by Travis B.
Member since:
August 25, 2006

Daily Article Limit

April 07, 2007 06:23 PM EDT
views: 247 | comments: 118
I'm starting to think this might be a very good idea for Gather. One of the biggest abuses of Gather happens when someone posts a large number of articles every single day.  Is it unreasonable to think that ten to twenty or more "articles" is a bit much?  I don't think so.  This detracts from other articles that people actually spend time on and totally abuses the point system in my opinion.  One would have hoped that self-moderation works, but it is painfully clear some simply can't or won't do that.  My proposal would be to limit the number of articles on could post every day.  Why not 4 or 5 a day per user? I really think this would offset some of the problems Gather faces and cut down on some of the complaints about Gather content.  Your comments and opinions are most welcome.
link to this page
Bookmark this post:
Facebook
Twitter
Delicious
Buzz
More

Comments: 118

Wendy HUSSEIN R. Apr 7, 2007, 6:30pm EDT
You're such a hater Travis. There's enough room for everyone. The people you're talking about are so nice. That boycott was so stupid.

(Running away now.)
Travis B. Apr 7, 2007, 6:33pm EDT
Liz..I suppose you're right, but I thought I would throw this out there anyway.

Wendy...you will pay for that stupid head!
~~ Sarina ~~ Apr 7, 2007, 6:35pm EDT
My brain only works on blonde dust. I envy anyone that can post more than one.
Travis B. Apr 7, 2007, 6:36pm EDT
So there is no number of articles that is too many? How about 18? How about 25?
Ron B. Apr 7, 2007, 6:37pm EDT
Travis I agree. "Articles" are in the eye of the reader and I find fewer and fewer worth reading. Some read like multiple, brief diary entries that describe someone's day. I think placing a daily limit is a good idea.
Lisa D. Apr 7, 2007, 6:40pm EDT
Great idea. It will never happen though. As Liz said- it's about clicks. Gather won't be paid as much by their advertisers if there aren't as many clicks and it's obvious that the games and email forwards and the like = more clicks.

Hi Ron!
Ron B. Apr 7, 2007, 6:44pm EDT
Hi Lisa. I heard you've been working on the house but what about the basement?
Rob Appell Apr 7, 2007, 6:45pm EDT
10-20 posts per person X 10-20 persons per day X 7 days per week = You figure it out...too much for me.
Kathryn E. Apr 7, 2007, 6:45pm EDT
Gosh, these days, I don't even post more than 4 or 5 a week, perhaps 6. I know this subject has been broached before, but to no avail.

