Brohoofs in Cloudsdale Colosseum

[equerio 6,153]

I fully support this. Posts don't count and are often of little to no merit other than something spammy or just playing around in a game. Furthermore, look at this topic. We've got people posting there just to get brohoofs; We've got people with less than 20 posts and nearly 4000 brohoofs because of stuff like that; stuff with no merit, basically.

 

 

I, for one, think that brohoofs are representative of someone agreeing with a post you made or having reason to give it a brohoof; that section, and several of the topic in it, have become almost nothing but people mining for brohoofs. While brohoofs are fine, I find it a bit unfair that people can just make nothing but pointless posts to help cure their boredom/improve their brohoof count, while the areas that require a bit more thought are treated the same way. Furthermore, post count doesn't go up, so why should brohoofs? That doesn't make any sense to me. Posts are generally of low quality over there, and post count doesn't go up. 

If post count doesn't go up, neither should brohoof count. It's only reasonable.

As one of the regular counters in that thread, I know this is also addressed to me.

Now, about the things I pointed out in your post. I am there every day. And I am yet to see the member who posted there just to get brohoofs. And I really don't recall that brohoof count can influence the ranking, which is deserved by active posts.

We brohoof because we like those posts. Sometimes we brohoof just a plain number BY MISTAKE, but that doesn't happen often.

[Pastel 7,630]

So as I said in the concerned topic, I agree that having less than 500 posts and more than 4,000 brohoofs is a problem, and I agree brohoofs shouldn't count in the Cloudsdale Colosseum.

But the members concerned don't post only to get brohoofs, or at least not more than the members who don't post there. They brohoofs for the same reasons as everybody: when they like a post.

I haven't seen a brohoofed post where there's only a number.

 

Actually, I don't really like the brohoof count in itself, it's so elitist.

[M'aiq the Liar 5,804]

So as I said in the concerned topic, I agree that having less than 500 posts and more than 4,000 brohoofs is a problem, and I agree brohoofs shouldn't count in the Cloudsdale Colosseum.

But the members concerned don't post only to get brohoofs, or at least not more than the members who don't post there. They brohoofs for the same reasons as everybody: when they like a post.

I haven't seen a brohoofed post where there's only a number.

Actually, I don't really like the brohoof count in itself, it's so elitist.

If one were to be truly concerned with eliminating all elitism on this forum, we would remove the post count ranks, remove the brohoof counter, remove/hide the page view number and only have subscribers and moderators have any sort of rank/crest. Quality of post is all subjective, and I have yet to see any real evidence of people using the brohoof count to put themselves above others. This phantom problem is no more so an issue than is the post count rankings.

[ghostfacekiller39 23,860]

Quality is subjective. 

 

 

Post quality is a matter of opinion.

 

 

 

Quality of post is all subjective

 

 

I keep seeing people say this, and I know I've asked for an explanation of how the posts in the games like "Count to a Million" can be considered quality several times. 

 

Just because something's a subjective opinion doesn't mean that you don't have to back up your line of reasoning. Throwing out the "Oh, well, it's subjective" line over and over again and ignoring it when someone asks for an explanation of why you feel the posts there are of quality is basically saying you can't provide an explanation.

 

I've asked a few times for an explanation of how the posts in there are of any quality, especially since it's the subforum where posts don't go up due to the nature of what's being posted, and I've yet to receive an explanation.

[M'aiq the Liar 5,804]

I keep seeing people say this, and I know I've asked for an explanation of how the posts in the games like "Count to a Million" can be considered quality several times. 

 

Just because something's a subjective opinion doesn't mean that you don't have to back up your line of reasoning. Throwing out the "Oh, well, it's subjective" line over and over again and ignoring it when someone asks for an explanation of why you feel the posts there are of quality is basically saying you can't provide an explanation.

 

I've asked a few times for an explanation of how the posts in there are of any quality, especially since it's the subforum where posts don't go up due to the nature of what's being posted, and I've yet to receive an explanation.

It is subjective to the person. Quality of a post may mean they find it funny, or interesting, or it made them think. There are posts up there stating why smaller posts can be of "quality". Quality may not always mean the magnum opus of forum posts, it may just mean that they found it funny, or entertaining, or it contained information they found relevant. There is no standard for forum posts, so what a member finds quality is entirely up to them.

