just thrash out the points to start with and tart it up later. HIGH QUALITY POSTS 1- new relevant information usually accompanied by observable evidence or corroborating events - that makes a new logical contribution to the discussion/debate. 2 - The language used makes it possible for the majority of readers to understand their point. This refers to the grammar and spelling only.. not because the post is of a complexity only a few can fully analyse or grasp. other factors that could make them positive but do not essentially change the need to meet the criteria above ..but should be of heavy consideration 3 - Scam prevention and warnings with corroborating evidence or sensible reason to claim scam. These are of VERY HIGH VALUE. 4 - The opinion of a Proven and Recognised expert in that specific field/area being discussed in the topic. 5- A post that can take complex information and concepts already presented in a thread and break them down for consumption through examples or steps to those less trained or less capable in that specific area whom would still like to gain a certain level of understanding. LOW QUALITY POSTS. 1 - no new relevant information - (empty support faux support empty rebuttal faux rebuttal) 2 - The majority reading the thread can not understand the post because the grammar or English fall below the threshold to convey their meaning. (not just some broken English that most people should be able to piece together). 3 - Scam pumping or promoting . These are VERY NEGATIVE. 4 - Not always, but in many cases can seen to be financially motivated Just tell me and we can evaluate and add them here in the OP. If later we discover things need to be added or removed through sensible debate we can do that too. Let's just all give our POV and examine them. Should be lots of input here because this is basically the merit forum where people must have clear ideas of what they are giving it or holding it back for. Every post and idea here will be evaluated by everyone else not just me and then added to either category above. So we all need to agree or the vast majority should be able to agree on some key points here we all must be looking for. Try to push the things/points/criteria you look for in clear numbered order or lines not just one huge paragraph where I have to locate the actual points to list above. Also a mini explanation of why you look for them. ANYTHING YOU DO NOT AGREE WITH THAT HAS BEEN ADDED THEN SPEAK UP AND WE CAN GET IT REMOVED IF YOU PRESENT A LOGICAL REASON IT SHOULD NOT BE THERE. OR IS I TOOK YOUR IDEA/POINT AND MUTATED IT THEN TELL ME. Title: Re: What makes a post a HQ post. What makes a post a LQ post. ? merit - lets see?? Post by: Findingnemo on December 31, 2018, 04:10:41 PM Low quality post means,the post which is has no new information just made for the purpose of completing the minimum quota to reach the posts which is required to getting the rewards from the signature campaign which are considered to be spams.
High quality means when the post has something to read and new information or explaining any doubts for OP.Maybe made with excellent grammar too. Title: Re: What makes a post a HQ post. What makes a post a LQ post. ? merit - lets see?? Post by: jackg on December 31, 2018, 04:22:12 PM I think we should also try to define a medium quality post and determine whether it's merit worthy or not. I'd suggest a medium quality post is one that adds something but the thing added is usually something that's obvious but is still potentially merit worthy if stated by a newbie member.
Title: Re: What makes a post a HQ post. What makes a post a LQ post. ? merit - lets see?? Post by: cryptohunter on December 31, 2018, 04:26:59 PM Low quality post means,the post which is has no new information just made for the purpose of completing the minimum quota to reach the posts which is required to getting the rewards from the signature campaign which are considered to be spams. High quality means when the post has something to read and new information or explaining any doubts for OP.Maybe made with excellent grammar too. Lot's of very good points here. I think this is an excellent start. Many I agree with too. Some we should clarify further. Some I will add straight away and will only remove if we find good reason. To the point of. No new information. Should we further clarify this to no new information that is relevant and objectively/logically takes the debate in either direction? I mean should we really work hard here to thrash out what really is a good/ net positive post. Sometimes lot of new opinions that arrive on a thread with new information( but not relevant ) that is not at all moving the debate either way are just clutter and dilution regardless of their grammar. Does everyone agree with this ? or perhaps not? let me know. I will add points and later under their sub headings ie "new information" clarify what we all agree it means. If you meant something else then let me know. Title: Re: What makes a post a HQ post. What makes a post a LQ post. ? merit - lets see?? Post by: Alone055 on December 31, 2018, 04:27:04 PM A post that answers a question or adds something to an answer given earlier, helps someone in need of help, or makes an on-topic point in any discussion is considered to be a constructive or high quality post regardless of its size or length. Having a clear grammar makes it look better, although it doesn't matter as long as the reader understands what the poster is trying to convey.
