Jump to content

Font size, 30-second break, word-count limit...

kking

By kking,
in No Holds Barred Political Forum

 Share Followers 2

Font size, 30-second break, word-count limit...  

47 members have voted

  1. 1. Are you in favour of removing or severely restricting the feature that allows changes in font size?

    • Yes, I want it removed.
      17
    • No, I want to be able to change font sizes in my posts
      31

  2. 2. Are you in favour of imposing a 30-second break between posts IN THE SAME THREAD

    • Yes, I think a lot of one-sentence posts could be compiled into a single post to keep conversations coherent.
      28
    • No, I want to post in a rapid-fire style so that my opponents are overwhelmed by my intellectual assault
      19

  3. 3. Are you in favour of imposing a word-count limit per post. It would be roughly 1000 words.

    • Yes, I am in favour of a word-count limit.
      25
    • No, there should be no limit on how long a post is.
      22

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 123
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

Cannonpointer

Cannonpointer

Posted
Posted
On 4/4/2020 at 10:25 AM, leftwinger said:

Easy solution:

 

Put the people you don't want to read on ignore. Even a grade schooler could figure this out. Are right winger this stupid?! Yes. And they're whining sissies.

NOT.

 

I have 123urout on iggy, because of his obnoxious siggy size.

 

Still shows up - your advice fails.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BeAChooser

BeAChooser

Posted
Posted

 

Quote
  • I am in favor of a word count limit.  It cuts down on cut-&-paste junk and forces a person to cogently create their own thoughts on a matter.

 

It's easy to detect cut and paste junk, Skans.   And then ignore it.   But limiting the word count will make it twice or three times as difficult to prove something.    And without that proof, thoughts have little to no value.   Because everyone here has "thoughts".  This forum is full of errant thoughts, most of them bogus and most of them in the form of one-liners which you're perfectly ok with allowing.     Only a few posters on this forum appear to know how to do research and back up their thoughts ...their opinions ... with proof.   And most of them are conservatives.  So it seem to me that what you recommend would make the conservatives who actually can debate leave the forum ... then leftists can chat in one-liners about The Party and socialism.   Word limits is one of the chief problems with Lucianne's site.  That an allowing only one comment per thread.  Is that next around here?

Link to post
Share on other sites
BeAChooser

BeAChooser

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, maineman said:

There are very few people on here who I hate

 

You've said "Blacks in Maine don't hate me... they hate republicans... just like I do. I hate them so much I dream of serving on firing squads that execute them for treason.   It is my greatest fantasy... to watch the blood spurt from republicans on this site."  And yet, you've said you want to "line" us "sorry motherfuckers up against the wall" and start putting bullets into us.    You prove once again you're nothing but a LIAR, COWARD.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BeAChooser

BeAChooser

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Imgreatagain said:

You actually are a very smart person. I respect that. 

 

He's not nearly as smart as he thinks he is, Imgreatagain.   If he were, he wouldn't have blabbed every detail of his life on an internet forum like this.   If he were, he wouldn't now be hiding behind the ignore filter to avoid facing me in debate.   I can link you to past debates I had with him so you can see what sort of debater he's like and how they turned out.    He is not worthy of the respect you give him.   If he's "smart", it's wasted on him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BeAChooser

BeAChooser

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, kking said:

Well, there's a very narrow majority in favour of a word limit...

 

Shouldn't something like that require a super majority?   Or is this a tyranny of the majority ... what the left wants?   Our Founders fought that possibility, you realize, kking.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Imgreatagain

Imgreatagain

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, BeAChooser said:

 

He's not nearly as smart as he thinks he is, Imgreatagain.   If he were, he wouldn't have blabbed every detail of his life on an internet forum like this.   If he were, he wouldn't now be hiding behind the ignore filter to avoid facing me in debate.   I can link you to past debates I had with him so you can see what sort of debater he' like and how they turned out.    He is not worthy of respect you give him.   If he's "smart", it's wasted on him.

When I say “smart” I mean he’s not a troll. He participates in lukewarm debates. 
I DO think that his efforts would be better served on a website that he pimps his wife out.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
skews13

skews13

Posted
Posted
On 4/4/2020 at 11:23 AM, kking said:

This will be up for three days. 

 Severely restricting or removing font size?

 

I can see limiting it to something no larger than three or four times the text size here.

 

Time limiting? I have no opinion on that one way or the other.

 

I'm for limiting word count in personal content. Not so much for posted articles unless they go into tl;dr territory.

 

Long articles should be a couple of paragraphs and the url.

 

To be honest king, i've never seen this to be a problem here except for intentional trolling.

Link to post
Share on other sites
kking

kking

Posted
  • Author
Posted
7 minutes ago, skews13 said:

 Severely restricting or removing font size?

I can see limiting it to something no larger than three or four times the text size here.

That would be the restricting: lower the max size.

7 minutes ago, skews13 said:

I'm for limiting word count in personal content. Not so much for posted articles unless they go into tl;dr territory.

Yeah, that's mostly where it would be applied. But worst case scenario with regular posts: when you run out of room, you put 1/2 on your post and then continue with the second one. And perhaps it will encourage some people to be more concise. 

 

7 minutes ago, skews13 said:

Long articles should be a couple of paragraphs and the url.

 

To be honest king, i've never seen this to be a problem here except for intentional trolling.

You're right. Which is shown by the mixed results across the three questions...we aren't adamantly in favour one way or the other. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
123urout

123urout

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Cannonpointer said:

NOT.

 

I have 123urout on iggy, because of his obnoxious siggy size.

 

Still shows up - your advice fails.

Its not the quantity of my siggy, its the quality of it that you hate.I agree that numbering posts are good.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Chuck!

Chuck!

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Annoyed Liberall said:

I would be more inclined to limit the size of signatures.

Some of them are so huge.

It's totally disrupts the flow of a thread.

 

Upper right corner of every signature is an "X" you can click to ignore that person's sig.
Easy Peasy

 

siggy-ignore.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • kking unpinned this topic

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Followers 2
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...