[ghostfacekiller39 23,860]

It is subjective to the person. Quality of a post may mean they find it funny, or interesting, or it made them think. There are posts up there stating why smaller posts can be of "quality". Quality may not always mean the magnum opus of forum posts, it may just mean that they found it funny, or entertaining, or it contained information they found relevant. There is no standard for forum posts, so what a member finds quality is entirely up to them.

Might I ask you, why were those subforums created, or why they have no character limit, or why post count does not increase when someone makes a post in there?

 

Why should brohoofs count when there's no character limit and post count does not increase? 

[Guest90210 3,568]

I keep seeing people say this, and I know I've asked for an explanation of how the posts in the games like "Count to a Million" can be considered quality several times. 

 

If you take a look at the Count to a Million thread, it's actually more of a General Chat as well as a counting game. Most posts aren't brohoofed blindly as you may believe. There's plenty of actual discussion going on. There have been several times when my mood was lifted in that thread alone. If that isn't worth a brohoof, then I don't know what is.

[M'aiq the Liar 5,804]

Might I ask you, why were those subforums created, or why they have no character limit, or why post count does not increase when someone makes a post in there?

 

Why should brohoofs count when there's no character limit and post count does not increase? 

I do not know, I would have them count, as there are quite a few posts that are on par, or above my personal taste in quality to those posted elsewere on the forums. Why have a brohoof counter? Why have a post counter? If most of the posts on this entire forum are just an image macro and colored text, why count those at all?

[equerio 6,153]

I keep seeing people say this, and I know I've asked for an explanation of how the posts in the games like "Count to a Million" can be considered quality several times. 

 

Just because something's a subjective opinion doesn't mean that you don't have to back up your line of reasoning. Throwing out the "Oh, well, it's subjective" line over and over again and ignoring it when someone asks for an explanation of why you feel the posts there are of quality is basically saying you can't provide an explanation.

 

I've asked a few times for an explanation of how the posts in there are of any quality, especially since it's the subforum where posts don't go up due to the nature of what's being posted, and I've yet to receive an explanation.

It's fascinating how you avoided my post, despite being addressed to you.

Oh wait, it's because I said something different than other posters, so you didn't feel comfortable changing your first post much and responding to counter-arguments.

This^^^ post proves even further that you haven't spent 15 minutes in the CTAM thread. Even periodical posters, such as Rivendare realized that there are some true quality posts there, and that we can develop a damn good discussion, and that not everything is blindly brohoofed.

Edited May 18, 2014 by equerio

[ghostfacekiller39 23,860]

If you take a look at the Count to a Million thread, it's actually more of a General Chat as well as a counting game. Most posts aren't brohoofed blindly as you may believe. There's plenty of actual discussion going on. There have been several times when my mood was lifted in that thread alone. If that isn't worth a brohoof, then I don't know what is.

Just because it makes a few people feel good does not mean that it's fair to everyone on the forums.

 

I do not know, I would have them count,

Like Miaq said, if brohoofs count in the Colosseum, so should posts, as well as a character limit, albeit a bit smaller than 20 - probably 10 or 15. That's what I'd do, at least.

 

But that's not going to happen, unfortunately, due to the nature of what's being posted in there - unless the admins decide posts should count over there, and that'd be a miracle.

 

Posts don't go up, so I don't see why why brohoofs should, too.

 

 

 

It's fascinating how you avoided my post, despite being addressed to you.

Sorry about that - I have other things to tend to than this topic, you know

 

 

 

It's fascinating how you avoided my post, despite being addressed to you.

Oh wait, it's because I said something different than other posters, so you didn't feel comfortable changing your first post much and responding to counter-arguments.

This^^^ post proves even further that you haven't spent 15 minutes in the CTAM thread. Even periodical posters, such as Rivendare realized that there are some true quality posts there, and that we can develop a damn good discussion, and that not everything is blindly brohoofed.