it is worth a try; I do think that people who are posting multiple times per day will continue to do so.
Kathryn E. Apr 7, 2007, 6:49pm EDT
Is that you, Liz ? Liz, I hardly know ye, but by your words? Where are your spiders, your wings, your planes, your photos, your
Travis B. Apr 7, 2007, 6:49pm EDT
Kathryn..I'm not talking about "multiple"...I am talking about a whole lot more than that.
elizabeth e. Apr 7, 2007, 6:50pm EDT
I do think you are right, Travis, two or three should be the limit. Although, only an active Gatherite for three months, I have learned in that short time frame, connections of those that post real articles and those that don't...and so I scroll right past the mundane entries...it's like going into a cafeteria...I choose the soup and salad. So maybe in the end, we don't need a quota...I don't know.
Lisa D. Apr 7, 2007, 6:51pm EDT
Ron- the basement is doing just fine in the midst of other remodeling adventures. It's been kind of inactive though as I can't tend to it.
Ron B. Apr 7, 2007, 6:56pm EDT
Lisa, I like your new icon but my favorite will always be the one in a bikini.
Wendy HUSSEIN R. Apr 7, 2007, 7:00pm EDT
Wow, 36 minutes and you still have a 10!
Travis B. Apr 7, 2007, 7:01pm EDT
mmm patient you must be...
4 to 5 games per day instead of 10 to 20 games per day per person still amounts to a huge load of crap.
Travis B. Apr 7, 2007, 7:02pm EDT
I agree Melissa, but I just figured would at least be worth trying to bring up the idea of a middle ground.
Jennifer F. Apr 7, 2007, 7:03pm EDT
I totally agree with you, Travis. I actually can't post one than one article every two weeks or so because I really take time in preparing them. But, right on the sign-in page at Gather.com, it clearly states: "Publish anything you wish - a story, essay, recipe, poem, your imagination's the limit". Therefore, it could be considered false advertising if all the sudden arbitrary rules were posted on publishing things. I think I remember something about original content when I enrolled, but maybe the policy has changed. Does anyone know if the rules at Gather have become more relaxed? I seem to remember reading much more poetry when I first joined Gather than I see now.
Dame Ruth, Chief Executive Elitist D. Apr 7, 2007, 7:06pm EDT
But gee, Trav.. a limit of four or five a day would eliminate half of the "Good Every Hour on the Hour, Gather" articles, to say nothing of the "it's 2:00 o'clock and I only got 973 points today. Please come and give me more" entries. How would we survive without them? It could *gasp* turn Gather into a place for writers, forgodsake, and nobody wants that...especially the management!
Apryl Just Apryl Apr 7, 2007, 7:07pm EDT
Liz is right, it's all about the clicks, you raise a good point. % is my weekly total nowadays! here's a ten for your wisdom
Christine Zibas Apr 7, 2007, 7:08pm EDT
I think you are right on the money, Travis. I had to stop getting emails of notifications from my friends because some folks put so much out there in one day...and yes I have gotten rid of some friends like that. Still, I would prefer a limit to say 5-7 per day. Surely that is enough for anyone.

If those folks have so much to say, then they can spend a little time reading other people's work and comment on that!
Travis B. Apr 7, 2007, 7:08pm EDT
"Therefore, it could be considered false advertising if all the sudden arbitrary rules were posted on publishing things."

Thanks for dropping in J ennifer.. I'm pretty sure that there is a difference in moderating the volume of articles posted, versus the actual content. Both of which should be addressed IMO, but as Liz noted it probably isn't in the best interest of their bank account to do so. I suspect to that a lot of people would totally lose what little minds they have if they couldn't participate in "name your favorite feminie product" anymore.
Ron B. Apr 7, 2007, 7:11pm EDT
Betcha Lisa nails you for that one.
People actually publish ten to twenty "articles"? Are they two line games or something? Gather must love them. It churns the stats like crazy.
Travis B. Apr 7, 2007, 7:16pm EDT
mazhar...I know why you wouldn't consider a limit on the number of articles one could post, but we won't go there. Do I think it would kill gather? No way would it. people might actually have to read or look at the work of a braoder range of gatherers, but it wouldn't kiil it at all.
Travis B. Apr 7, 2007, 7:17pm EDT
Charles..perhaps we should all strat doing 25 articles a day. I wonder what that would look like.
c.l.m. 180Ëš Apr 7, 2007, 7:18pm EDT
if anyone has time to post in such hugh numbers ... well ... let's just say they have too much time on their hands ...

or they are the cut & paste junkies ... junk being the primary word ...

4-6 posts a day (not including comments) would be sufficient in any world ... but then how would we earn all our credit points so quickly?
Jody Says Apr 7, 2007, 7:19pm EDT
Travis, my poor disillusioned friend, you are trying to apply sane, rational thought to an obvious problem. It'll never work, rationale gets checked at the door here, inflated egos and attitude run amuck, and the bi-partisan mentality will never change. It is a good idea, but it is yours, and therefore it will never float. Much like the proverbial turd in the punchbowl.
Travis B. Apr 7, 2007, 7:19pm EDT
"but then how would we earn all our credit points so quickly?"

