One-liner posts

[qwery_hi]

NP w/ them.

That's shocking. Almost as shocking as Dick Cheney saying "I don't have any problem with water-boarding".

 

(my first) LOL !

A lot more shocking than you choosing the fifth 4-word or shorter post in the thread to LOL immediately after saying the following.

 

The other problem with WTPs and LOLs is when people who frequently use them get selective.

 

Case in point: your recent post of a 3nt play problem in the Burlingame regional. In my opinion it was as close to a WTP as they get and there may be others who share that opinion. And yet most people didn't post one-liners, including the frequent-WTP-LOL crowd. It's hard for me to believe that they wouldn't have been derisive had someone else posted the problem. So while they're offensive quite often, they're not equal-opportunity-offense-dispensers.

It's hard for me to take offense though. I can't tell if you LOLed at my joke, at my comment because you didn't realize it was a joke, or at your joke. Or maybe some other option that hasn't even occured to me. :)

Nah, LOL is Lots Of Love. What he giving you is lots of love for such a wonderful post. Waiting for them LOL y'all.

[TimG]

snipped

Way too long; didn't read past the 2nd sentence.

[kenberg]

As noted by others, a reasonable translation of "wtp' is "I don't consider other options reasonable". I don't take it as a putdown. Lol might be a putdown, depending on context, I don't fret about it. "Agree with so-and-so" can be useful. Someone says "Of course you should lead a spade". Perhaps I should have. If several other people chime in with the same advice, I guess I really should have led a spade.

 

Often I like to hear reasons as well, but not always. And a poll doesn't always accomplish the same thing. Recently I asked about 1H-2D-2S-3C, the question was how seriously I should take the club bid. Justin said he played it as natural. It's not a "one man-one vote" situation. I was happy to have his briefly stated, and signed, view. And other views as well.

[awm]

Notice that it is possible to start polls in the forums.

 

If you want a vote on how many people would do one thing versus another, you start a poll. This is much easier and more concise than counting the "XXX WTP" and "Agree with YYY" replies.

 

If you want a discussion, it is annoying when instead of discussing the topic at hand, people use the space to tell you that your problem is not a problem, to LOL at you, and to kiss up to their favorite expert poster by agreeing with them, sometimes before they even posted a reply. Of course, it is also annoying when people change the subject and make long posts about something else in your thread.

 

And after people complained about the amount of italics and bold face in my posts, I have cut down on those (admittedly not to zero, but cut down).

[jdonn]

And after people complained about the amount of italics and bold face in my posts, I have cut down on those (admittedly not to zero, but cut down).

So since, by the current poll results, 26 people like such answers outright, 8 people sometimes do, and 10 people don't, is it fair to say it's reasonable for people to keep doing it?

[hanp]

It is very valuable to me if bidding questions receive several answers from world class players that say things like "clear pass for me", "obvious 4S", "double wtp", "agree with orlam" and so on. I often skip long answers.

 

In the B/I forum such comments are typically not useful.

 

Lately we have seen a fair number of short answers that were meant as insults. They tend to come across as such and don't make the forum a nicer place. On the other hand, if these insults were more articulate I doubt it would be any better.

[hanp]

Oh and polls are absolutely useless.

[JoAnneM]

I don't post bridge hands here because I am not an expert, and I think it is required. But I do post director and administrative type stuff, and on those posts it is always nice to have an explanation whether agreeing or disagreeing.

[TimG]

If you want a vote on how many people would do one thing versus another, you start a poll. This is much easier and more concise than counting the "XXX WTP" and "Agree with YYY" replies.

It's very important to know who is voting for which option. Counting "agree with" replies from respected posters is much more useful than looking at poll results.

[sathyab]

And after people complained about the amount of italics and bold face in my posts, I have cut down on those (admittedly not to zero, but cut down).

So since, by the current poll results, 26 people like such answers outright, 8 people sometimes do, and 10 people don't, is it fair to say it's reasonable for people to keep doing it?