 

I've posted there several times - before it hit 2500, if I can recall, and no, I didn't discussion of the sort. What I do know, though, is that if one were to look at the top posters in that game, they'd find a bunch of members with a much larger number of brohoofs than post count - and I mean around 4,000 or so - and most of these are members I've frankly never seen before, and I'm on here nearly all of the time.

 

Furthermore, this - 

 

 

 

Quote 34418 Hi! :3 On the first 5 minutes,i've received 3-4 brohoofs,with one sensless post,that just had a number and a gretting on it.

 

 

Lightwing's post - he put down a number and said hi. Explain to me how that's quality discussion?

Edited May 18, 2014 by ghostfacekiller39

[Pastel 7,630]

If one were to be truly concerned with eliminating all elitism on this forum, we would remove the post count ranks, remove the brohoof counter, remove/hide the page view number and only have subscribers and moderators have any sort of rank/crest. Quality of post is all subjective, and I have yet to see any real evidence of people using the brohoof count to put themselves above others. This phantom problem is no more so an issue than is the post count rankings.

You're right, but in my opinion the brohoof count is the most elitist thing of the forum.

[ghostfacekiller39 23,860]

You're right, but in my opinion the brohoof count is the most elitist thing of the forum.

Echh. I don't think we should do away with brohoofs entirely, because it feels nice to get them, not going to lie. Maybe displaying them alongside post count instead of in a giant green box would be a bit better

[equerio 6,153]

Sorry about that - I have other things to tend to than this topic, you know

 

 

I've posted there several times - before it hit 2500, if I can recall, and no, I didn't discussion of the sort. What I do know, though, is that if one were to look at the top posters in that game, they'd find a bunch of members with a much larger number of brohoofs than post count - and I mean around 4,000 or so - and most of these are members I've frankly never seen before, and I'm on here nearly all of the time.

 

Furthermore, this - 

 

 

 

 

 

Lightwing's post - he put down a number and said hi. Explain to me how that's quality discussion?

Yeah, but it's funny how you rather answered a member who allowed you to state your first argument again. Ok, nevermind.

 

The key words are: before it hit 2500. That thread was dead before it hit 8000-9000. Since then, that thread has became something completely different. It's like when people say MLP: FIM is girly based on G3 stuff.

Lightwing apologized and changed his mind. In the CTAM thread. Look it up.

And why did we brohoof his post? Because it was his first post there, and we wanted him to feel welcomed, and encourage him to stay and hang out with us.

[ghostfacekiller39 23,860]

YThe key words are: before it hit 2500. That thread was dead before it hit 8000-9000. Since then, that thread has became something completely different. 

Even still, if you're there for the chat and camaraderie, why are people from it seemingly so opposed to removing the brohoof count in the Colosseum? Honestly, I'm not saying "DOWN WITH THE CTAM THREAD LOCK IT KILL IT DEAD," I'm just using it as an example of how brohoofs in the Colosseum are a bit unfair.

 

If you were truly there for the friends you've made in it, then why are you so opposed to this? 

 

Edited May 18, 2014 by ghostfacekiller39

[equerio 6,153]

Even still, if you're there for the chat and camaraderie, why are people from it seemingly so opposed to removing the brohoof count in the Colosseum? Honestly, I'm not saying "DOWN WITH THE CTAM THREAD LOCK IT KILL IT DEAD," I'm just using it as an example of how brohoofs in the Colosseum are a bit unfair.

 

If you were truly there for the friends you've made in it, then why are you so opposed to this? 

 

Well, chit-chat is not the /only/ thing going on in that thread, ya'know?

 

I'm opposed to it because it would prevent me from giving a sign of approval of one's post.

[ghostfacekiller39 23,860]

I'm opposed to it because it would prevent me from giving a sign of approval of one's post.

To be honest, you don't need the brohoof counter to approve one's post. Brohoofs don't really affect actual discussion too much, you can show approval just as easily by choosing to continue the discussion

 

All brohoofs honestly effect is that little green counter on your profile.

Edited May 18, 2014 by ghostfacekiller39

[equerio 6,153]

To be honest, you don't need the brohoof counter to approve one's post. Brohoofs don't really affect actual discussion too much, you can show approval just as easily by choosing to continue the discussion

 

All brohoofs honestly effect is that little green counter on your profile.