I'm sure that would be the biggest lament of all.
Madame Donna C. Apr 7, 2007, 7:21pm EDT
If articles were, imagine this, properly assigned to groups where they belonged and the tags accurately identified the topic and content, that would help immensely.

Games would go to groups like "Your Games Here", instead of showing up in groups like "Fiction Addiction".

And with tags like: "games, name this, only fun" no one would have to click on things they don't want to see. Alas, never will happen.
Jody Says Apr 7, 2007, 7:24pm EDT
My little experiment yesterday, was interesting, I knew what "topics" my "articles" were going to be, and churned out five I think, in less than an hour. It wasnt difficult to do at all, they required little thought, and only a few lines of type. Most of them hit 30 or so comments each, I had time answer others and post comments all over the place, all the while IM'ing another member.
☃ Aunt Shanny Apr 7, 2007, 7:28pm EDT
I turned off my notifications of my connections' postings. Even those of us home all day cannot keep up with the articles of 300 people, give or take a few.

That being said, I have not really had a problem with my various connections posting multiple articles in one day. It doesn't prevent my viewing of the items I am looking to read. So no, I really do not support a limit. I think some people on here supplement their income and NEED those points/cash. I am glad to help them out with a comment/10 star thrown their way, even if it's on 20+ articles each day.
Jody Says Apr 7, 2007, 7:29pm EDT
A thought- an instant message board, or chat room doesnt require huge amounts of bandwidth, they could set up a couple for the "chatters", and the socialites, that would be the ideal place for the breakfast club. I wonder how prolific William would be with his comments if there were no points involved? Is he genuinely interested in everyones day, or is he the ultimate point master?
Travis B. Apr 7, 2007, 7:30pm EDT
"I think some people on here supplement their income and NEED those points/cash."

so you believe their "needs" supercede the needs of everyone else?
☃ Aunt Shanny Apr 7, 2007, 7:31pm EDT
The "need" to not read something they don't want to?
Jennifer F. Apr 7, 2007, 7:32pm EDT
Once Ed Nudelman wrote an article about trying to limit articles to one a week. That way only someone's very best work would be published. I don't see how anyone can produce more than three real articles in a day. By article, I mean something that has some research and editing behind it; or some creative energy that is really original.
Lori Cee Apr 7, 2007, 7:34pm EDT
jody, what was your 'experiment' supposed to prove?
Travis B. Apr 7, 2007, 7:34pm EDT
"By article, I mean something that has some research and editing behind it; or some creative energy that is really original."

setting the bar a little high aren't we there Jennifer? :D
I totally favor Madame Donna C's method and have in fact been saying that for months to no avail. I think if Gather did channels this would be a far less contentious place. Imagine on reading games, politics, first chapters etc. when you go to their channel. Oh what a wonderful world it would be.
I saw it mentioned before that it was in the works to attempt to declassify all as "articles" and to limit "articles" to actual "articles."

If my addled brain serves me correctly then you would have classifications such as, article, recipe, joke, blog, etc. This way you can filter what you want and do not want to see.

In my always magnificent opinion (did I say that out loud?) this would be the best means of limiting articles and still be able to post to your heart's content.
Carol LeHane Apr 7, 2007, 7:56pm EDT
Travis,

As someone whose limited number of articles get buried in the listings so fast, they often go unnoticed except by my few loyal reader who get notified by email I'm all for both limiting the number of articles and Gather improving its search engines. They are of such limited use I suspect using Google and limiting the search to gather.com would yield more useful results for items that weren't published recently.
Damn, Travis, you sure know how to get a conversation started. I've had as much to read on this one article than I have reading fifteen average sized ones. Well, your strategy is working, I'm too tired now to post anything else.
Jody Says Apr 7, 2007, 8:36pm EDT
Lori cee, my experiment proved several things
1- people will comment on anything, even toe cheese.
2- useless blather is very fruitful, I earned a lot of points, for very little work
3- many people I have never seen, commented and played
4- many who never, or hardly ever comment on my "serious" work chastised me for wasting my talents on useless garbage.
5- the people that do this type of publishing are very protective of their turf, every one of the "articles" got nailed with low scores immediatly
6- my "serious" stuff gets nailed as soon as I publish it, I switch over to the more popular "writing" trend, and my stuff gets nailed. Conclusion- it doesnt matter what I write, certain factions dont want me here sucking up their precious points.
7- several groups, in an attempt to squelch my everpresent, and in some circles, highly regarded , and very opinionated voice, kicked my articles out to keep them from being read.
Lisa D. Apr 7, 2007, 8:38pm EDT
Not on a good day, Kathleen :D
OK, I'll settle this right now.

