so are you saying that first the OP has significantly less space available for making his point in the first post, but that he also shouldn’t be able to split his post into several posts in a row, because you do neither want that?
You can make one of these things, either reduce the maximum amount of characters per post, or not allowing the OP to make several posts in a row, but not the two combined.
That would be terrible because some things just require more text, including some responses. Imagine there are several people responding to the OP and the OP can not respond back to them all bwcause he neither has enough characters in a single post available to respond to them all, nor can he make several response posts in a row…
If anything, people need to get better with formatting and structuring theiir posts, but I think that your suggestion is a terrible idea for the reasons I elaborated above.
A better fix would imo be if we could link to headings in our own posts.
Like Link to Part 1 Link to Part 2 Link to Part 3 Link to Part 4
Part 1
text…
Part 2
text…
Part 3
text…
Part 4
text…
That would give longer posts a better structure if we could put an index at the beginning of it.
Welcome to the Diablo III Community Forums. These forums are here to provide you a friendly environment where you can discuss everything Diablo III with your fellow players.
These forums are a place explicitly provided to us by Blizzard for discussing things. Why would they consider a proposal that would limit people’s ability to discuss things?
hmm, i see that not as such a big restriction;
-it’s also, i notice the most from the ‘flaw’ in different threads, but only from maybe 10 posters;
-it’s not that i hate them for it.
i have my own technique for it:
-i keep my OP rather short but transparant and then, during the postings, i elaborate. it works for me.
May I ask how I would better present something like this under your proposal? I know I am often guilty of creating lengthy topics, but it seems better to consolidate all the item suggestions in 1 topic than create a separate topic for each.
Limiting the characters per post is not something I wanted but the forum is certainly need to improve their Ignore function.
Why am I still able to see the ignored posts thru other poster’s quote? Also, why is there even has 4 months time limit for ignoring someone again? What’s wrong with permanent timeframe of ignoring someone again?
i read the post you linked;
yes, here is some compromise needed;
i would try to break this post up through 2 ways;
-starting with an attractive part.
-elaborate with more parts, after a first comment, etc…
-and, if really needed, maybe a week later, hide the unposted part in a new positive provocative way, to see if readers are actually interested in the subject.
I disagree. Some ideas are simple enough to be posted on Twitter. Other ideas require some actual nuance and complexity. The entire point of a forum is that it’s not limited to the idiotic back and forth of a text or tweet. You actually have enough space to develop an idea fully, cite sources, cite examples including math, etc.
If you don’t want to read a developed idea, then don’t read it. If you have the attention span of a gnat, fine, don’t read any post longer than two lines. That’s your prerogative, but don’t try to effectively censor the rest of us who might actually want to have a more detailed discussion by limiting our ability to do so.
This is particularly important with D4 in development. A lot of us have very strong ideas about what we want in D4 and why. I’ve written a half of dozen posts of 1-2 pages in a standard Word doc trying to outline a complex idea and discuss its merits fully. Whether I’m advocating against a system or for it, I need to define what I’m getting and and provide supporting evidence. You simply can’t provide that kind of constructive feedback by limiting the read time to 30 seconds or less.
that part is already answered, i’m not talking about reducing to Twitter size posts, far from it.
i’ll give a counter:
how many readers will even start reading several pages containing 1 post (with quotes or without)?
-this also goes beyond the goal of a forum, isn’t it?
It’s not an OP’s fault someone has a short attention span.
How an OP composes their post or the quality of content therein may be questionable, but that either translates to such threads being DOA or people at least picking out kernels to nibble on through replies.
If anything, we’re lacking the proper moderation to cut down on the same few threads being repeated over and over because someone thinks they have the newest hot take or solution that devs in the industry probably came up with years ago but deemed impractical or ineffective.
Right now we’re getting a touch of variety due to the pending PTR, but you can pretty much bet 6+ weeks into the next season it’ll just be more people prattling about trade, yet more D2 clone’isms, standard hardcores (or “fans”) crapping on casuals, the 300th Vic thread where he does what Vic does, etc…
So, while I’m all for interesting chatter, a lot of that is dependent on Blizzard actually setting the mood between more D3 content or legitimately pertinent back and forth about D4. With Covid doing its thing, it’s obvious we’re starved for both and that won’t really be changing anytime soon, and quite likely getting worse.
This is probably a rhetorical question. It’s not possible to answer with an exact count. You’d have to ask everyone what they do. I often read longer posts if the topic is interesting. Yes, the more posts in a thread, the less likely it’ll be that I’ll read all of them. I hear your point that much of the back and forth is two people arguing and name-calling back and forth, but that can be useful. Debate is how you test ideas. If an idea is bad, someone who really doesn’t want to lose an argument will point out the flaws, and that can be valuable. I still argue that the reader is capable of filtering out the garbage, skimming over it, and reading only what interests him.
Would a nested format better suit you? A format where replies become sub-threads of the parent thread and you can minimize each subthread and all it’s replies? That’s how Reddit works. I’m not intending to troll you here. I’m honestly trying to see if this format might work better for you, because it has a tool (the minimize option) to help quickly filter irrelevant sub-threads