A post that doesn't add anything new to the discussion, repeats something that has already been said or in some cases, is constructed very badly (large quotes, un-understandable grammar/lines) is considered to be a nonconstructive or low quality post regardless of its size or length. Title: Re: What makes a post a HQ post. What makes a post a LQ post. ? merit - lets see?? Post by: cryptohunter on December 31, 2018, 04:50:19 PM I think we should also try to define a medium quality post and determine whether it's merit worthy or not. I'd suggest a medium quality post is one that adds something but the thing added is usually something that's obvious but is still potentially merit worthy if stated by a newbie member. If a newbie adds anything regardless of whether others find it obvious I think they should be regarded as positive. Of course we will never entirely make an objective system. We are just trying to see what people consider good and bad posts. I agree a newbie should be given encouragement if possible but still should fit into our broad(ish) criteria for good or bad post. So yes I agree but will not at this time make a medium post category unless many others wish for one there because it may complicate things and bring in subjectivity that stop us having a clearer consensus on good and bad. posts. So I agree in principle. Honestly I though good and bad posts would have lots criteria but actually it seems just a few statements can define a good or bad post quite accurately. I almost think you could define the what is a good post and bad post into one statement. This surprises me. Title: Re: What makes a post a HQ post. What makes a post a LQ post. ? merit - lets see?? Post by: mikeywith on December 31, 2018, 09:31:35 PM I could be the only one who thinks this, but in many cases language skills including grammar and spelling are not an important measure of post quality at all, some people who hardly speak English are crypto-experts, i see a few of them on the Mining forum especially, some of them might be using Google Translator to provide some high quality posts that include advanced solutions to major problems. those to me are very HQ posts that deserve merit much more than a well written post which has nothing worthy to merit, i also don't think that someone who is providing some sort of valuable information for FREE is obligated to have any language related skills, it's the reader who needs to put some effort in understanding, on the other hand if the person is asking for help to a certain issue then he is somehow "obligated" to make himself clear if he wants to get the proper response.
Title: Re: What makes a post a HQ post. What makes a post a LQ post. ? merit - lets see?? Post by: o_e_l_e_o on December 31, 2018, 10:02:55 PM i also don't think that someone who is providing some sort of valuable information for FREE is obligated to have any language related skills, it's the reader who needs to put some effort in understanding Yes and no. I don't think there should be a requirement to write in perfect English by any means. While it should be the goal for every user, good spelling and grammar is not an indication of the quality of the content of the post, and shouldn't be a major factor in the decision to award a post with merit or not. Having said that, a line needs to be drawn somewhere. You cannot place the onus for understanding solely on the reader. If you write a post which I can understand on my first read through, then I don't get too worried about some minor spelling or grammar mistakes. If, however, I've read the first line 4 times and I still don't understand your point, then I'm giving up and moving on. Communication skills are not an indication of content, but they need to be sufficient to be understandable. Title: Re: What makes a post a HQ post. What makes a post a LQ post. ? merit - lets see?? Post by: cryptohunter on December 31, 2018, 11:13:47 PM totally agree that grammar and english are not all that important
so long as you can get the general idea of what they are saying then for sure that is all they need to really achieve. However the majority in that thread do need to be able to get an idea of what is being said right? They need to meet a threshold level of being able to convey their message to the majority in that thread. I will adapt the OP to take into account of this. It is strange because I thought we could list many traits of a good and bad post. However it seems that we have nearly exhausted these traits in just 3 attempts. Therefore a good and bad post should easily identified if the person judging actually understands the points being made in the thread because there are only a few criteria it would seem. Or perhaps there are still more we have not thought of. Title: Re: What makes a post a HQ post. What makes a post a LQ post. ? merit - lets see?? Post by: Findingnemo on December 31, 2018, 11:28:50 PM Not only English have grammar,I said high quality posts are made with excellent grammar so it really means when someone reads it which will be really easy and understandable to them so don't confuse english with grammar anymore because there were lot of high quality posts were made in local language boards too.
Sorry my English grammar is really bad. :-\ Title: Re: What makes a post a HQ post. What makes a post a LQ post. ? merit - lets see?? Post by: cryptohunter on December 31, 2018, 11:38:00 PM Not only English have grammar,I said high quality posts are made with excellent grammar so it really means when someone reads it which will be really easy and understandable to them so don't confuse english with grammar anymore because there were lot of high quality posts were made in local language boards too. Sorry my English grammar is really bad. :-\ Don't worry everyone I am sure knows what you mean. Just replace English with whatever local board language the thread is initiated in. Any other ideas of what makes a good post or a bad post? Title: Re: What makes a post a HQ post. What makes a post a LQ post. ? merit - lets see?? Post by: r1s2g3 on January 01, 2019, 01:18:32 AM I guess it also depends upon the knowledge of user also.For example if I write "Good Project" then it will be LQ but if same thing written by Satoshi will be a stamp that no one will deny. LQ/HQ are directly identified by user knowledge on the subject.