There shall be a new Gather dress code.


Everybody must wear thongs.
roxanne m. Apr 7, 2007, 9:14pm EDT
But Barney, my poor toes turn inwards and the things will hurt my feet..... :Þ
Audrey F. Apr 7, 2007, 9:15pm EDT
I like the channel idea. There are times when I have had a really bad day and I just want to play a game and chat with people. Other days I am more in the mood and have more energy to read the "original content" articles. People come to Gather for different reasons. That is why I like the channel idea. So that way there would be space for everybody's interests and needs.

I don't see anything wrong with the idea of limiting the daily number of articles a member can post,Travis, but I agree with those who said Gather most likely won't go for it.
roxanne m. Apr 7, 2007, 9:16pm EDT
Travis, you mean to tell me that I am not the only one who is sick of the Good Morning, Good Afternoon, Good Evening, and Good Night Gathers? Parts 1, 2, 3, and more? LOL

I know that for the most part, my articles are just mindless drivel or memories, but they are special to me. I write them to share with some people. If I get 15 responses, I am on cloud 9...I try to keep my drivel down to 1 or 2 articles a day...
Borgie B . Apr 7, 2007, 9:21pm EDT
The "serious writers" could easily create their own groups, invite only those who have the sort of "great writing" they desire, and have their own great private discussions about writing......but they choose not to do this!!

They choose to complain, complain, complain.......

why you ask?? Why do they do this??? Easy answer!! THEY JUST WANT MORE POINTS!!!!!!!!

The real writers on this site dont proclaim they are great writers, they dont make fun of people, they dont try boycotting the site......

they write....they write...they write....
they pass by the games...the stuff they dont want to read and go find great writing!!!

Yes...its not all spoon fed to them!! but in any bookstore, convention, etc. they have to look past the inferior stuff, inferior authors, crossword puzzles, posters, textbooks, etc...as well.. SO GATHER REALLY IS NO DIFFERENT THAN ANY OTHER PLACE!!!

The original idea of Gather was that those with the "articles" the majority of people on Gather wanted to read would be the most read and highest rated

THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT IS HAPPENING ON GATHER!!!

WHY DOES EVERYONE READ WILLIAM'S GOOD MORNING ARTICLES???? BECASUE EVERYONE WANTS TO!!
WHY DO GAMES DRAW SO MUCH ATTENTION??? BECAUSE PEOPLE ENJOY CONTRIBUTING TO THEM!!!

Please stop telling eveyone how brilliant you are, how great your writing is, how inferior everyone is to you, how much their work sucks compared to your work, how unoriginal and stupid everyone is!!!

Just stop comming to Gather if you hate it so much!
Jody Says Apr 7, 2007, 9:32pm EDT
You complain more than anyone here, you never write anything worthwhile, and you make it your bizness to come into places you arent welcome and leave comments that only further prove your ignorance, why dont you leave, I promise not to miss you.
Lori Cee Apr 7, 2007, 9:35pm EDT
allow me to offer #8, jody:

8) members who have been bitching and moaning about 'mindless' content had no problems commenting on your 'useless blather'.

or did your experiment go over my head too?

this whole "what you publish is clogging up the lists and bringing gather down but its okay if one of my connections publishes the 'drivel' cuz we can" is getting old. amusing, but old.
Ron B. Apr 7, 2007, 9:37pm EDT
I don't hate anything, except that Lisa changed from the bikini icon.

