I don't understand why certain people are having a hard time understanding this. blondie got it, why can't the rest of you?
Phytotron wrote:I don't really see the point in [spoiler] tags, either. Where I've seen them in use—aside from places where they're used to actually hide actual spoilers—they're mostly used as a gimmick for people to put stupid shit in. As for the "tldr" argument, if you need a "tldr," either as a writer or a reader, you need to change how you write (be more concise) and/or read (learn to friggin' read, you low-attention-span nits!), not lazily fall back on some forum device.
Actually what I was suggesting was not meant for JUST spoilers (that is a very specific context).
You're right, spoiler tags are used as a gimmick to add in stupid shit (sometimes). To be fair, that does happen (just as any post has the potential to have stupid shit in it).
Though apparently I didn't explain myself concisely
enough for you:
- In the case of the context I provided, I would be using the bbcode to shorten the length of my post significantly, simply because of how I respond to people directly. This means that my post would basically look like:
Code: Select all
@Phytotron: [show/hide button]
@Lucifer: [show/hide button]
@otherPerson: [show/hide button]
And that is only one of many contexts possible - the bbcode itself is very versatile and doesn't HAVE TO be only for spoilers (or stupid shit).
Another context (that I've actually coded for another forums website) is an 18+ / nsfw bbcode; in which users were allowed to share questionable content but the button would prompt the user and force them to say they are 18+ or it wouldn't show the content - it includes a disclaimer to say "you hereby take all responsibility for anything you might be offended at" that the user agrees to before seeing the content. It solved a lot of problems.
That being said, what I will be hiding in my posts is just more detailed information. Consider an essay; it has a thesis. One could use it to leave the thesis visible, and the essay hidden. The users that are unable to "read (learn to friggin' read, you low-attention-span nits!)", will appreciate this kind of reduction in post size.
This was literally an answer to those people who couldn't tell the difference between something that should be summarized, and something that CAN'T be summarized (because it isn't the same message at that point - info is missing).
I can assure you that I wasn't "lazily" falling back on this (I wrote the darn code - I went out of my way to NOT be lazy and to give people options).
But, if you can do a good job in summarizing this very post for me - show me how I could have written it better while still retaining all the information - then by all means, I will LEARN something and be able to write differently. You can't expect me to learn if you can't teach.
. . . . . . . PLEASE READ THIS SMALL SECTION . . . . . .
If you're going to be "tl;dr" or otherwise complain or just think this is stupid shit based on the length of the response - then so be it; you needn't post a response to tell me to drop anything because nothing needs to be dropped. The following is just a response to what Lucifer said, simple. You can say he's baiting me - I don't care. Either you want to read what's being said, or my post ends right here for you.
. . . . . . . THAT IS ALL . . . . . .
First I'd like to say that you need to get over your obsessions and attempts to perpetuate an environment of negativity around my posts; that is flaming.
JUST SO WE'RE CLEAR: refer to my response to Phytotron to make yourself aware of other uses for a very versatile bbcode - this isn't just for "spoilers". The function of the code defines it's purpose = to hide content until chosen to be revealed. Simple. Thinking that it's just for movie/tv/book/etc spoilers is limiting yourself and your capability (open your mind).
If posters like Durf want to be able to levy the expectation that people will read their posts, then they need to write posts that people want to read.
Too bad that's not the case. The fact
remains that anyone can simply choose not to read my posts - what they don't realize is that they take the responsibility of that choice (it's like someone who chooses not to go to college to get a degree, then complains when they can't get a job because of it - it was their choice to begin with).
The thing is, I can even write the most unappealing post in the world and nothing would change, that fact
will always remain true. If you don't know what I've said, you aren't credible enough to post like you do.
Now, this doesn't mean that I'm intentionally writing posts that are unappealing to certain people - but I've explained myself clearly on why exactly this bbcode would help everyone (including those users inclined to feeling repulsed by my posts). If a user doesn't want to read my post because I happen to disagree with them - tough luck.
I don't care if it's only a five minute hack on these forums, it's a waste of time. Durf and other posters like him will grow as a person if they learn how to write shorter posts while still retaining the meaning of their longer posts.
Funny how it doesn't matter what you think anymore since it's on Tank's todo list. And yet you still try to..do what exactly?