LQ involves copying the article and providing the source while HQ involve comprehending the article and initiating the discussion on Pros and cons. LQ involves just reading and replying to the OP while HQ involve reading OP and all other replies and replying to add the things that are missing in thread. Title: Re: What makes a post a HQ post. What makes a post a LQ post. ? merit - lets see?? Post by: NavI_027 on January 01, 2019, 04:02:21 AM Aside from what OP said, I think sarcastic post also works. These kind of posts are short but sweet and yet they gain merits. Like one of my post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2807541.msg29229863#msg29229863). Honestly, I never expected to get merit from that one but it happened ;D.
I think we should also try to define a medium quality post and determine whether it's merit worthy or not. In my own description, a medium quality post or sometimes I call a mediocre post are posts that are informative somehow but not as complex as high quality posts like bitcoin technical discussions. Example of those posts are opinions, friendly advises and by answering simple questions (particularly coming from newbies). No doubt that these posts also deserve some merit because they are a little bit helpful too but since they belong in the mediocrity, others find it common and nothing special. That is why other members don't appreciate it and leading them to refuse giving some merit. Title: Re: What makes a post a HQ post. What makes a post a LQ post. ? merit - lets see?? Post by: Findingnemo on January 01, 2019, 06:31:01 AM How about ability to tell complex things in simple way (with illustration, example, simpler words, etc.), it's really important for newcomers who wish learn more about Bitcoin/cryptocurrency. Definitely,when someone able to tell everything in a simple way then that needs to be considered as HQ posts but sadly most of these posts weren't considered for merited.But,In the view of common forum member long post= HQ post,this needs to be changed. Title: Re: What makes a post a HQ post. What makes a post a LQ post. ? merit - lets see?? Post by: o_e_l_e_o on January 01, 2019, 09:07:43 AM But,In the view of common forum member long post= HQ post,this needs to be changed. Being able to break complex issues in to simple to understand points is a skill, as is being able to briefly and concisely state a point. There are some very long and excellent posts in Technical Discussion, for example, but equally some very long and utterly meaningless posts in other boards. I think some spammers think that if they pad their posts out they look less like spam, but they end up either endlessly repeating themselves or waffling a bunch of irrelevant nonsense. In my opinion, there is a very weak correlation between post length and post quality. Title: Re: What makes a post a HQ post. What makes a post a LQ post. ? merit - lets see?? Post by: Pmalek on January 01, 2019, 12:51:14 PM Most things were already mentioned so I will try not to repeat what others said.
That is a post that is first off all on-topic. Offers/supplements the needed information asked by the OP, offers a solution/step by step guide to a problem if it is needed. Doesn't repeat previous ideas that didn't work for the OP. Low quality posts are posted just for the sake of posting something, anything. They can still be on-topic, but usually are not and in no way to they improve an existing problem or offer any kind of help or new information. Title: Re: What makes a post a HQ post. What makes a post a LQ post. ? merit - lets see?? Post by: cryptohunter on January 01, 2019, 04:35:12 PM Okay been a bit busy so a delay - - but back now..
