Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[MultiMillionMiler]

I’m noticing this thread is now the focus from MMM in one thread.  Same argument but different thread.

Don't worry, when I get to 1000, you know with my numbering OCD I'll make sure it will stay exactly at 1000. Maybe I-ll go back and delete some low level "I agree" or "fair enough" replies to cancel out my new posts. Or I could delete a post and copy and paste the content back into one of my previous posts near it..etc. Or is any of that against the forum rules?

You know I can change that number to whatever I want, right?

So every now and then after 1000, would you agree to revert it back to 1000? That would also help stop certain users from constantly bringing up my post count.

[Max Rockatansky]

I’m noticing this thread is now the focus from MMM in one thread.  Same argument but different thread.

Don't worry, when I get to 1000, you know with my numbering OCD I'll make sure it will stay exactly at 1000. Maybe I-ll go back and delete some low level "I agree" or "fair enough" replies to cancel out my new posts. Or I could delete a post and copy and paste the content back into one of my previous posts near it..etc. Or is any of that against the forum rules?

You know I can change that number to whatever I want, right?

So every now and then after 1000, would you agree to revert it back to 1000? That would also help stop certain users from constantly bringing up my post count.

A lot of us (including me) argued to remove post counts completely after several people in your age demographic kept trying to pad their’s.

[JoePCool14]

I thought that was just people recounting where they already had been, not that they actually drove somewhere they normally wouldn't just to add the county.

But that's part of what roadgeeking is: driving new roads to see new roads instead of driving the same ones over and over again. TM makes it easier to keep track and find new roads to take.

A lot of us (including me) argued to remove post counts completely after several people in your age demographic kept trying to pad their’s.

I'm going to continue to argue against removing it. I don't care how many people come in obsessed with post counts. They can be useful for seeing at a glance of how active each user is. I also don't like removing something from everyone because one person couldn't handle it. That's been a pet peeve of mine since childhood.

I still think the stats page should come back, but maybe you shouldn't have access until you reach a certain amount of posts or days since account registration.

[Scott5114]

I thought that was just people recounting where they already had been, not that they actually drove somewhere they normally wouldn't just to add the county.

Dude, driving somewhere you normally wouldn't to fulfill X travel goal is what this whole hobby is.

A lot of us (including me) argued to remove post counts completely after several people in your age demographic kept trying to pad their’s.

I would probably find a display of the lowest route number a person hasn't been on to be a more useful proxy for experience than post count, to be honest.

[Max Rockatansky]

I thought that was just people recounting where they already had been, not that they actually drove somewhere they normally wouldn't just to add the county.

Dude, driving somewhere you normally wouldn't to fulfill X travel goal is what this whole hobby is.

A lot of us (including me) argued to remove post counts completely after several people in your age demographic kept trying to pad their’s.

I would probably find a display of the lowest route number a person hasn't been on to be a more useful proxy for experience than post count, to be honest.

This would actually speak to experience with a huge degree of accuracy.

[Molandfreak]

I'm going to continue to argue against removing it. I don't care how many people come in obsessed with post counts. They can be useful for seeing at a glance of how active each user is. I also don't like removing something from everyone because one person couldn't handle it. That's been a pet peeve of mine since childhood.

I still think the stats page should come back, but maybe you shouldn't have access until you reach a certain amount of posts or days since account registration.

Why should someone be concerned with the number of other posts a user has instead of the quality of the post being read?

[Max Rockatansky]

I don't refuse to drive on US highways and limited access routes.

So consider you down for the freeway portion of Alfred Harrell Highway?  How you even going to get there considering no limited access highway or US Route reaches it?

[Scott5114]

I’m noticing this thread is now the focus from MMM in one thread.  Same argument but different thread.

Don't worry, when I get to 1000, you know with my numbering OCD I'll make sure it will stay exactly at 1000. Maybe I-ll go back and delete some low level "I agree" or "fair enough" replies to cancel out my new posts. Or I could delete a post and copy and paste the content back into one of my previous posts near it..etc. Or is any of that against the forum rules?

You know I can change that number to whatever I want, right?

So every now and then after 1000, would you agree to revert it back to 1000? That would also help stop certain users from constantly bringing up my post count.

I would agree to revert it to 997. Or 1002. Or 58.

