T Nation : Civil War
So if I understand, underscores don’t count as characters because they don’t show up? That sounds like a whole lotta not-our-fault. We didn’t code underscores to be invisible.
Also, functionally, what’s the difference between typing irrelevant or redundant words to meet the character limit vs just punching in arbitrary characters (visible or not)? Is the quality of my post really better because I took 20 characters to say what I could manage in 10? Or is it that we should just not post if our comment can’t take up at least 20 sensical and visible character slots?
I speak Italian, and Italian words are often longer than english words. If my post doesn’t make the 20 character cut off in english, can I just say it in Italian, or is that also a rule violation because I’m still getting around the character limit? If it is a violation, how could you ever enforce that without straight-up banning the use of non-English words on the site (which is impossible considering how much of english comes from non-english anyway)? If it’s not a violation, then we have a case where making my post less-intelligible to the intended reader somehow makes it more acceptable on the site. How does this improve post-quality? I could always just use longer, less familiar english words, but that’s the same issue – I’m making my post less intelligible.
It’d also be rather peculiar to have “acceptable” ways of getting around the character limit. What makes using more verbose language (or just straight up switching languages) an acceptable means of breaking the character limit rule, but simply using filler-characters not? Seems arbitrary and needless to me. If the meaning of my post is the same, but the character count is made longer, what have I actually improved in my post?
Besides, It’s all the same thing in principle – I’m artificially changing my post to get around the minimum. Are less concise posts universally superior to short posts with added filler-characters to meet the minimum? How so? I’m still trying to break the rule, I’m just being less conspicuous about it, and the conciseness of my post suffers as a result. I also waste the readers time (precious seconds of it!) by being needlessly verbose, when I could’ve just posted easily-ignorable underscores, or better yet, if I didn’t have to add anything because there was no minimum.
Clearly this character minimum is a great injustice and needlessly burdensome to the T-nation userbase, and it should be removed immediately.
3 Likes
It really is a “laugh out loud” policy. If it wasn’t for the reason behind the policy. A person’s pet-peeve.
2 Likes
I say good sirs, I do agree most heartily.
2 Likes
Just a thought, maybe add a thumbs down or a middle finger choice along with the thumbs up. I’m having to come up with a witty reply beyond 20 characters to essentially say,
“No, fuck off,” in another thread.
I feel this adjustment would improve the quality of the forums.
1 Like
From my experience with similar systems, this tends to cause a LOT of drama. Either the systems shows who gave the thumbs down and people get into “thumbs down wars” with each other, or the system makes it anonymous and then, when someone gets a thumbs down, they go on a witchhunt to find out who gave them a thumbs down.
I know reddit uses a similar system, but it’s so huge that it can get away with it. With as small of a userbase as we have, I can see it getting ugly.
But, I could be wrong. That’s just my experience.
I suppose that’s true. I mean, I don’t personally care if someone’s feelings get hurt, but I can see how that could cause issues.
Oh yeah, don’t get me wrong, there are certainly people that can deal with it, but it’s rather alarming watching someone get completely unhinged over internet points, haha.
2 Likes
Like this 
or this 
Slightly less conspicuous than adding thumbs down icon. 
EDIT: apparently on here, it’s not a middle finger, like it is on the phone. 
1 Like
Still requires 20 characters, though.
Dude just busted out “We are the World” lyrics.
You see what you and your dictatorship comrades have done, Chris?
Well, tnation has this forum for users to provide feedback, it’s explicitly asking for it - I know you don’t represent tnation but it’s a bit harsh to tell folks who take that opportunity that the company owes them nothing and they should reflect on their life LOL
The entire thread has gone down a weird path. I dont really see user support for the rule, the ban hammer is like jailing someone for a few speeding tickets and now there is just a back and forward over who is right.
Best approach would have probably been to say let things runs as is and review in a few months - I think most folks would be happy with that.
You’re right, maybe I might’ve been somewhat insensitive with my words but y’all get what I mean. I honestly don’t get what the big deal is. Everyone seems to make it sound as if its the pussification (or more appropriately, emasculation) of T Nation. Don’t get me wrong, there are certainly times where I think to myself “LOL”, I might want to type it out but is pressing “Like” instead really that hard? It seems to me that people are just resistant to change.
Or maybe some of us have been here longer than you have, and have a greater appreciation of just what exactly has changed.
1 Like