so I see some new points to discuss and drill down and some new good ones that I think will help us make a perfect set of comprehensive points/criteria when rewarding posts. @r1s2g3 So just to clarify... You are saying that if you read a white paper and your review just said "good project" that would be a low quality response but if satoshi read the white paper and said "good project" that would be a high quality post?? Yes that is interesting ... because really it would be nice if satoshi could expand on his reasoning but still from such a person then that would be a valuable input.. Hmmm yes I do agree with you. So how do I list this under the good post heading?? "person with known and proven expert knowledge of the specific topic giving their opinion" good way to put it? is this what you mean? so certain persons like GM VB DZ AM - just replying is valuable even if not a detailed post. I agree ... what about other people? On this part "LQ involves copying the article and providing the source while HQ involve comprehending the article and initiating the discussion on Pros and cons. LQ involves just reading and replying to the OP while HQ involve reading OP and all other replies and replying to add the things that are missing in thread." You think it is covered by this 1- new relevant information usually accompanied by observable evidence or corroborating events - that makes a new logical contribution to the discussion/debate or not quite? @NavI_027 sarcastic - I agree can be funny but do we think could have a double edged sword effect to offend or put down too? perhaps we can say humorous in a positive and cheerful way? @ETFbitcoin Yes this is without doubt a great skill I will list this one as positive for sure...I like examples of analogies for things that are hard to describe or complex concepts. conversely though do you think we can put negative if the person is capable of a complex post that provides great insight but only to those at his level or above?? no perhaps we should not put this as negative because it still has great info for the more trained or capable in that area. Ok so post length we say is not correlated to value - this could be very true .... although complex things sometimes are nice if accompanied by examples or analogies hence the touching with breaking down complex things to be consumed by less capable or not trained in that area.... for now though we leave off post length @Pmalek I agree. So I wait to see what we all think of this post and if no disagreement then I post them in them up in the OP. I didn't think we would find any more but great some additional criteria or points came in. Title: Re: What makes a post a HQ post. What makes a post a LQ post. ? merit - lets see?? Post by: annerl on January 01, 2019, 05:09:24 PM how about posts that show nude female in sexistic pose ? with no relevant content ?
like they have in aktueller kursverlauf? which are reportet to moderators and never get erased ? how about such posts ? #81243 that one and on the page 4058 all over Title: Re: What makes a post a HQ post. What makes a post a LQ post. ? merit - lets see?? Post by: cryptohunter on January 01, 2019, 05:20:32 PM how about posts that show nude female in sexistic pose ? with no relevant content ? like they have in aktueller kursverlauf? which are reportet to moderators and never get erased ? how about such posts ? #81243 that one and on the page 4058 all over yes that would come under no new relevant information and off topic for the majority of threads.... you are correct -- those are automatically assumed low quality posts. this is unless the thread or topic was on female anatomy or such. In which case for a more hands on experiences in that field of exploration there are other websites where research is much more fruitful... I have been told. So yes in 99.99% of topics here you are correct. Do you have the direct link? I will make sure to add my support to the removal process shortly after. Thanks. Title: Re: What defines a HQ post. What defines a LQ post. ? merit - Let us see what people Post by: Yeahpro on January 01, 2019, 05:35:21 PM I do not think it should be classified into high and low quality posts, but rather quality and zero quality posts.
A quality post is one which is relevant to the discussion and which contains information that at least another user could find helpful and beneficial. And a zero quality post is one which contributes nothing of value to the discussion. High quality i think should be a well detailed, and articulated post which provides expert view on a particular topic and takes a long time to put together. A quality post could be formed at the spur of the moment without exess effort. A zero quality post has no effort put in. Title: Re: What defines a HQ post. What defines a LQ post. ? merit - Let us see what people Post by: annerl on January 01, 2019, 05:48:45 PM thank you
i sent you a privat message with all the links id realy apriciate help in this case Title: Re: What makes a post a HQ post. What makes a post a LQ post. ? merit - lets see?? Post by: cryptohunter on January 01, 2019, 09:44:05 PM conversely though do you think we can put negative if the person is capable of a complex post that provides great insight but only to those at his level or above?? no perhaps we should not put this as negative because it still has great info for the more trained or capable in that area. No, especially few things simply too hard to be simplified if it requires knowledge of specific topic beforehand. For example, explaining ECDSA/secp256k1 (which used by Bitcoin) to non-programmer/mathematician pretty much impossible. And as you said, it's still useful for some people with same/higher level. Yes, I agree, this makes sense. @yeahpro This is a reasonable point we can change the headings later. I guess there are varying degrees of usefulness or value and then those of 0 value. I have speculated before that you can actually have posts of negative value too. For now I am just trying to get a rough criteria from everyone on