About pure programming threads

[rbarreira]

I think the opponents of the strcpy debate don't mind the topic itself but the length. A suggestion to the mod-team might be that the moment they feel such a thread is running in circles they invite each of the key debaters a one more time all-inclusive post that explains their position in detail, then lock the thread.

I don't get why the length is a big problem. It takes as much effort to ignore a 1-page thread as it takes to ignore a 50-page thread. That is to say, almost no effort at all (and certainly less effort than what Daniel did, creating several threads insulting forum posters and moderators)...

[Ryan Benitez]

I think the opponents of the strcpy debate don't mind the topic itself but the length. A suggestion to the mod-team might be that the moment they feel such a thread is running in circles they invite each of the key debaters a one more time all-inclusive post that explains their position in detail, then lock the thread.

I don't get why the length is a big problem. It takes as much effort to ignore a 1-page thread as it takes to ignore a 50-page thread. That is to say, almost no effort at all (and certainly less effort than what Daniel did, creating several threads insulting forum posters and moderators)...

In flat view yes. In thread view this forum is an mess full of non chess related talk that is hard to navigate around.

[hgm]

Indeed, but that is more a problem of threaded view. It is obviously no good for a busy forum like this. But as there is an alternative that does not have that poblem, I don't see a reason why it should affect the posting behavior.

[Rebel]

I think the opponents of the strcpy debate don't mind the topic itself but the length. A suggestion to the mod-team might be that the moment they feel such a thread is running in circles they invite each of the key debaters a one more time all-inclusive post that explains their position in detail, then lock the thread.

I don't get why the length is a big problem....

It's not a problem for me, just a suggestion to keep everybody happy.

[wgarvin]

I think the opponents of the strcpy debate don't mind the topic itself but the length. A suggestion to the mod-team might be that the moment they feel such a thread is running in circles they invite each of the key debaters a one more time all-inclusive post that explains their position in detail, then lock the thread.

I don't get why the length is a big problem....

It's not a problem for me, just a suggestion to keep everybody happy.

At first I liked Ed's suggestion, because it would prevent people from hitting Reply, quoting an entire message and putting a single sentence reply at the bottom of it, and doing that five times in a minute.

But after thinking about it a bit more, I realized it might just cause what would currently be several smaller posts to get combined into one LARGE post, and that might make the conversation harder to follow. Selectively replying to a one-sentence post (and deleting the big wall of quote-text it was replying too) is fairly easy, but following conversations where 8 different things are quoted one by one and replied to one by one, in the same post, might get more difficult.

It still might be worth trying but I'm not sure it would actually improve signal-to-noise ratio.

[bnemias]

but I'm not sure it would actually improve signal-to-noise ratio.

Bad SNR has been a constant on this forum as long as I've been registered. It's why I usually just read a few things here and there and rarely participate. Circular arguments, irrelevant tangents, etc.

In this case, the situation is different because it's in the Programming and Technical discussions area. I've found this sub-forum to have a much better SNR. But it seems to be devolving now too.

[Rebel]

There is another kind of fun idea I saw elsewhere. They have a special place (section) on the forum called "The Arena". When person A and B have an ongoing dispute with no end in sight person A may challenge person B to the Arena and vice versa.

In the Arena (setup and controlled by a mod) only A and B are allowed to post. It goes in 3 rounds.

Round-1 : A and B present their case.
Round-2 : A and B respond to each other regarding round-1
Round-2 : A and B respond to each other regarding round-2

Then a poll setup by the mod in charge and folks can vote and appoint a winner.

It usually generates a high quality and informative debate as no one is willing to lose and secondly there is no noise, thirdly it is an excellent reference once the topic is resurrected again later.

Furthermore it can be useful for the mods to interfere in an ongoing discussion that is going nowhere by stating: knock it off guys else proceed in the Arena.

Last, the Arena section may contain a twin thread for everybody (except A and B) who is interested in the subject.

[rbarreira]

There is another kind of fun idea I saw elsewhere. They have a special place (section) on the forum called "The Arena". When person A and B have an ongoing dispute with no end in sight person A may challenge person B to the Arena and vice versa.

In the Arena (setup and controlled by a mod) only A and B are allowed to post. It goes in 3 rounds.

Round-1 : A and B present their case.
Round-2 : A and B respond to each other regarding round-1
Round-2 : A and B respond to each other regarding round-2

Then a poll setup by the mod in charge and folks can vote and appoint a winner.

It usually generates a high quality and informative debate as no one is willing to lose and secondly there is no noise, thirdly it is an excellent reference once the topic is resurrected again later.

Furthermore it can be useful for the mods to interfere in an ongoing discussion that is going nowhere by stating: knock it off guys else proceed in the Arena.

Last, the Arena section may contain a twin thread for everybody (except A and B) who is interested in the subject.

That means fragmenting the discussion, which is not the point of a forum.

[michiguel]

[MODERATION]
Transplanted from another thread that was removed.
===

I have a question. Since you seem to be intent on getting another 24hr ban, what exactly is your plan for after that? Why not just let it go, and ignore the threads you aren't interested in.

I have a question...oh forget it... you run away from it as always

Okay, fine, I went and tracked down the 3 questions that I think you wanted me to answer. If these are not the right 3, just please post them again here. This might be the most irrelevant post I've ever made here, but here goes.

Wylie, since you seem to believe you are enlightening everyone I have couple of questions for you

1) This forum is computer + chess club as you know. I don't know if you follow other sub-forums but discussion of human + chess is frowned up on! This same group of moderators delete those threads. OTOH we have computer + no-chess allowed to roam here. It misses the most important gradient IMO which is chess.

I don't much follow the other sub-forums. Sometimes I follow this programming sub-forum, but not always. I wasn't really aware they frowned on discussion of human-human chess stuff [if that is even true?], but I'm not really sure what that has to do with anything.

2) Since you seem to really believe in the worth of strcpy() discussions, I request you to go to 'Computer Go' mailinglist and post threads like 'A note to C programers', 'Another note to C++ programers', 'How your stacks and integers OVERFLOW' etc. If it is equally worth to any game programers, they should be interested too. But I highly doubt it.

Thanks for the suggestion, but I am not interested in doing that.

3) No matter how you bend it, a computer+chess programing forum can not be a computer+programing forum. So if most here are physicsts (I am sure we have a sizable number), should we have a poll for physics+programing, a slippery slope. We might as well name this place the cccOVERFLOW forum, where your OVERFLOW questions are answered in 80 pages. I am sure I can make daily contributions of C/ASM programing questions

I'm sorry, is there a question in there somewhere? Anyway, the poll you wanted is now available, though the answer set has been phrased in a more neutral fashion. You ought to at least vote on it if you didn't already. And maybe you should occasionally post a C/ASM question here, especially if its related to your chess engine in any way? Just to spice things up a bit. Of course making a spectacle of yourself and getting banned could work too, I concede that I could find some entertainment value in that.

[wgarvin]

This transplanted text was a post from me. Miguel, can you edit [quote="wgarvin"] into it or something?

EDIT: Done, Miguel