Whoops, my bad. Approval is the wrong choice of words. It's basically our version of "like" button. If I see a post that I like, I'll brohoof it. It's just that there are so many posts there DAILY (we can get up to 1500 a day sometimes), it's inevitable that there will be a lot of like-able posts too.

[M'aiq the Liar 5,804]

To be honest, you don't need the brohoof counter to approve one's post. Brohoofs don't really affect actual discussion too much, you can show approval just as easily by choosing to continue the discussion

 

All brohoofs honestly effect is that little green counter on your profile.

Your own posts disagree with this statement, you said earlier in the thread that brohoofs "show that one agrees with the post, and finds it of quality". And if all they do is effect that little green counter, why remove them from one forum section? If they are really of so little meaning, why remove them?

[DubWolf 17,264]

I'm going to leave this here. You can use it either way you'd like (support or non support). This was a quote by Chigens and Kay in a locked brohoof game.

 

"Brohooves themselves have no bearing on your worth or popularity as a member, and are simply a fun but ultimately meaningless statistic. They are intended to express gratitude, agreement, or similar sentiments without one having to make a post. Perfect for situations where you can't think of something like that to say or can't meet the section's character minimum requirement when doing so. If you want more, just get out there and start posting in topics that interest you, but please don't create meaningless threads for the sole purpose of farming them."

 

"Intended to express gratitude, agreement, or similar sentiments without one having to make a post."

Edited May 18, 2014 by Super80 Wolf

[ghostfacekiller39 23,860]

Your own posts disagree with this statement, you said earlier in the thread that brohoofs "show that one agrees with the post, and finds it of quality". And if all they do is effect that little green counter, why remove them from one forum section? If they are really of so little meaning, why remove them?

I've said it countless times, there's no character limit and things that are nonsensical are often relegated there. Just because brohoofs don't matter to me doesn't necessarily mean they don't matter to anyone on here - some people like their brohoofs, and feel they should be earned, and I find that to be a perfectly understandable sentiment.

 

 

 

Whoops, my bad. Approval is the wrong choice of words. It's basically our version of "like" button. If I see a post that I like, I'll brohoof it. It's just that there are so many posts there DAILY (we can get up to 1500 a day sometimes), it's inevitable that there will be a lot of like-able posts too.

Just because it's likeable doesn't mean you have to give it a brohoof, though - again, there's no character limit in the Colosseum. If you find something to be funny, you could easily quote it and say "lol." It isn't fair to the other sections that posts don't count in that section when brohoofs do, given the nature of that section.

Edited May 18, 2014 by ghostfacekiller39

[equerio 6,153]

Just because it's likeable doesn't mean you have to give it a brohoof, though - again, there's no character limit in the Colosseum. If you find something to be funny, you could easily quote it and say "lol." It isn't fair to the other sections that posts don't count in that section when brohoofs do, given the nature of that section.

You just basically said the definition of a brohoof, and then said "if it fits this definition, no need to brohoof it".

[ghostfacekiller39 23,860]

You just basically said the definition of a brohoof, and then said "if it fits this definition, no need to brohoof it".

 

Just because it's likeable doesn't mean you have to give it a brohoof, though - again, there's no character limit in the Colosseum. If you find something to be funny, you could easily quote it and say "lol." It isn't fair to the other sections that posts don't count in that section when brohoofs do, given the nature of that section.

All apologies, but I fail to see how you reached that conclusion from my post. 

[Doctor XFizzle 8,669]

Or how about we keep brohoofs as an option to show agreement/approval/thumbs up, but just don't have the accumulation of them counted anywhere on a person's profile. Boom, problem solved. Because I know of a place where this works.

Edited May 18, 2014 by Doctor XFizzle

[equerio 6,153]

All apologies, but I fail to see how you reached that conclusion from my post.

Read Wolfie's post, he worded it much better than I did.

Then you'll get it.

[ghostfacekiller39 23,860]

Or how about we keep brohoofs as an option to show agreement/approval/thumbs up, but just don't have the accumulation of them counted anywhere on a person's profile. Boom, problem solved.

Personally, I think it should be counted alongside posts - of course, I can agree with this as well