Do posters pay more attention to volume posters?

[BballTim]

This isn't about hurt feelings or lost self-worth due to being ignored as others have suggested.  It is about building an inclusive online community that promotes dialogue.  The quality of the post should matter more than the quantity of posts.   When new posters are ignored it discourages them from posting again and you get what you have now on this board....probably 10-20 posters make 70-80% of the posts.

  Just curious, but exactly what do you mean about posters being ignored? Do they start threads that never get responded to? Do threads die after they make a post because nobody else visits the thread?

[Roy H.]

There are over 300 posters with 500+ posts on this forum, if that means anything.

[Celtics18]

I don't really have anything to add right now, but I just picked up 4 really quick and easy Tommy Points by contributing to this thread.  So, I figured I'd try my luck again.  

[KCattheStripe]

Have to agree with Dons here. Are people really going to get bent out of shape because if you are a new or low quantity poster your posts aren't being responded to as much as a person who posts on the blog 10-20 times a day? Really?!?!?!?!

I mean, sorry, but simply through shear numbers the people who post more are more apt to come up with a post that will ignite something in someone to create a response. Not everybody hits a homerun with every post and warrants a response to that post and if you aren't adding something new or interesting at a time where a thread is getting traffic, chances are your post isn't going to be responded to.

Celticsblog is not a community to measure your self worth from, even though, apparently there are some that do. Celticsblog is a community to air one's voice and be heard. Does it matter if your voice is responded to or if you have one star or 33 stars or 1 Tommy Point or 5000? Does it really make that big a difference in your life because if it does, my suggestion is to get off the computer and get out more.

This is Nick. See Nick scorn. Scorn, Nick, Scorn.  

LOL

Keep it up KC and I'm going to personally make sure that I draft Wesley Matthews in every draft we have on this blog and then I'm going to photoshop him in a Boxers uniform and make it my avatar.

****....

I'm just glad you love him now!

Again this isn't about hurt feelings. It's about encouraging new members to post and increasing dialogue instead of the same small group of people make inside jokes about Wesley Matthews.

A noble goal, but I think you just invited KC to the "in crowd", and that won't fly around here.

It's true, I'm the Mo Williams of Celticsblog.

[StartOrien]

I don't really have anything to add right now, but I just picked up 4 really quick and easy Tommy Points by contributing to this thread.  So, I figured I'd try my luck again.  

EDIT: Obligatory winking emoticon to make it abundantly clear I was kidding: 

[nickagneta]

Have to agree with Dons here. Are people really going to get bent out of shape because if you are a new or low quantity poster your posts aren't being responded to as much as a person who posts on the blog 10-20 times a day? Really?!?!?!?!

I mean, sorry, but simply through shear numbers the people who post more are more apt to come up with a post that will ignite something in someone to create a response. Not everybody hits a homerun with every post and warrants a response to that post and if you aren't adding something new or interesting at a time where a thread is getting traffic, chances are your post isn't going to be responded to.

Celticsblog is not a community to measure your self worth from, even though, apparently there are some that do. Celticsblog is a community to air one's voice and be heard. Does it matter if your voice is responded to or if you have one star or 33 stars or 1 Tommy Point or 5000? Does it really make that big a difference in your life because if it does, my suggestion is to get off the computer and get out more.

This is Nick. See Nick scorn. Scorn, Nick, Scorn.  

LOL

Keep it up KC and I'm going to personally make sure that I draft Wesley Matthews in every draft we have on this blog and then I'm going to photoshop him in a Boxers uniform and make it my avatar.

****....

I'm just glad you love him now!

Again this isn't about hurt feelings. It's about encouraging new members to post and increasing dialogue instead of the same small group of people make inside jokes about Wesley Matthews.

Okay here's the joke....

When Wesley Matthews was coming out of Marquette CB's resident expert on Marquette basketball, KCattheStripe proclaimed him a first round talent and easily the sleeper of the draft. I raked Wesley Matthews ability over the coals and have not lived it down since. Since KC and I are regulars in the blogs various drafts a lot of teasing and good-natured ribbing goes on over my serious flawed former opinion on Wesley Matthews.

But come on. Are people who are familiar with each other, friendly with each other, supposed to now not act that way for fear of isolating people who visit or participate on the blog sporadically? No inside jokes for fear of alienating someone who may never return to the blog because they don't like it or because they aren't embraced like a newborn baby after making a few posts?

That's just silly.

[BballTim]

I don't really have anything to add right now, but I just picked up 4 really quick and easy Tommy Points by contributing to this thread.  So, I figured I'd try my luck again.  

  I never check my tommy points unless there's a thread about tommy points. I lost a lot of mine last year but it's likely that I had well fewer than the 1 in 5 (or even 1 in 10) ratios being thrown around.

[Interceptor]

Well, I don't have much experience with too many other forums (the only other forum I visit daily is about brewing beer, and I mostly lurk there and dream), but is this a rare thing? While I don't think it happens between 2 posters, it is as you say layers of groups.

I'd imagine this to be a pretty regular phenomena.

In my experience, it happens more often in highly specialized forums than it does in more general ones (which makes sense, when you think about it).  I visit places that are like Internet Cheers, and I also visit places that are cliquey and have a lot of big dogs who ignore the yipping of the little ones.  This place falls somewhere in between.