their opinions of good and bad posts. Negative value posts are actually worse than spam that can easily be spotted and disregarded. Other than scam promotion or outright scamming these are the worst kind of posts to me. Title: Re: What defines a HQ post. What defines a LQ post. ? merit - Let us see what people Post by: r1s2g3 on January 02, 2019, 05:31:50 AM Quote 4 - The opinion of a Proven and Recognised expert in that specific field/area being discussed in the topic I think however brief word is not required. Any reply from an expert is good enough. If they give detailed reply it will be cherry on top. Quote conversely though do you think we can put negative if the person is capable of a complex post that provides great insight but only to those at his level or above?? no perhaps we should not put this as negative because it still has great info for the more trained or capable in that area. No, I guess Einstein "Theory of Relativity" is perfect example where very few understood it at that time but it does not decrease its importance. Even for "bitcoin" we still have hard time to explain who already decided it as ponzi. Title: Re: What defines a HQ post. What defines a LQ post. ? merit - Let us see what people Post by: cryptohunter on January 02, 2019, 11:34:03 AM Quote 4 - The opinion of a Proven and Recognised expert in that specific field/area being discussed in the topic I think however brief word is not required. Any reply from an expert is good enough. If they give detailed reply it will be cherry on top. Quote conversely though do you think we can put negative if the person is capable of a complex post that provides great insight but only to those at his level or above?? no perhaps we should not put this as negative because it still has great info for the more trained or capable in that area. No, I guess Einstein "Theory of Relativity" is perfect example where very few understood it at that time but it does not decrease its importance. Even for "bitcoin" we still have hard time to explain who already decided it as ponzi. This I agree does make sense. I'll alter that now. Title: Re: What defines a HQ post. What defines a LQ post. ? merit - Let us see what people Post by: cryptohunter on January 05, 2019, 08:55:10 PM I think perhaps another permutation of a LQ post is
A post that voices merely an opinion (no evidence nor corroborating events ) that a previous post stating facts or observable events is incorrect or unreasonable. In other words an empty rebuttal. Or A post that voices a rebuttal based upon unrelated evidence or other factual evidence that is not actually in opposition or preventing the earlier post being correct. In other words a faux rebuttal. there may be some actual real term for those things out there already How about those? Title: Re: What defines a HQ post. What defines a LQ post. ? merit - Let us see what people Post by: Coyster on January 05, 2019, 09:13:09 PM How about those? They may be wrong or incorrect posts,but they may not be of low quality as the posts could be properly constructed and could have opposite views with the initial post.Though such views may be wrong,and we've seen that happen numerous times here, when a member is vehemently arguing a wrong cause,but the way and manner in which he or she presents the case makes it worthy but doesn't make it correct I think it doesn't make the post of low quality except of cause if the post is totally off from the initial or previous correct post as opposed to it being a slight difference in opinion Title: Re: What defines a HQ post. What defines a LQ post. ? merit - Let us see what people Post by: suchmoon on January 05, 2019, 09:51:54 PM They may be wrong or incorrect posts,but they may not be of low quality as the posts could be properly constructed and could have opposite views with the initial post. Though such views may be wrong,and we've seen that happen numerous times here, when a member is vehemently arguing a wrong cause,but the way and manner in which he or she presents the case makes it worthy but doesn't make it correct I think it doesn't make the post of low quality except of cause if the post is totally off from the initial or previous correct post as opposed to it being a slight difference in opinion Opinions are not statements of fact and by definition can't be right or wrong. What we often confuse with opinions is their factual basis (see below). This has nothing to do with quality though. Statements of fact can be right or wrong. This also doesn't have much to do with quality. Someone could post an elaborate high-quality hoax and someone could post a poorly-expressed albeit true fact. The problem is that this is rarely so nicely delineated. We don't start all our posts with "in my opinion" although that can be implied most of the time. In some cases the poster can abuse this implication and masquerade false statements as opinions or vice versa. In some cases the reader might abuse this implication and interpret one's opinion as a statement of fact or vice versa. But again, most of the time that doesn't have much if anything to do with quality. Not liking someone's opinion or even someone being flat out factually wrong doesn't mean they can't construct a high-quality post. Where I would draw the line is a lie, i.e. knowingly making a false statement with intent to deceive, although there are some exceptions (lying to preserve privacy on an internet forum would be one such exception). By extension this may include logical fallacies. A fallacy is an error in argument/reasoning but once the error has been pointed out it may be considered a lie if it's repeated. I would probably not merit something that I know is a lie even if it's three paragraphs of impeccable Queen's English. Title: Re: What defines a HQ post. What defines a LQ post. ? merit - Let us see what people Post by: yahoo62278 on January 05, 2019, 10:03:20 PM Should we be looking for low/high quality posts or low/high quality users? This would be a good reason to bring in these "tags" i've seen mentioned.
