correct assessment
--- In [email protected], "Richard J. Williams" wrote:
>
>
>
> turquoiseb:
> > Because you obviously got caught unawares by the odd
> > convention we have here at Fairfield Life of limiting
> > the number of posts anyone can make to 50 per week, I
> > thought I'd explain -- for your benefit and for that
> > of any other newbies, lurkers, or people who have
> > forgotten WHY they were established.
> >
> > Back in the "Bad Old Days," a few posters at FFL tended
> > to get...uh...carried away with regard to the sheer
> > number of posts that they made to the forum. It was not
> > uncommon for these individuals to make hundreds of posts
> > a week, effectively "drowning out" other posters and
> > using volume and quantity to replace quality.
> >
> Yeah that was about the time you cross-posted to
> Usenet inviting all the misfits over there to come
> to FFL and debate with you, because you got waxed
> so bad over there that you ran away. Lol!
>
> You're the guy that brought Judy, Lawson, Alex, Vaj,
> ColdBluIce, and Shemp over here in the first place.
> You really screwed up this place and caused dozens
> of FFL TMers to go and unsubscribe to the list.
>
> In fact, you've been the most prolific poster in the
> history of TM discussion groups, with at least 10,000
> posts since 1995 when you started posting as 'Shoki',
> the Buddhist. Go figure.
>
> > I and others got tired of it, especially after the need
> > to wade through literally thousands of posts per month
> > began to drive many people off of the forum. As I pointed
> > out in a post about the month of October, 2006:
> >
> > > Total posts: 4672
> > >
> > > shempmcgurk -- 541 (11.6% of total posts made)
> > > sparaig -- 533 (11.4%)
> > > authfriend -- 482 (10.3%)
> > > new.morning -- 265 (5.7%)
> > > off_world_beings -- 253 (5.4%)
> > > turquoiseb -- 218 (4.7%)
> > >
> > > Again, the "top three" account for a third
> > > of all posts. And again, they'll take no
> > > notice of this. So far in November, they
> > > account for 47% of all posts made.
> >
> > As you can see, I was one of the offenders myself,
> > although my numbers were not much higher than the
> > current 50 per week.
> >
> > So in his infinite wisdom, Saint Rick Archer created
> > the Posting Limits, which initially limited us to 35
> > per week, and then were expanded to 50. And at first
> > even they didn't solve the problem, because a few of
> > the people listed above continued to violate the new
> > guidelines, going over the limit each week, until
> > Saint Rick finally put some "teeth" into the rule by
> > declaring, "If thou overposteth, thou shalt sit silent
> > on the Overposters Bench for a week whilst the rest
> > of us haveth all the fun."
> >
> > And it's been a resounding success. The Posting Limits
> > are "fair and balanced" in that everyone is limited
> > to the same number. No one can get so carried away
> > in trying to "win" an argument over mere opinion or
> > "get" their "enemies" and use sheer numbers to accom-
> > plish either of these questionable goals.
> >
> > Yes, it's somewhat silly, and wouldn't be necessary
> > if everyone here was an adult, and thus had some sense
> > of balance in their lives. But the Posting Limits
> > clearly ARE still necessary, as evidenced by the fact
> > that at least one of the posters on the above list
> > made 40 posts in two days this past week. In the Bad
> > Old Days, if she had been allowed to continue at that
> > rate, we would have had to wade through 140 of her
> > posts this past week. As it is, she has had to resort
> > lately to "concatenating" her posts at the end of each
> > week, squishing replies to several different posts into
> > one, hoping beyond hope that someone -- anyone -- will
> > actually read them, and that she'll be able to get
> > the "last word" in.
> >
> > Saint Rick be praised. His wisdom hath made this
> > cybersaloon a much nicer place, one in which most of
> > us have no problem squeezing everything we want to
> > say into 50 or fewer posts per week. Those who don't
> > have the self-discipline to do this wind up being
> > largely silent and frustrated at the end of each
> > "Posting Week," and I for one don't feel sorry for
> > them, especially when they seem to do this to them-
> > selves week after week after week.
> >
>