Yes, people have spoken in this regard, although as I noted earlier, I am not sure you would get as many votes in favor of one-liners had the question been posed as "How would you like a dismissive reply to a serious post of yours ?".

 

Had there been only one or two votes against one-liners the only practical solution would have been to advise them to grow a thicker skin and endure it. But that number is a sizeable minority, so we might want to look for a solution that accommodates both positions.

 

In an unmoderated group such as this, the rights of those who post something that might be objectionable is protected, whereas the rights of those who don't want to see such objectionable material is not protected at all. You have to allow individuals to exercise control over replies to their posts. Making this a moderated group will solve some problems, but create quite a few of its own. I believe there is a better solution, below.

 

Examples of this kind of control already exist. On both BBO and OKBridge, a host that serves a table can be selective about who gets to play or kibitz at his table. Chat from kibitzers can be filtered on a per-player basis. It shouldn't be too hard to extend this model to this forum.

[mtvesuvius]

And after people complained about the amount of italics and bold face in my posts, I have cut down on those (admittedly not to zero, but cut down).

So since, by the current poll results, 26 people like such answers outright, 8 people sometimes do, and 10 people don't, is it fair to say it's reasonable for people to keep doing it?

Yes, people have spoken in this regard, although as I noted earlier, I am not sure you would get as many votes in favor of one-liners had the question been posed as "How would you like a dismissive reply to a serious post of yours ?".

 

Had there been only one or two votes against one-liners the only practical solution would have been to advise them to grow a thicker skin and endure it. But that number is a sizeable minority, so we might want to look for a solution that accommodates both positions.

 

In an unmoderated group such as this, the rights of those who post something that might be objectionable is protected, whereas the rights of those who don't want to see such objectionable material is not protected at all. You have to allow individuals to exercise control over replies to their posts. Making this a moderated group will solve some problems, but create quite a few of its own. I believe there is a better solution, below.

 

Examples of this kind of control already exist. On both BBO and OKBridge, a host that serves a table can be selective about who gets to play or kibitz at his table. Chat from kibitzers can be filtered on a per-player basis. It shouldn't be too hard to extend this model to this forum.

Why fix something if it aint broken? Some people value one liners, the others should just read on to the next post. In addition, the rephrasing you are suggesting is like false advertising. It's like instead of saying "Would you like some mushroom sauce?" you say "Would you like some fungus?"

[sathyab]

Some people value one liners, the others should just read on to the next post.

So you don't have any problem with SPAM at all then ?

[mtvesuvius]

Some people value one liners, the others should just read on to the next post.

So you don't have any problem with SPAM at all then ?

SPAM is worthless garbage sent by people and companies that you don't know. One liners are simply someone's opinion, they cared enough to share their opinion... Whether it's right or wrong, rude or considerate. If you don't find them valuable, just read on or you can ask them to elaborate, I'm sure they would be happy to.

[sathyab]

Some people value one liners, the others should just read on to the next post.

So you don't have any problem with SPAM at all then ?

SPAM is worthless garbage sent by people and companies that you don't know. One liners are simply someone's opinion, they cared enough to share their opinion... Whether it's right or wrong, rude or considerate. If you don't find them valuable, just read on or you can ask them to elaborate, I'm sure they would be happy to.

The companies or individuals who send you SPAM might disagree with you. They care to share and boy do they share :) They'd tell you the same, just use the DELETE key.

[mtvesuvius]

Some people value one liners, the others should just read on to the next post.

So you don't have any problem with SPAM at all then ?

SPAM is worthless garbage sent by people and companies that you don't know. One liners are simply someone's opinion, they cared enough to share their opinion... Whether it's right or wrong, rude or considerate. If you don't find them valuable, just read on or you can ask them to elaborate, I'm sure they would be happy to.

The companies or individuals who send you SPAM might disagree with you. They care to share and boy do they share :) They'd tell you the same, just use the DELETE key.

So then next time the prince of Nigeria e-mails you asking for your help in transporting 10 million dollars, you can e-mail him back and ask him to elaborate on why he thinks you should do so, and to explain why other alternatives are wrong :).