Excellent food for discussion. There are as many reasons for people to join gather as there are people who belong to gather. If I ruled gather, or the universe, I'd change a few things but I can't get elected. I think it's related to historic drug useage.
Gretchen Lee Bourquin Apr 7, 2007, 10:04pm EDT
Multiple fluff articles are somewhat annoying, but the more I connect with people who don't write them the less I need to weed through them. And I admit that I will play the occasional game, but I also try and leave meaningful comments on work that took some effort. What I don't do is rate games-- although if I ever came across one that took some thought I might consider it. But asking people to list different types of cheeses is not something I chose to reward on any grand scheme. This probably means I will have to earn that occasional gift certificate, but that's okay-- I still get to write and share my work. That's the more important thing anyway.
Linda B. Apr 7, 2007, 10:43pm EDT
I still follow my connections to great articles. I'm not a writer, but an avid reader. Most of my connections publish one or two articles a week. The writers enjoyed most by me are those that comment on other writer's articles.
Madame Donna C. Apr 7, 2007, 10:49pm EDT
Hi John O. Nice to see ya round if only for a sec.
Madame Donna C. Apr 8, 2007, 12:03am EDT
Need a hanky, John?
Marianne R. Apr 8, 2007, 12:18am EDT
Nice thought Travis, but it will never happen. I finally had to disconnect from a VERY nice person simply because I couldn't wade through the crap anymore. My time here is limited and I want to read what is either going on personally with my connections, a good rant or read something creative. It's much easier to browse the content from my connections now.
Carol Lloyd Apr 8, 2007, 12:47am EDT
I dont know how people can keep up with that many posts. It is almost 1am here I am still have over 200 posts to read rate and comment on. And I do read them all. But I am disabled and home 24/7 so I can see what you're saying for someone who works has children and a life outside of Gather. I personally can keep up with posting no more than 3 a day Sun evening through Thur. evening. Then no more than 5 on Friday and Saturday. But the last 3 days its been only one trying to keep up with everyones post they send me. If they can manage that many fine as by now I know the serious writers on Gather and give them more time than I do the jokes and games. Thats how I do it. But whatever works best and is fair to all. As always Ty for your post gives us all food for thought. Which leads me to the fridge to get a frozen pizza working. LOL. Night Travis take care Keep caring
Gerry Wass Apr 8, 2007, 12:54am EDT
I don't know, Travis. Part of me hates to impose creative limits but I do get weary of sorting through stuff, even though I have long since given up on the main articles list and rely only on what my connections publish. That means that I'm missing a lot of good writing by people outside my sphere. Someone like you (who still attempts to see the big picture and bring to our attention original content) must have a lot more reason than I do to be annoyed at how hard you have to work to find such work. I also wonder if it simply limits our time to read and thereby moves us all toward short articles that didn't take so much thought or work. I sometimes wonder if that isn't why my pieces get so little attention--it takes time to read them. After reading the thread you inspired, do you feel any closer to something that resolves this conflict, such as the idea of channels?
Carol Lloyd Apr 8, 2007, 12:56am EDT
Just thought of something else. I post a poll every night about PM and the responses require me to respond with more than Ty for sharing. So they keep me thinking and busy. But I published a poem couple nights ago and I got fewer comments then someone who simply says Good Morning. The Poll is fun and gets my mind working. But the poems are more than that. I write them on something that has deep personal meaning to me and when a joke or a dumb game gets comments and my thoughts and feelings dont. I sat here shaking my head with tears in my eyes. Really hurt. And that surprised me. Maybe that is what gather members want. A kind of escape that requires little of them. You asked me early in my Gather days why I didn't publish original works I know now. No one really wants to read them. And I am not going to send out mass mailings just to get someone to take the time to read something that is a piece of me.
George Corneliussen Apr 8, 2007, 7:49am EDT
Travis,
Do these articles get much of a response ? If they fall flat, my guess is that whoever is publishing them will get tired/bored and eventually stop doing it. If they are getting rated/read/commented on then , as annoying as they are, I guess we have to say, " The people have spoken".
Maria G. Apr 8, 2007, 10:48am EDT
I completely agree with sending content to the rightful group. Limiting someone's content amount...that's limiting someone's self-expression. I don't post on a daily basis, but the few articles I have posted, get little to none response, I'm unsure as to why, if they are awful I would rather know and get constructive criticism. This is the main reason I joined Gather, also to connect on a personal level, but mostly in an attempt to showcase my work and get feedback.