If a guy is a bounty hunter who only posts to collect from a bounty, then IMO he would be tagged as a low quality user. If someone is always posting in mega threads only trying to get his post counts for their sig pay, they would be a low quality user. If someone is posting all sorts of technical analysis or helpful threads trying to teach users of the forum about bitcoin or other technology available for bitcoin and altcoin users, they would be considered a high quality user. Why separate them? Obviously so we aren't wasting our time reading useless threads/posts or reading the trash that a low quality poster might be posting in order to be paid. Of course we would need to devise a system in order to be able to change a users tag from low quality to high quality but if a person with a high quality tag is posting, it's more likely that their post will be read and possibly merited. Title: Re: What defines a HQ post. What defines a LQ post. ? merit - Let us see what people Post by: suchmoon on January 05, 2019, 10:09:45 PM Why separate them? Obviously so we aren't wasting our time reading useless threads/posts or reading the trash that a low quality poster might be posting in order to be paid. Of course we would need to devise a system in order to be able to change a users tag from low quality to high quality but if a person with a high quality tag is posting, it's more likely that their post will be read and possibly merited. I think it's time to change the merit display from total to earned merits. Or even to average per post. Title: Re: What defines a HQ post. What defines a LQ post. ? merit - Let us see what people Post by: cryptohunter on January 05, 2019, 11:25:34 PM They may be wrong or incorrect posts,but they may not be of low quality as the posts could be properly constructed and could have opposite views with the initial post. Though such views may be wrong,and we've seen that happen numerous times here, when a member is vehemently arguing a wrong cause,but the way and manner in which he or she presents the case makes it worthy but doesn't make it correct I think it doesn't make the post of low quality except of cause if the post is totally off from the initial or previous correct post as opposed to it being a slight difference in opinion Opinions are not statements of fact and by definition can't be right or wrong. What we often confuse with opinions is their factual basis (see below). This has nothing to do with quality though. I guess you can look at it like that...however an opinion worth hearing (HQ that has value) you would expect would be grounded on some reason and logic. Reason and logic you would expect require some factual evidence or events/experiences to analyse. If you have opinions you have not thought about enough or one that is not derived from factual experiences or evidence or at the least has some corroborating material that you can present to make a reasonable case then it is likely not worth hearing and is probably dilution/pollution to a group attempt to find the optimal answer/action. I mean as an example .... discussion on the earth being an oblate spheroid and people presenting evidence to support this and ways to demonstrate or confirm. So several people say their opinion is that is indeed a oblate spheroid for those reasons and present data. They are to me having an opinion worth listening to. Now another says in his opinion the earth is a cube and provides no supporting data or when pressed he provides data that is not related... like the ingredients of a bag of salt and vinegar crisps. I think if you got lots of those kinds of opinions on such a thread it is safe to call them LQ or low value. I guess opinions you can argue are right or wrong as they are not statements of fact.. but they are either valuable or not valuable or even of negative value through dilution and disruption. I would not expect the cube earth crisps guy to get a high merit score above the guy that said oblate spheroid and presented a ton of valid fact based supporting data. Opinions can be sensible reasonable and logical or ...not i guess.. I mean if people are rewarded and encouraged to voice any opinions with no thought or regard to them at all then they will just be a dilution and pollution to the thread. Posters should start to be of the mindset that I should be ready to back up my opinions with sensible logical reasons for having such an opinion and why they are pertinent to the discussion. Statements of fact can be right or wrong. This also doesn't have much to do with quality. Someone could post an elaborate high-quality hoax and someone could post a poorly-expressed albeit true fact. Let's think about this. In most debates (like this one) you are trying to find the optimal or correct answer/action/outcome. The value of each post to me would be the positive contribution one makes towards that goal. If people voice an elaborate hoax that actually misleads or confuses some that do not have the capacity to see through it they are net negative because they are actually the faux rebuttals I am referring to. So in relation to merit. If these faux rebuttals fool people into believing they are a valuable post in reaching the optimal truth/action/outcome and receive merit this compounds the problem further because this reinforces to others that fell for this hoax that it was a valuable post. You do not really want a system where you get high merit individuals posting convincing (to those that do not have the capacity to see the truth for themselves) hoax or for posting flawed logic and those posting valuable factual, logical and reasonable statements or answers that are contributing greatly to discovery of the optimal answer/solution getting low merit. I mean that would make merit score almost and inverse correlation with actual value. I would even say obvious spam is less negative because it can easily be discounted. The problem is that this is rarely so nicely delineated. We