There used to be a guy here who was overly particular about his post count ending on a round number when he signed off for the night. I used to add 1 to his post count at 3 am just to fuck with him.

[JoePCool14]

I'm going to continue to argue against removing it. I don't care how many people come in obsessed with post counts. They can be useful for seeing at a glance of how active each user is. I also don't like removing something from everyone because one person couldn't handle it. That's been a pet peeve of mine since childhood.

I still think the stats page should come back, but maybe you shouldn't have access until you reach a certain amount of posts or days since account registration.

Why should someone be concerned with the number of other posts a user has instead of the quality of the post being read?

Post count isn't always an accurate read on someone, but it is another useful tool in the tool box of determining the value of a user's contributions or knowledge. It's more useful on other, larger forums where you can't always keep track of all the most active users.

[Roadgeekteen]

I have said before it doesn't take as long as you think to make a mere 23 posts in 1 day.

It takes a lot longer to make 23 good posts than 23 shitposts, though. And if you have the time to be making 23 posts, chances are most of them aren't very good.

My favorite posters on this forum are the ones that post new stuff I didn't know already. That kind of post is usually so lengthy and well-researched that there is just not enough time in the day to get 23 of them put together. Maybe that's because it requires lots of research digging up old maps and newspaper articles, or maybe that's because it involves going down to an active construction site and taking a bunch of pictures.

If I wanted more half-assed posts with kneejerk opinions in them, I can write those myself.

A little high of a standard for fictional highways don't you think? I am sure 99 percent of proposed plans would never be considered realistic after all of the research you are suggesting. Is there something wrong with drawing numbers on a map cause it looks good visually? After all, that is the counter argument for preserving natural areas and not building new highways, because the area without the strip of roadway "looks nicer".

I don't give a flying fuck about fictional highways. If it was up to me, I'd ban anyone with a majority of their posts there. It's not the main point of the forum.

So you would ban Fritz Owl? Fictional highways is actually my favorite branch of the hobby, although I do enjoy the other parts as well. I am not as knowledgable about roads as I'm young and haven't been to as many places as other users have.

[Roadgeekteen]

I have said before it doesn't take as long as you think to make a mere 23 posts in 1 day.

MMM, I have days where I post that much. But since I actually have a life and other things I like to do, it's not every day. My post per day average was closer to yours when I was younger, but now it's much lower (around 6 posts per day). But other people post tons per day, just don't be annoying and you should be fine.

[Scott5114]

I have said before it doesn't take as long as you think to make a mere 23 posts in 1 day.

It takes a lot longer to make 23 good posts than 23 shitposts, though. And if you have the time to be making 23 posts, chances are most of them aren't very good.

My favorite posters on this forum are the ones that post new stuff I didn't know already. That kind of post is usually so lengthy and well-researched that there is just not enough time in the day to get 23 of them put together. Maybe that's because it requires lots of research digging up old maps and newspaper articles, or maybe that's because it involves going down to an active construction site and taking a bunch of pictures.

If I wanted more half-assed posts with kneejerk opinions in them, I can write those myself.

A little high of a standard for fictional highways don't you think? I am sure 99 percent of proposed plans would never be considered realistic after all of the research you are suggesting. Is there something wrong with drawing numbers on a map cause it looks good visually? After all, that is the counter argument for preserving natural areas and not building new highways, because the area without the strip of roadway "looks nicer".

I don't give a flying fuck about fictional highways. If it was up to me, I'd ban anyone with a majority of their posts there. It's not the main point of the forum.

So you would ban Fritz Owl? Fictional highways is actually my favorite branch of the hobby, although I do enjoy the other parts as well. I am not as knowledgable about roads as I'm young and haven't been to as many places as other users have.

I quickly found out I'm the one who's most militant about that point of view on the staff, so it's not like a ban of fictional-only posters is going to happen anytime soon.

You're old enough that you can start really traveling now and getting to see the real thing. I was your age when I entered my 77th and final Oklahoma county. Believe me, getting to see the world in person is a lot more fun than reading about roads on a forum, and you learn a lot more about a place seeing it yourself instead of hearing about it second hand.

[Molandfreak]

I have said before it doesn't take as long as you think to make a mere 23 posts in 1 day.