[jdonn]

But that number is a sizeable minority, so we might want to look for a solution that accommodates both positions.

I think the solution is to ignore posts that are in a format you don't like. Filtering posters doesn't solve anything imo. Other people will still quote people you have blocked, and posts that are in reply to those people will make no sense to you, or may even be misinterpreted to have a totally different meaning. I think that would be sticking your finger in the leak in the dam and watching six more leaks burst out.

 

I mean let's be real. Some people don't like any short post. Some don't like LOLs. Some don't like lots of bold or italics. Some don't like bad grammar. Some don't care about the opinions of young/old people (take your pick). Some don't like lots of emoticons or yellow smiley faces. Some don't like curse words. Some don't like tough problems posted in B/I. Some don't like crazy bidding ideas as the solution to problems. And for every person that doesn't like any of those things in particular, there are probably just as many who don't care and even more who like them.

 

Read the posts you want to. Don't read the ones you don't. If you accidentally read one you don't like, you should accept that you have lost 15 seconds of your life and move along to the next post. Any solution beyond that is making a mountain out of a molehill.

[sathyab]

But that number is a sizeable minority, so we might want to look for a solution that accommodates both positions.

I think the solution is to ignore posts that are in a format you don't like. Filtering posters doesn't solve anything imo. Other people will still quote people you have blocked, and posts that are in reply to those people will make no sense to you, or may even be misinterpreted to have a totally different meaning. I think that would be sticking your finger in the leak in the dam and watching six more leaks burst out.

 

I mean let's be real. Some people don't like any short post. Some don't like LOLs. Some don't like lots of bold or italics. Some don't like bad grammar. Some don't care about the opinions of young/old people (take your pick). Some don't like lots of emoticons or yellow smiley faces. Some don't like curse words. Some don't like tough problems posted in B/I. Some don't like crazy bidding ideas as the solution to problems. And for every person that doesn't like any of those things in particular, there are probably just as many who don't care and even more who like them.

 

Read the posts you want to. Don't read the ones you don't. If you accidentally read one you don't like, you should accept that you have lost 15 seconds of your life and move along to the next post. Any solution beyond that is making a mountain out of a molehill.

In the solution that I have in mind, other people can't quote any one that you have blocked in a given thread. Someone has to take the trouble of starting a new thread and manually duplicating all the replies in the new thread.

 

People do have preferences about who they'd like to hear from. That's the reason Caller-Id was invented. As a society we're moving toward a model where we exert our preferences in every thing we do. Why should the forum be an exception ?

[TimG]

In the solution that I have in mind, other people can't quote any one that you have blocked in a given thread. Someone has to take the trouble of starting a new thread and manually duplicating all the replies in the new thread.

I'm not sure what you are suggesting.

 

If I start a thread, no one that I have can post to that thread?

 

If someone I have blocked is quoted by someone who I do not have blocked, I can only read part of the post? That would likely make it difficult to figure out what is going on in the post. Or does the whole post get blocked because someone I have blocked is quoted? What of someone else quotes the quoted part?

[sathyab]

In the solution that I have in mind, other people can't quote any one that you have blocked in a given thread. Someone has to take the trouble of starting  a new thread and manually duplicating all the replies in the new thread.

I'm not sure what you are suggesting.

 

If I start a thread, no one that I have can post to that thread?

 

If someone I have blocked is quoted by someone who I do not have blocked, I can only read part of the post? That would likely make it difficult to figure out what is going on in the post. Or does the whole post get blocked because someone I have blocked is quoted? What of someone else quotes the quoted part?

I don't have the solution figured out in exact detail. But this is a well understood problem in computer science: a cluster of nodes where a sub-set is either trusted or distrusted by another sub-set of nodes. Companies working on social networking have to go to elaborate lengths to solve this problem. But there are cheaper solutions which get you reasonably good approximate solutions.