don't start all our posts with "in my opinion" although that can be implied most of the time. In some cases the poster can abuse this implication and masquerade false statements as opinions or vice versa. In some cases the reader might abuse this implication and interpret one's opinion as a statement of fact or vice versa. But again, most of the time that doesn't have much if anything to do with quality. Not liking someone's opinion or even someone being flat out factually wrong doesn't mean they can't construct a high-quality post. Well yes if they are factually wrong in one case they may be able to make a factually correct and positive contribution in another post. Where I would draw the line is a lie, i.e. knowingly making a false statement with intent to deceive, although there are some exceptions (lying to preserve privacy on an internet forum would be one such exception). By extension this may include logical fallacies. A fallacy is an error in argument/reasoning but once the error has been pointed out it may be considered a lie if it's repeated. I would probably not merit something that I know is a lie even if it's three paragraphs of impeccable Queen's English. Intent and motive are relevant when thinking about punishment. I do not think they are that relevant when assessing the true value of a post in it's relation to reaching the optimal truth/solution, only the content and it's contribution to reaching the optimal solution should be weighed.. The rest I can agree with. Of course I am just here laying out my views as they are now. I remain open minded and hoping for more debate. I can see no logical reason to reward and add merit (if merit scores are meant to ever correlate to value of the posters input) to either empty or faux rebuttals however elaborate and clever they may be to mislead those that do not have the capacity to find the trust through their own analysis. I mean even if they thought they were correct and not doing it to mislead. I just can't see any value in a system that allows incorrect or misleading posts to gain more rewards than those that provide real value from contributing to the optimal solution via relevant and factual presentation. Or maybe that is not what you are saying? I am not intentionally trying to pick any holes in what people are saying. I simply want to drill it down so we get an optimal definition of HQ and LQ posts. Perhaps I need to rephrase to high value and low value. Still good debate on this. I hope after it is all thrashed out and we encourage all people that really want to see merit be a score that denotes a score derived from a real meritocracy to have their part in the debate then we can form some solid basis for what is low and high quality/value. @yahoo I think your post is something that could be generally accepted as a broadly correct view but.. Motive is a hard one. Motive can have no real bearing on post value sadly and I found it hard to add it on the LQ list. As much as I agree most paid2post loving shitposters are the issue there. When you bring motive into post quality or value then you are on the same lines as ad hominem attacks. We need to evaluate their central point not their motive for making it. I agree though broadly speaking paid2post junkies trying to max out their income are a big issue. On the other hand if VB or GM lost all of their money and needed to get in on some bounties and would only post their great knowledge and experience here for btc dust we could not write their posts off as LQ until we evaluated the content. Also what you suggest about finding HQ members ( they can not even be located until you have an objective system that allows them to surface over time.. except for known and proven experts in their field i guess) and then making sure their posts get more attention could create a more efficient and powerfully positive environment however you would then stop it being a fair and true meritocracy. I mean that is probably impossible but we should strive for it if you want merit system to have the highest value it can. Title: Re: What defines a HQ post. What defines a LQ post. ? merit - Let us see what people Post by: cryptohunter on January 07, 2019, 04:53:03 PM bump
last chance for additions to either list before we try to create a criteria to match against to demonstrate good or bad post. I guess they are exhausted already? Title: Re: What defines a HQ post. What defines a LQ post?? have your say inside come and h Post by: stoat on January 07, 2019, 10:04:10 PM Spam has made this forum pointless and I unusable. Give me mod powers for 24 hours and i’ll Ban all these sig spammers myself.
It’s obvious who’s doing it and it doesn’t go by account level. There are some of these spam accounts that have worked their way up to senior and even hero. BAN THEM ALL Title: Re: What defines a HQ post. What defines a LQ post. ? merit - Let us see what people Post by: Findingnemo on January 07, 2019, 10:21:07 PM ~snip~ ~snip~ This also can be considered as spam and against the rule too,you can did that by single post too.Quote 32. Posting multiple posts in a row (excluding bumps and reserved posts by the thread starter) is not allowed. BTW I am not getting what you want to say,you are going to ban all people who is making post with 3-4 line length? Title: Re: What defines a HQ post. What defines a LQ post. ? merit - Let us see what people Post by: suchmoon on January 07, 2019, 10:24:12 PM Ban any account that makes more than five 3-4 line posts in a row. Let's start with this serial spammer: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=541928;sa=showPosts Title: Re: What defines a HQ post. What defines a LQ post. ? merit - Let us see what people Post by: stoat on January 07, 2019, 10:48:10 PM ~snip~ ~snip~ This also can be considered as spam and against the rule too,you can did that by single post too.Quote 32. Posting multiple posts in a row (excluding bumps and reserved posts by the thread