People already complain endlessly about everything on this site, actually since I joined I have read more articles about this subject matter than anything else. And as I usually say being part of this network is a choice.

It's difficult to keep up with one's connections and make sure to give individualized attention to everyone, but it's not impossible, I do it, but I can't say the same (so far) from half or more of the connections I've made. When I joined I was unaware of all the "drama" behind the scenes. I actually found this site to be quite useful at the beginning of my membership, and to this day although I get few responses, the select group that gives me insights and honest feedback are enough for me to put up with the rest of the bullshit that goes on at Gather.

Write on \m/
Charles D. Apr 8, 2007, 12:02pm EDT
Travis, for those who see to much, I say click, click. I continue to see some who post, post, post. To each his own. But they must know that we cannot possibly get to all. It's those who do all the posting, but rarely comment on others work. And if they do, it looks like a cut and paste. It's these gatherites that raise the eyebrow.
Jody Says Apr 8, 2007, 12:08pm EDT
Thats the point I'm trying to make Charles.
Lori, when, other than the articles I put up friday have I ever engaged in this behaivior? Never. I have also never advocated the crap thats being posted.
You need to step off and get a reality check ,chick.
Dale C. Apr 8, 2007, 12:24pm EDT
I probably would have violated the 5 postings per day rule a couple of times during the First Chapters contest, Travis. I was trying to grow a network here quickly enough for it to help me in the contest. At the same time, I only posted articles that I thought were worthwhile. I was able to post an enormous amount quickly because I had a backlog of reasonably good articles from nine years worth of zines I had written for various venues.

I'm not saying this to necessarily oppose a limit, but to say that maybe it needs to be a little more flexible--maybe on a weekly or monthly basis rather than a daily basis. Does that make sense?
Travis B. Apr 8, 2007, 3:01pm EDT
Mike, you would hear no arguement from me if YOU were writing ten articles a day. I always enjoy reading your stuff.

BTW, anyoone out there who thinks limiting the number of articles equates denying the concept of free speech should think again. Abusing a system isn't exercising free speech.
S. W. Vaughn Apr 8, 2007, 3:21pm EDT
I think limiting articles per day is a good idea. I'm rather surprised there isn't a limit already, actually.

(Admittedly, I did post something like six articles yesterday -- but it was my first time posting anything at all, and I didn't want to just have one lonely little article up there. :) I don't intend to post in batches all the time!)

Gee, it's nice to see there are trolls here too. *G* They're everywhere!
Lori Cee Apr 8, 2007, 3:28pm EDT
jody, stop taking everything so personally.
there was no hidden meaning in my words and i never said i had a problem with what you published.
i just found it amusing that the members who keep bitching about the content level and lack of quality had no problems with what you posted.
those same members bitch about williams "good morning" article clogging up the almighty list but had no problems putting your article on the list by giving you names of medication.
granted, articles of that caliber are often published to bring connections together and to have a good time like your party article for example.
but thats the reason why williams connections enjoy seeing his "good morning" article(s) everyday.
they like coming together and the more other members bitch about them, they more they band together.
some members here need to lay their holier than thou attitudes to rest and except this INTERNET SITE for what it is.
make the best of it or leave.
but leave for good this time.