It takes a lot longer to make 23 good posts than 23 shitposts, though. And if you have the time to be making 23 posts, chances are most of them aren't very good.

My favorite posters on this forum are the ones that post new stuff I didn't know already. That kind of post is usually so lengthy and well-researched that there is just not enough time in the day to get 23 of them put together. Maybe that's because it requires lots of research digging up old maps and newspaper articles, or maybe that's because it involves going down to an active construction site and taking a bunch of pictures.

If I wanted more half-assed posts with kneejerk opinions in them, I can write those myself.

A little high of a standard for fictional highways don't you think? I am sure 99 percent of proposed plans would never be considered realistic after all of the research you are suggesting. Is there something wrong with drawing numbers on a map cause it looks good visually? After all, that is the counter argument for preserving natural areas and not building new highways, because the area without the strip of roadway "looks nicer".

I don't give a flying fuck about fictional highways. If it was up to me, I'd ban anyone with a majority of their posts there. It's not the main point of the forum.

So you would ban Fritz Owl? Fictional highways is actually my favorite branch of the hobby, although I do enjoy the other parts as well. I am not as knowledgable about roads as I'm young and haven't been to as many places as other users have.

I quickly found out I'm the one who's most militant about that point of view on the staff, so it's not like a ban of fictional-only posters is going to happen anytime soon.

You're old enough that you can start really traveling now and getting to see the real thing. I was your age when I entered my 77th and final Oklahoma county. Believe me, getting to see the world in person is a lot more fun than reading about roads on a forum, and you learn a lot more about a place seeing it yourself instead of hearing about it second hand.

Lol you must really hate me then. Fictional highways are exactly the kind of mindless things I enjoy reading about just to escape from real life a bit, even FritzOwl's nonsense is good for a laugh once in a while. Not everyone is interested in just being a highway news bro 24/7.

[roadman65]

MMM don’t take it personally.  Yes, we tell you straight, but your not disliked as much as your persistence is not appreciated.

We welcome input on here and would like to see you interact, but not being ridiculous when you do and rehash the same proposals and rebut the same rebuttals after every critique you get.

You want to see the world, travel yourself. May I also suggest a virtual Google tour, or check out AA Roads on the roads photos. Alex posts nice photos of the different roads to show coverage of many US highways whether interstate, US, state, county, or municipal.

[JoePCool14]

It may also be worth noting that the AARoads' slogan is "See the roads before you go." Food for thought.

[Max Rockatansky]

I have said before it doesn't take as long as you think to make a mere 23 posts in 1 day.

It takes a lot longer to make 23 good posts than 23 shitposts, though. And if you have the time to be making 23 posts, chances are most of them aren't very good.

My favorite posters on this forum are the ones that post new stuff I didn't know already. That kind of post is usually so lengthy and well-researched that there is just not enough time in the day to get 23 of them put together. Maybe that's because it requires lots of research digging up old maps and newspaper articles, or maybe that's because it involves going down to an active construction site and taking a bunch of pictures.

If I wanted more half-assed posts with kneejerk opinions in them, I can write those myself.

A little high of a standard for fictional highways don't you think? I am sure 99 percent of proposed plans would never be considered realistic after all of the research you are suggesting. Is there something wrong with drawing numbers on a map cause it looks good visually? After all, that is the counter argument for preserving natural areas and not building new highways, because the area without the strip of roadway "looks nicer".

I don't give a flying fuck about fictional highways. If it was up to me, I'd ban anyone with a majority of their posts there. It's not the main point of the forum.

So you would ban Fritz Owl? Fictional highways is actually my favorite branch of the hobby, although I do enjoy the other parts as well. I am not as knowledgable about roads as I'm young and haven't been to as many places as other users have.

I quickly found out I'm the one who's most militant about that point of view on the staff, so it's not like a ban of fictional-only posters is going to happen anytime soon.

You're old enough that you can start really traveling now and getting to see the real thing. I was your age when I entered my 77th and final Oklahoma county. Believe me, getting to see the world in person is a lot more fun than reading about roads on a forum, and you learn a lot more about a place seeing it yourself instead of hearing about it second hand.