starter) is not allowed. BTW I am not getting what you want to say,you are going to ban all people who is making post with 3-4 line length? Not really. I made a post. And then I replied to another post. I can make more than one post in a thread. In fact that’s actually a sign of being a legitimate poster. Oh look the spammer account farmers are ganging up on me. There are spam farmers in this thread ban them all. Title: Re: What defines a HQ post. What defines a LQ post. ? merit - Let us see what people Post by: Findingnemo on January 07, 2019, 10:51:56 PM Not really. I made a post. And then I replied to another post. I can make more than one post in a thread. In fact that’s actually a sign of being a legitimate poster. Oh look the spammer account farmers are ganging up on me. There are spam farmers in this thread ban them all. You can make multiple posts in a thread but,if you do multiple posts or replies (or whatever you call it as) in a row is not allowed.You are going to get ban if you didn't follow the rules. ::)Title: Re: What defines a HQ post. What defines a LQ post. ? merit - Let us see what people Post by: o_e_l_e_o on January 07, 2019, 11:03:39 PM Not really. I made a post. And then I replied to another post. It's not up for debate. Posting multiple times in a row is against the forum rules: Unofficial list of (official) Bitcointalk.org rules, guidelines, FAQ (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=703657.0). No one is ganging up on you for pointing out you broke the (widely known and well established) rules. If you've made a post, and want to reply to another post, the edit your original post to contain the new information. Don't double post. Simple. Title: Re: What defines a HQ post. What defines a LQ post. ? merit - Let us see what people Post by: cryptohunter on January 08, 2019, 02:00:18 AM Not really. I made a post. And then I replied to another post. I can make more than one post in a thread. In fact that’s actually a sign of being a legitimate poster. Oh look the spammer account farmers are ganging up on me. There are spam farmers in this thread ban them all. You can make multiple posts in a thread but,if you do multiple posts or replies (or whatever you call it as) in a row is not allowed.You are going to get ban if you didn't follow the rules. ::)I'm sure nobody will get a ban for this now and then. If someone did it in most of the threads they participated in then a warning, if then after they regularly did it again 3 month ban,...only after willful disobedience perm ban. We need a measured and sensible approach to genuine posters. Perm bans are to remove net negative members. The odd double post is not a huge deal. Let's focus our efforts to doing what we can to improve the board and just make it easier for good conversations and debates to take place. Now let's get back to defining a high and low value post. After consideration I guess both empty rebuttal and faux rebuttal came under the no new relevant information heading anyway. It seems we have almost exhausted our criteria ... I guess a few more days to see if anything new comes from anyone or any new reasons to remove anything that is already there. Title: Re: What defines a HQ post. What defines a LQ post?? have your say inside come and h Post by: jeromix on January 08, 2019, 01:15:34 PM Assessment will depend on the one reading the posts. I do not think that a post should be distinguisged from high quality and low quality by just the information being presented. Others had gotten their merit by bashing other people showing that they are good lifting themselves so that they will be acknowledge and get some respect especially to the merit source. Take a look on every newbie posts. Many will not going to like and instead of helping that newbie from his/her mistakes on point of view some users will going to bash that user that will definitely deprived the other user to post again. If there is any diatinguishing attributes to quality post then probably theymos has set a guidelines on how to give merits.
Title: Re: What defines a HQ post. What defines a LQ post?? have your say inside come and h Post by: cryptohunter on January 08, 2019, 02:53:20 PM Assessment will depend on the one reading the posts. That is how it is now. This will reduce that dependency on the varied and subjective opinion of what makes a good post and who they like or dislike. I do not think that a post should be distinguisged from high quality and low quality by just the information being presented. Feel free to suggest more criteria that we can use objectively and fairly so all persons have a more equal chance of being part of a true meritocracy. If you have additional suggestions that will be great because it needs to be as comprehensive as possible that is why the entire board should add anything they can think of. Others had gotten their merit by bashing other people showing that they are good lifting themselves so that they will be acknowledge and get some respect especially to the merit source. Can you explain what you mean by this? Take a look on every newbie posts. Many will not going to like and instead of helping that newbie from his/her mistakes on point of view some users will going to bash that user that will definitely deprived the other user to post again. Why would they not like being treated more fairly? and having criteria to ensure their posts are judged against the same criteria as anyone else. If there is any diatinguishing attributes to quality post then probably theymos has set a guidelines on how to give merits. If there are? .... give it more thought and start to realise this will help everyone who makes sensible, reasonable, logical contribution to reaching optimal answers/solutions and discourage ill thought out garbled word salad and bots Thanks for your post. Think it all over a bit more then reply. This is better for newbies and well everyone else if you like things fair and transparent. |