It's not good or bad, it just is what it is.

[FrDrake]

This isn't about hurt feelings or lost self-worth due to being ignored as others have suggested.  It is about building an inclusive online community that promotes dialogue.  The quality of the post should matter more than the quantity of posts.   When new posters are ignored it discourages them from posting again and you get what you have now on this board....probably 10-20 posters make 70-80% of the posts.

  Just curious, but exactly what do you mean about posters being ignored? Do they start threads that never get responded to? Do threads die after they make a post because nobody else visits the thread?

The fact that this thread is at six pages long and counting proves two things.   One, that posters are not completely ignored here since this has gotten lots of interest.  And two, there are posters on this thread that agree with the original question....Are high volume posters more likely to reply to other high volume posters who they 'know.' 

This just proves it is a valid issue.  Neither side is 100% right or wrong.  Rather, some people think there are too many ping-pong conversasions where high volume posters respond to each other much more than to others and hand out tommy points to people they know either in real life or via the site.

No one's feelings are hurt by this.  It just creates a crummy environment for new ideas and in my opinion it discourages some new members from sticking with the board.  I don't have stats to back this up cuz I'm not a mod.  But if we weren't allowed to make posts that are unsupported by stats, then 90% of the opinions on this site would never see the light of day.

The issue is certainly not exclusive to celticsblog either.

[Roy H.]

I visit places that are like Internet Cheers...

Is that a forum where everybody claims to know your name, but instead the focus always remains on 2 or 3 core patrons and the staff?

[ACF]

I think this is actually one of the more interesting threads that I've seen in the past few weeks. At the very least it's a break from the Bring Back John Doe Part Umpteen or Sky Is Falling - World Will Implode Tomorrow threads. When I started posting 3+ years ago, I did feel that I was not a part of the blog until some time had elapsed. I'd never really been a part of any blog, so maybe I just didn't know what to expect. I do remember, though, that I made a thread about something and hardly anyone replied. I had to let that sink in but then I figured that people only respond to stuff that interests them (Duh!) I still make threads about certain stuff but people can still "ignore" those threads. I wouldn't call the volume posters here an "in crowd" but sure, a lot of us "know" each other and kind of now where we stand with everyone. But like I said earlier, I've handed out probably hundreds of Tommy Points to any and all posters and even though there are people I like better here than others, I still hand them out when I see a post that makes me think, makes me laugh or whatever. Even though I might not usually agree with that particular poster.

[Interceptor]

Is that a forum where everybody claims to know your name, but instead the focus always remains on 2 or 3 core patrons and the staff?

OK, I'll freely admit that I could have picked a better analogy. 

[indeedproceed]

The quality of the post should matter more than the quantity of posts.

Absolutely...and very often new posters have opinions or theories that are either overly simplistic or flat out repetitive of the common opinion without managing to stand apart in a way that is interesting. Nobody really wants to reply to things that are already known, or that they apathetically agree with.

Here was your post which spawned this whole discussion:

Definitely less than Rondo got (5years x $55mil) but the market (aka idiot NBA owners) tends to overpay for young athletic scorers....see contracts of Deng, Josh Smith, Danny Granger.

The new collective bargaining agreement will be the determining factor.

Now, nobody quoted it, nobody referenced it. I can't speak for everyone...but here was my thinking:

1) Everyone knows that the new CBA will be the determining factor for all new contracts that aren't extensions. Its a valid point, but not really one I found interesting.

2) I agreed with your thoughts on NBA owners over paying athletic scorers, but I didn't want to look up the numbers on Josh Smith's extension to see where he sat.

So overall, a post I mostly agreed with, but not one I felt like commenting on, because I didn't really have anything to add to it.

However, I did find the notion of whether or not we were going to extend Green the qualifying offer to be an interesting one, so that is what I commented on. Danny Ainge has pretty firmly said he's against any contracts that run beyond the big 3's window, the only exceptions being Paul Pierce and Rajon Rondo..so I found the idea of extending a qualifying offer and maybe getting into a game of chicken with another team's management group to be an interesting one.

[FrDrake]

I don't really have anything to add right now, but I just picked up 4 really quick and easy Tommy Points by contributing to this thread.  So, I figured I'd try my luck again.  

If this post is serious then it proves my points.  Celtics18 gets four tommy points...but I've gotten none on this thread.  I'm not crying about it.  I don't care about stupid TPs.  But it shows that people respond much more so to those they know and praise them too.

If it's sarcastic then it was pointless.

[Roy H.]

I had to let that sink in but then I figured that people only respond to stuff that interests them (Duh!)

Yeah, I think content and/or a catchy title do more to generate conversation than name recognition does.  "Well-known" posters get quoted more, but in terms of interest in threads, I think it's 100% equal-opportunity.

I've seen very well-known posters start threads that die after 2 or 3 responses.  I've started threads where I put a lot of hard work into them, making what I thought was a well-reasoned argument, only to see it largely ignored.  The same happens often; it's just a fact of life.

I haven't done any research into this at all, but it's always been my opinion that posts that give a very clear "yes or no" / "Opinion A vs. Opinion B" choice are more responded to.  Also, strong, hyperbolic threads seem to get a lot of responses.  Why?  Because many threads are at their core debates, and debates are only interesting if there's something to debate about.