end of reality check....
Travis B. Apr 8, 2007, 3:31pm EDT
I'm sure there is nothing in the world some would like more than to run off the people who want to make Gather a better place. Better to coddle and patronize people than to actually have a higher expectation I suppose..
Lori Cee Apr 8, 2007, 3:40pm EDT
i think people just want to be left alone more than anything.
Travis B. Apr 8, 2007, 3:42pm EDT
not likely to happen...
☃ Aunt Shanny Apr 8, 2007, 3:46pm EDT
And neither is a limit on article quantities I would surmise.
Travis B. Apr 8, 2007, 3:46pm EDT
maybe not, but it was accepted to Building a Better gather, so maybe someone is listening.
Jody Says Apr 8, 2007, 3:47pm EDT
Lori, what I did was to go as far out in left feild as I could, and publish the stupidist things I could think of, the people that are my friends knew it was a sacastic poke at what is going on, and commented as such, they werent condoning it, they were just playing along. Its not personal with me, far from it, as I have said before, I'm just having fun. And one line articles were crap, really bad crap, but people came and played, even as I left tags like "points for me" and "stupid games". There really was a point to all of it, and not the literal points for posting, I really dont need them, we're getting by okay without them.
☃ Aunt Shanny Apr 8, 2007, 3:50pm EDT
Yeah, it's cool when "certain" members post stupid games/one liners/greetings.
Travis B. Apr 8, 2007, 3:51pm EDT
Shannon..you never heard me say that...
Lori Cee Apr 8, 2007, 4:43pm EDT
i noticed that too, shannon. its almost like their purpose here supercedes anyone elses.



jody, exactly! again, i have no problem with what you published. i have a problem with those members who believe that what they call 'crap' is okay only when its published by their connections or 'friends'. you said there was a point to it all. but doesnt williams connections prove a point when they continue to max the comments on his thread to the point where he needs to publish a part II and sometimes a part III?

'....my friends knew it was a sacastic poke at what is going on, and commented as such, they werent condoning it, they were just playing along.'

so thats allowed but a thread where people genuinely come together everyday to enjoy each others company is considered 'crap'. hmmmm....
Travis B. Apr 8, 2007, 4:47pm EDT
"so thats allowed but a thread where people genuinely come together everyday to enjoy each others company is considered 'crap'. hmmmm...."

Too much of it most certainly is and don't give me any of that mess about being genuine. I've had people tell me they will just post even more of the crap simply because they have been called out about their abuse. point whoring, point prostituting, lowering the bar, pandering to idiocy..whatever you want to name it...it is just that.
Lori Cee Apr 8, 2007, 5:06pm EDT
'too much of it most certainly is....'