Lol you must really hate me then. Fictional highways are exactly the kind of mindless things I enjoy reading about just to escape from real life a bit, even FritzOwl's nonsense is good for a laugh once in a while. Not everyone is interested in just being a highway news bro 24/7.

Saying “bro” to is a good way to make everyone in all walks of life hate you. 

[MultiMillionMiler]

I’m noticing this thread is now the focus from MMM in one thread.  Same argument but different thread.

Don't worry, when I get to 1000, you know with my numbering OCD I'll make sure it will stay exactly at 1000. Maybe I-ll go back and delete some low level "I agree" or "fair enough" replies to cancel out my new posts. Or I could delete a post and copy and paste the content back into one of my previous posts near it..etc. Or is any of that against the forum rules?

You know I can change that number to whatever I want, right?

So every now and then after 1000, would you agree to revert it back to 1000? That would also help stop certain users from constantly bringing up my post count.

I would agree to revert it to 997. Or 1002. Or 58.

There used to be a guy here who was overly particular about his post count ending on a round number when he signed off for the night. I used to add 1 to his post count at 3 am just to fuck with him.

I guess I'll take 1002. Although 997 is also nice as it's the largest 3 digit prime number...

[MultiMillionMiler]

I don't refuse to drive on US highways and limited access routes.

So consider you down for the freeway portion of Alfred Harrell Highway?  How you even going to get there considering no limited access highway or US Route reaches it?

I'll drive on non-limited access roads to get to another as long as they are decent. It's not that far from I-7 (excuse me CA 99).

[1]

One thing I don't know is whether setting a user's post count to a negative number causes the user to see ads again or not. (Ads are shown for 0-2.)

[MultiMillionMiler]

Maybe a word count would be better, as you can reply to 10 people in 1 long post, or reply to 3 people separately in 3 posts each a sentence long. Word count would take this into account and be a better indicator of contribution.

[webny99]

You can also say a bunch of nothing in a lot of words, or something worthwhile in very few words.

[1]

Maybe a word count would be better, as you can reply to 10 people in 1 long post, or reply to 3 people separately in 3 posts each a sentence long. Word count would take this into account and be a better indicator of contribution.

I've had an idea for a while that "count" would be increased by log2(characters) of non-quoted material. As long as 0-character posts are prohibited, it would work well. Unfortunately, I don't think the forum software allows it.

[MultiMillionMiler]

Here's a good idea. I don't know what Scott would think of this though:

Normal Posts: 1 per post
Long ass quotes: Negative .5 per post, it's so annoying trying to read through those.
Fictional Highway Topics: 2 per post
Fictional Highway Posts with visual maps: 3 Per Post.
FritzOwl quoting and answering your question: 5 Free Points

Suggestions and Questions section: 1.5 posts.

[Max Rockatansky]

I don't refuse to drive on US highways and limited access routes.

So consider you down for the freeway portion of Alfred Harrell Highway?  How you even going to get there considering no limited access highway or US Route reaches it?

I'll drive on non-limited access roads to get to another as long as they are decent. It's not that far from I-7 (excuse me CA 99).

What about those curves on Alfred Harrell Highway?  They are way worse than the PA Turnpike. 

[1]

Here's a good idea. I don't know what Scott would think of this though:

Normal Posts: 1 per post
Long ass quotes: Negative .5 per post, it's so annoying trying to read through those.
Fictional Highway Topics: 2 per post
Fictional Highway Posts with visual maps: 3 Per Post.
FritzOwl quoting and answering your question: 5 Free Points

Suggestions and Questions section: 1.5 posts.

Can't be automated. How long does a quote need to be to be "long ass"? Also, why does Fictional get more than regular? Especially as this would apply to both the person proposing and the people responding. In addition, how can the software tell a visual map from an Internet meme?

I do know of one other forum that has a "Forum Games" board where those count as 0. I wouldn't recommend doing that here, though; our games, especially the photo ones, are more on topic than theirs.

Also, there are some posts (sparker's sound wall rant, NE2's 13/69/420/666 thread and history of state numbering system threads) that should count as at least 4 each. Length is common to these, but it's also common to Rothman's repetitive updates to the the lowest number you haven't been on (this forum counts characters pre-processing, so code tags are included in character count), which probably shouldn't count as multiple, but the software has no way of knowing if going by length.