To prop or not to prop

[Didacus]

actually, positive props are now offensive to me, so i demand that there be no positive props.

I'm offended that you're offended and demand there be props immediately!

[Credo in Deum]

The fact that we're making this much of a fuss over props shows we should just leave them in the past. Plus I like that Lil Red reached the highest number of props before the prop system went kaput.  It will be her legacy on Phatmass.  

[Nihil Obstat]

I am of the opinion that having props allowed us:

• To thank posters for a good post without interrupting a discussion.
• To keep, over time, a rough and inexact estimate of a member's contribution to discussions on the site.
• A way for other members to quickly identify particularly valuable contributions within a thread.
• A non-threatening way for new and/or more timid members to participate in a discussion (i.e. by propping) without exposing themselves to unwanted criticism, which for some people is a pressing concern.
• A way to positively reinforce good forum habits and etiquette.

I think we can do fine without negative props. They were not used nearly as often as positive props, and the contributory effect was not as worthwhile. 

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

PROPS ARE FOR ACTORS. 

*Ducks for cover*

[superblue]

The fact that we're making this much of a fuss over props shows we should just leave them in the past. Plus I like that Lil Red reached the highest number of props before the prop system went kaput.  It will be her legacy on Phatmass.  

 that is a negative prop for making a big fuss over other peoples fusses.

[Gabriela]

I am of the opinion that having props allowed us:

• To thank posters for a good post without interrupting a discussion.
• To keep, over time, a rough and inexact estimate of a member's contribution to discussions on the site.
• A way for other members to quickly identify particularly valuable contributions within a thread.
• A non-threatening way for new and/or more timid members to participate in a discussion (i.e. by propping) without exposing themselves to unwanted criticism, which for some people is a pressing concern.
• A way to positively reinforce good forum habits and etiquette.

I think we can do fine without negative props. They were not used nearly as often as positive props, and the contributory effect was not as worthwhile. 

I agree. And also, I just spoke with someone who has decided to spend the last year or so just lurking around on Phatmass. That Phatmasser says that props are the only way s/he participates in the phorum anymore, because s/he doesn't want to post.

[AccountDeleted]

Let's answer this poll with these questions in mind:

1. Will eliminating props help foster more replies to posts?

2. Will eliminating props be better for us, spiritually?

3. Will keeping props make it more reassuring for people posting?

4. Will keeping props provide valuable feedback to help visitors evaluate different posters?

1.No

2. Yes

3. No

4. No

 

[veritasluxmea]

I agree with Nihil. Back in the day when forums were popular I was a member of a popular anime and video game forum with lots of active members, and they, although with all other secular forums I checked out, all had a prop system. (not always called that but same difference). It keeps things honest and transparent. 

Here's a suggestion though: You can see who negatively props something. How about when you give a negative prop you're required to give a reason why, just a word or sentence? Eh, no negative props would be easier on some personalities so I'd be fine with that too. 

Edited September 13, 2015 by veritasluxmea

[AccountDeleted]

I agree with Nihil. Back in the day when forums were popular I was a member of a popular anime and video game forum with lots of active members, and they, although with all other secular forums I checked out, all had a prop system. (not always called that but same difference). It keeps things honest and transparent. 

Here's a suggestion though: You can see who negatively props something. How about when you give a negative prop you're required to give a reason why, just a word or sentence? 

Well, in that case, you should also have to say why you gave something a positive prop, as there are cliques on this forum who only prop their 'friends'.

Edited September 13, 2015 by nunsense

[veritasluxmea]

Well, in that case, you should also have to say why you gave something a positive prop, as their are cliques on this forum who only prop their 'friends'.

I stand by my statement of explaining negative props only. (although that's not a bad idea to do it for both... it would really keep things transparent! But negative props are more important to explain. A "normal" post getting a neg prop can confuse people or even be upsetting). 

People tend to prop what they agree with, and make internet buddies with people they agree with. So... It would follow someone they agree with, who is also their friend and they notice a lot, "gets the props". I doubt they're going around purposely looking to prop their friends and down vote their enemies. But even if they are, what does it matter? If someone/many people only want to prop their friends or internet buddies, who cares? Heh, maybe we should bring back props so people can have opportunities to learn to chill. 

[AccountDeleted]

I stand by my statement of explaining negative props only. (although that's not a bad idea to do it for both... it would really keep things transparent! But negative props are more important to explain. A "normal" post getting a neg prop can confuse people or even be upsetting). 

People tend to prop what they agree with, and make internet buddies with people they agree with. So... It would follow someone they agree with, who is also their friend and they notice a lot, "gets the props". I doubt they're going around purposely looking to prop their friends and down vote their enemies. But even if they are, what does it matter? If someone/many people only want to prop their friends or internet buddies, who cares? Heh, maybe we should bring back props so people can have opportunities to learn to chill. 

If we want to 'chill' maybe we should just leave things as they are now? 

[dUSt]

I agree. And also, I just spoke with someone who has decided to spend the last year or so just lurking around on Phatmass. That Phatmasser says that props are the only way s/he participates in the phorum anymore, because s/he doesn't want to post.

Well maybe s/he will post now.  

[Credo in Deum]

You should revert the entire forum back to the first Phatmass phorum platform.  That would be fun! 

 

[AccountDeleted]

Well maybe s/he will post now.  

I prop this! 

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

positivity is for hippies. Props are detrimental for our humility. The word hypocrite comes from the greek word for actor, and actors thrive off the applause of the crowd and credos for how good there acting is. Seriously ya'll. Not saying that your all actors but lets think and pray about this seriously, our salvation could be at stake.

Let it be known that even if all of the phatmass crew diverge into other ministries i will stick with you till the bitter end dUSt unless of course you become an anti christ.

Your ministry including just here on the forums board has saved me time and time again and born much fruit in my life with Christ.

Who needs props, we got Jesus, the Holy mother and the angels and saints living and dead.

Edited September 13, 2015 by Tab'le De'Bah-Rye