travis, im starting to realize that. i think i would much rather be connected to groups than members sometimes. that way, and this is only with the hopes that people are moderating their groups, i would see the content that i want.
Jody Says Apr 8, 2007, 5:29pm EDT
Lori, a place where people come together each day to enjoy each others company is called a chat room, this place is by no ones definition a chat room. It isnt set up to operate that way, hence the need to keep starting new threads, when the old ones get slow. No, its not crap when done properly, chat rooms are very popular and fun to use, this is not a chat room, never has been, it is a place to write articles and get feedback on them.
Terry S. Apr 8, 2007, 7:27pm EDT
This obviously was a short, but good article. Or should I say thought spoken aloud?
Travis, it was a great thread to read.
Jean E. Apr 8, 2007, 7:30pm EDT
I don't know how folks do more than one good article a day - but I guess I'm slow. Jean
Travis B. Apr 8, 2007, 7:31pm EDT
Thanks Terry...one wishes it weren't necessary, but since some "adults" around here can't self-moderate when it comes to posting "articles", it at least needs to be discussed.
Travis B. Apr 8, 2007, 7:45pm EDT
Actually TJ..posting limits are not a new option for discussion boards. I used to help moderate a board of about 10,000 very active users and although there were no points to be handed out, people would often abuse the system to collect "number of comments" accumulted, which would artificially raise their membership status. i think our limit was ten or something a day and then when people abused this priviledge by making it so very obvious as to what they were doing, the restriction was furthered by reducing it to five and then sometimes less than that.
Tamela R. Apr 8, 2007, 7:51pm EDT
I think you are 100 percent right! As much as I love each and everyone of you...I don't need to know everytime you have a thought. I'd suggest gathering them up and at the end of the day...telling me all of them! Then I can get on with my life instead of gettin email reminders to read yours!
Jody Says Apr 8, 2007, 8:26pm EDT
TJ, you write articles, ones that are about something, not that I always agree with them, but they are at least thought provoking.Thats the point, most of the others are strictly for the point totals, and are technically against TOS.
Travis B. Apr 8, 2007, 8:30pm EDT
Jody is right and I'll say this one more time or however many times it takes...It certainly says something when a teenager can do something that some "adults" here simply refuse to do and try to rationalize that fact away with one idiotic reason or another.
J. C. Apr 9, 2007, 1:38am EDT
Travis, it's a great idea. I don't think gather will do it, but it is a great idea.

Amber, you are an idiot child.
Timothy V. Apr 9, 2007, 1:59am EDT
Depends on how you define " article "

Games, jokes and " Good Morning Gather " don''t fall under the definition of " article "

BTW, when you scroll down on your homepage, you have the option called " write and article" . It doesn't say ' post games, jokes and Good Morning Gather '

Time for a major overhaul here.
Timothy V. Apr 9, 2007, 2:04am EDT
And that guy actually published 29 so called " articles " on one day.
Lisa D. Apr 9, 2007, 2:32am EDT
I spent time with my family today for Easter. One family member was playing a letter game and he was looking for a specific something and had moved through the alphabet and was on the letter "R."

It was my nephew. He is 10 years old.
Lisa D. Apr 9, 2007, 3:12am EDT
One of the things that I believe is a misnomer in this whole problem is that some folks believe that it's only a vocal handful of us who feel this way. If you pay close attention to all the different articles and the responses, you'll find MANY who think the same way. They may be much more quiet about it and only put their two cents in here and there but the numbers are large.

People want change. The place has turned into myspace and it will continue to go downhill from here with nothing but games and email forwards and freebie notices. The folks who take the time to write something orginal and get only a few responses to it are speaking up and they won't stick around. You can replace them with more "myspacers" but there won't be enough money in that to sustain the place in the long run. They are here to take, not give.
Dolphi D. Apr 9, 2007, 5:22am EDT
For me even one article per month seems a very high limit. I wonder how people get inspiration to write 5-6 articles per day! At that rate the more than 250,000 members at present can produce more than a million articles per day. Terrific!
Dolphi D. Apr 9, 2007, 5:38am EDT
A decade ago I read somewhere that the volume of written material produced by the humankind during the 50 or so years far out-volumed the entire productivity of all the prior generations put together. Now the internet and online publishing must have enabled us to make another mega leap during the last ten years! Think of the difference from the stone age and the electronic age! I presume the storage capacity of the bursting servers would be the ultimate physical barrier for the recklessly creative human race. But, by then, the bionic storage media might give a tumultuous turn to the present challenges. The answer is in the very rapid guzzling power to the human mind to consume the written word.
Dolphi D. Apr 9, 2007, 5:47am EDT
Anyway, good article, Travis! I hope every one will give a chance to everyone else to bask in the ephemeral glory of published extravaganza.
Lisa M. Apr 9, 2007, 10:54am EDT
I liked Jody's idea of a chat area - but I don't think it would work for these threads unless there were points involved to encourage the use of this area vs the article threads. Perhaps the moderaters of the chats would get points? and anyone logging in would get so many points for adding to the chat...