 

Better yet, why not use Facebook ? I'm new to Facebook, but I know that users who have your permission in a given network can write to and read from your "wall", which serves as a semi-public bulletin board.

[hotShot]

Blocking user is only half a good idea.

 

There are users where part of their posts are a great source of information while at other occasions they are just LOLing. If you block this user you lose all his posts.

[sathyab]

Blocking user is only half a good idea.

 

There are users where part of their posts are a great source of information while at other occasions they are just LOLing. If you block this user you lose all his posts.

That's the choice a user can make, if he has the tools to do so. At present, we don't have such mechanisms available.

[orlam]

Notice that it is possible to start polls in the forums.

 

If you want a vote on how many people would do one thing versus another, you start a poll. This is much easier and more concise than counting the "XXX WTP" and "Agree with YYY" replies.

 

If you want a discussion, it is annoying when instead of discussing the topic at hand, people use the space to tell you that your problem is not a problem, to LOL at you, and to kiss up to their favorite expert poster by agreeing with them, sometimes before they even posted a reply. Of course, it is also annoying when people change the subject and make long posts about something else in your thread.

 

And after people complained about the amount of italics and bold face in my posts, I have cut down on those (admittedly not to zero, but cut down).

Polls are not the same as know who would vote for which option. Even between Frances and Mikeh I would be curious which of the two thinks it is an obvious 3S bid, and who would bid 3H, as I may know from other posts from which general assumptions they might be coming from.

 

If you are annoyed because you frequently look up a thread where this only one new one-liner post, then maybe you are checking the forums too frequently.

[jdonn]

People do have preferences about who they'd like to hear from. That's the reason Caller-Id was invented. As a society we're moving toward a model where we exert our preferences in every thing we do. Why should the forum be an exception ?

Because an incoming phone call disturbs you from your day whereas you read the forums at your own leisure?

 

Because phone calls are directed at a particular number whereas forum posts are simply laid out for the public to read?

 

Because the forums are free to use???

 

I honestly can't imagine going through life spending much time worrying about stuff like this. Is this why people have so many heart attacks and so much stress in life? Sure I'm glad to have the convenience of caller id. But if it vanished tomorrow I wouldn't be lobbying to get it back. I would happily go through life answering the phone and accepting what comes.

 

Here's a thought. Decide whose opinions you like. Set up an email list with only those people where you send them any problem you like. Rinse and repeat. Enjoy.

[helene_t]

If someone can state his opinion in one line instead of ranting a whole page to achieve the same, then I appreciate it. Much like in conversations where the most powerful answer to a question is "yes" or "no", or the most powerful contribution to a debate may be a smile or a nod.

 

I suppose it's just a matter of taste but I happen to prefer short posts. I also happen to dislike rhetoric questions and but have no problems with sexually explicit content and sarcasm. I dislike colors and lots of questionmarks but have no issues with boldface, and smileys are generally a plus.

 

I certainly wouldn't favor censoring, or even encouraging self-censoring, based on my personal taste.

[sathyab]

People do have preferences about who they'd like to hear from. That's the reason Caller-Id was invented. As a society we're moving toward a model where we exert our preferences in every thing we do. Why should the forum be an exception ?

Because an incoming phone call disturbs you from your day whereas you read the forums at your own leisure?

 

Because phone calls are directed at a particular number whereas forum posts are simply laid out for the public to read?

 

Because the forums are free to use???

 

I honestly can't imagine going through life spending much time worrying about stuff like this. Is this why people have so many heart attacks and so much stress in life? Sure I'm glad to have the convenience of caller id. But if it vanished tomorrow I wouldn't be lobbying to get it back. I would happily go through life answering the phone and accepting what comes.

 

Here's a thought. Decide whose opinions you like. Set up an email list with only those people where you send them any problem you like. Rinse and repeat. Enjoy.

Mailing lists do not scale well when the number of participants rises. They're being replaced by news groups even for intra-company communications. Mailing lists are used mainly to communicate critical messages while others are posted to news groups in several companies in Silicon Valley that I know of.