This response is an example of a post that could have easily been shortened by not addressing everything you've said; you try to excuse yourself from it by saying that I just can't learn to write shorter posts - then learn not to write a plethora of bullshit points you're trying to make and I won't disprove each one.
Another way to put it: you have a problem with the bbcode, and yet you can't explain SIMPLY why it's a bad idea - you yourself took too many words and you made too many points - each one instigating a response.
Like I said to Phytotron - use my post (this one) as an example. Take everything I've said, and summarize it so that it is shorter while still retaining its meaning.
If you can do that, I can actually LEARN what it is I need to do when writing my posts. I'm here willing to learn - are you willing to teach? If not, then stop complaining.
This next part is why your post is just flaming:
Let's be completely honest: the purpose of this thread is so Durf can continue writing 6000 word posts and bitching and nagging at people to read them. Here's the proof that he won't actually use this feature:
Why is it that you must harass me? I get that you dislike me, but there was no reason for you to start adding flaming posts to this thread. I created this thread FOR THE COMMUNITY - but next time I'll be sure to just ignore the complaints and make no attempt to appeal to their concerns (that's what you'd prefer out of me, right?).
This isn't so I can continue writing long posts - and I'm not bitching and nagging at people to read them. I can't tell if you purposely misread what I'm saying or if you're just that delusional. People can read my posts if they want - if they choose not to, they don't have the credibility to post as if they know what I've said - simple. If you still don't understand this and think I'm "bitching and nagging" at people, then you should at least be able to understand how that "bitching and nagging" would be significantly lessened with this new bbcode (there's literally more reason for you to be for it than against it at this point - by your own reasoning).
Durf wrote:(this isn't for the intention of allowing a person who SHOULD look at the details / evidence / explanations to excuse themselves from it)
If Durf thinks YOU need to read it, he won't use his own tl-dr tag. He'll just write it.
The part that you quoted me on is in reference to when my content is hidden. So you're wrong about assuming that I would just write it (outside the bbcode). Specifically the part you quoted me on was saying that if a section is hidden, say it contains evidence for a claim I've made, then everyone has the choice to ignore that evidence and just pay attention to the claim, EXCEPT to the people who that claim matter to (basically the people that would go and say "prove it" and the people the claim is made of) would still be required to read it all (again, only for their credibility and understanding of what's going on).
The best answer to the problem Durf's trying to address is already here on these forums, it's called your "Foe List". If you put someone on that list, their posts will be kept from you. However, you will still see that they have posted. Should you see someone responding to the post in a way that indicates you should read what was kept from you, there's a convenient link to click on that will open it for you.
This is a fairly decent solution, but it doesn't help the people that WANT to read and respond to what I say but still complain about the length - not everyone is like you, not everyone will be so quick to add me to their foe list (though people can if they want), and not everyone has the same problem / with me specifically.
Let me explain again WHAT "the problem" is that I'm trying to solve:
- users complain about my posts
- sometimes not 100% of the post content is directed to those specific
users, or sometimes detailed information is not wanted by some
- users can benefit from an ability to hide sections of their content from readers until they choose to show it
- this bbcode addresses the complaints, AS WELL AS add additional functionality that can be used by EVERYONE (for any reason or problem)
This solution isn't limited to a single person, and if anything your suggestion is exactly what Phytotron is describing: "lazily fall back on some forum device."
I agree, to whom it applies, that the foe list is a solution to the problem - but the bbcode solution reaches a larger audience and addresses more problems with one solution
Durf doesn't want you to do that, of course, he doesn't believe he's anybody's foe. He's the savior, after all.
Please, stop making assumptions about me. Is that so hard to do? I shouldn't have to ask a moderator this many times. Please. This is harassment.
But this whole suggestion is just more cruft, more things that make updating/upgrading the forums harder, and for no good reason.
^ Now this one made me laugh. It doesn't make updating/upgrading harder - and suggesting it is for no good reason is only an attempt to devalue my post / thread / suggestion without any real basis or reasoning (further harassment because you're just saying that this is for no good reason, without any actual reason to back that up). But hey, if you can code something better, let's see it. At the very least, you can suggest how it can be improved; but "cruft"? Stop being a flamer (because you show no capability for logical thought even though you've claimed to have "studied" logic - stop trying to devalue what I say with such flaming posts).
. . . . . .(for those who are reading this far, that aren't Lucifer - the following is even more "tl;dr" for you, please don't go "omg Durf" and just ignore it - I'm not allowed to PM Lucifer about this stuff anyway so it will be in public either way. Either you WANT to read this, or you can just ignore it - there is nothing of value in the rest of my post except a response to what Lucifer said; that being said..). . . . . .
Cue Durf's really long really convoluted post about hating Lucifer.
Hey Durf, in honor of the fact that Leonard Nimoy died today, can you just, for once, not use such bullshit convoluted logic, strawmen, and all the other logical fallacies you commit every single time you post?
Again what was said was:
such bullshit convoluted logic, strawmen, and all the other logical fallacies
And what did you say earlier?
Just so we're clear: Spoiler tags exist so that nobody gives away the ending, or important plot points, for stories.
Spoiler tags don't apply to non-fiction writing.
When I explained the many, many uses - you limit yourself and your thinking and try to limit everyone else on these forums. Why?
If posters like Durf want to be able to levy the expectation ...
Because that was logical for you to say >_> never have I ever made it a requirement for any regular user to read what I say. What logic did you use to come to that conclusion?
it's only a five minute hack on these forums, it's a waste of time.
Spending 5mins now, to save everyone 5mins later (and increasingly more and more time saved by not having to read or even scroll as much) is logical? I mean, you're the one that studied logic - can you teach me how that makes sense?
while still retaining the meaning of their longer posts
It is illogical to think that a long post is automatically capable of being summarized - sometimes many points have to be made and if even if each one was jotted down as an incomplete sentence to be as short as possible while still retaining the meaning, it doesn't guarantee the post length will be short.
the purpose of this thread is so Durf can continue writing 6000 word posts and bitching and nagging at people to read them
Assuming that you purposely misinterpreted the purpose of the thread, how is it logical to be this flaming? Assuming you are incapable of understanding the purpose of the thread, why is it logical to post without knowing what you're talking about?
Here's the proof that he won't actually use this feature
I don't even need to explain how there's no logic in this; it was done so earlier in this post.
<insert 3 quotes here for blatant illogical assumptions - this is to keep this post short> You sure you wanna talk about logical fallacies?
more things that make updating/upgrading the forums harder
You have no clue. Again, how is it logical to talk about something you know nothing about?
Cue Durf's really long really convoluted post about hating Lucifer.
If you had some understanding of the type of response you were going to get, how is it logical to say things like "they need to write posts that people want to read" and "posters like him will grow as a person if they learn how to write shorter posts"? Are you merely trying to instigate longer posts by spewing lots of bullshit in the hopes that I address it all simply so that you can perpetuate an environment of hate towards me, using my post length as an excuse? If you aren't, then you've taken some very illogical actions. If you are, then this is moderator oppression - manipulating public opinion to generate hate for the person that you dislike only because you were proven to be abusive (sorry you expected me to be some schmuck that wouldn't be able to do that - but that's not my problem) - and if you are doing that specifically, why are you (a moderator) permitted to be this flaming?
...so what was that about:
bullshit convoluted logic, strawmen, and all the other logical fallacies
I mean, were you trying to be funny or ironic by doing the very thing you're asking me not to? Because if you're serious, you're asking to have your status revoked - your post is just blatant mistreatment without reason.
Also, if this is already on Tank's todo list, how is it logical to even make arguments against it anymore? Hm? Perhaps I missed a few lessons when "studying" logic, but I know for a fact that what you posted is illogical.
You can go ahead and say that you knew I would post a response like this - I would say that this appears to be obvious bait; posting something this hilariously self-contradictory and overall ignorant can be considered a troll attempt. To which I remind you that I respond to all bait; I take it on only to to be disappointed in the shallow intellect of the troll.
Wanna try making your post again?
Try not being flaming.
Try to add value to what you say by adding reasoning to it (reasoning within the realm of reality, not like your "proof" attempt).
Try actually being logical yourself before you try to use words because you think you'll sound smart.
Try showing everyone how you can be an example forum user, instead of the instigator of posts like these (like people have been ASKING you to be).
You don't have to try anything (there's not really anything more to be discussed on IF it will be added - but there is still room for HOW [details on how it functions exactly] ) but you can if you want - I only suggest you keep it within acceptable and expected limits.
Had another "illogical" gif - but I found this to be more amusing.