Should Couchpotato Close His Account?

[Pladio]

So potato, are you staying?

 

[lackblogger]

As you have the most post at 29,570 .

Yes, I could have included loads of posters just on post count, but I listed just those who've had a habit of back-and-forth leaving and returning, the sort-of extreme zenith of the trait.

 

[TheDart]

If you want to measure trivial crap - at least take into consideration the amount of words involved

I feel confident I'm in the top-3 at least.

I can't tell you how much pride I feel

I can't remember who once said of my contribution to the Watch - something like:

"12.000 condescending walls of text."

Not sure it was 12.000 - but it was between 10-15K, which was my post count back then.

I laughed out loud at that questionable praise

 

[lackblogger]

Oh yes, you are quite definitely at the zenith of this particular tree, that is without question.

Don't you feel sad though, losing that gorgeous stat every time you reload? You could have had the unique honour of being the first person to reach 100k.

 

[TheDart]

Oh yes, you are quite definitely at the zenith of this particular tree, that is without question.

Don't you feel sad though, losing that gorgeous stat every time you reload? You could have had the unique honour of being the first person to reach 100k.

It's a tremendous loss that I have to learn how to deal with

Especially because I know how these things matter to JDR - and the thought of having the superior post count for all to see was so, so sweet.

 

[SveNitoR]

It's very unlikely there's some kind of relationship between emotional instability and post count. That's a strange conclusion to make and likely the other way around, in that most people with low stability don't have the energy/dare to post.

If I were to hazard a guess, I'd guess having a lot of posts has a correlation with low agreeableness (don't worry much about possible negative reactions/conflicts) and high extraversion (enjoys socializing a lot).

I'd also guess there are a lot of non personality factors with a lot more effect, such as register date, family life, job/study status, amount of free time, language skills and so on.

 

[JDR13]

There's no one here that has a very high post count in relation to how long they've been a member. Certainly not compared to some of the people I've seen on other forums. There are several members over at RPG Codex that have over a million posts! I don't even know how that's possible, but they're there.

 

[bkrueger]

There's no one here that has a very high post count in relation to how long they've been a member. Certainly not compared to some of the people I've seen on other forums. There are several members over at RPG Codex that have over a million posts! I don't even know how that's possible, but they're there.

Bots, probably...

 

[JFarrell71]

There's no one here that has a very high post count in relation to how long they've been a member. Certainly not compared to some of the people I've seen on other forums. There are several members over at RPG Codex that have over a million posts! I don't even know how that's possible, but they're there.

Yeah, but 600,000 of them are just some variation of "incline"/emoticon/slur

 

[lackblogger]

Lol, I actually know the joke behind that one. Some guy was arguing with their site owner about post counts being fiddled with or something & after a few pages of drama the site owner dumped something like 1.6m post count stat on a bunch of people in the thread. I think they have one dude over there permanently locked on 666 posts as well.

 

[lackblogger]

If I were to hazard a guess, I'd guess having a lot of posts has a correlation with - high extraversion (enjoys socializing a lot).

I feel sure I'm not the only one who can instantly see an obvious flaw in this theory

 

[bkrueger]

I feel sure I'm not the only one who can instantly see an obvious flaw in this theory

You mean because social people would be more active in real life and wouldn't have the time for posting on the internet? Sounds true at a first glance.

But in fact doing things in real life is pure escapism! Such people only flee from the problems they have in the digital world.

 

[JDR13]

Lol, I actually know the joke behind that one. Some guy was arguing with their site owner about post counts being fiddled with or something & after a few pages of drama the site owner dumped something like 1.6m post count stat on a bunch of people in the thread. I think they have one dude over there permanently locked on 666 posts as well.

Say what you want about Infinitron, but the guy has a sense of humor.

 

[TheDart]

I would personally think there's too much nuance and too many factors involved to establish a useful pattern of what posting very little or very much means about the level of security people have. At least without a lot of other relevant information added.

That's without getting into how we're likely all both secure and insecure in a wide variety of ways. It's pretty hard to quantify how one person is "insecure" overall - and another person is "confident" overall. Especially online, where personas are almost invariably different from the actual persons.

I think it's human nature to have a very significant amount of insecurity. If for no other reason than simply how little we actually know and how there will always be unfamiliar situations or encounters for us to feel insecure about them.

Not that it can't be fun to put people in boxes. I mean, our brains do that regardless

 

[SveNitoR]

I would personally think there's too much nuance and too many factors involved to establish a useful pattern of what posting very little or very much means about the level of security people have. At least without a lot of other relevant information added.



That's without getting into how we're likely all both secure and insecure in a wide variety of ways. It's pretty hard to quantify how one person is "insecure" overall - and another person is "confident" overall. Especially online, where personas are almost invariably different from the actual person.



I think it's human nature to have a very significant amount of insecurity. If for no other reason than simply how little we actually know and how there will always be unfamiliar situations or encounters for us to feel insecure about them.



Not that it can't be fun to put people in boxes. I mean, our brains do that regardless

Yeah. And if we are to put people in boxes, it's probably better to use factors which have at least some face validity if we have no data.

"Being insecure leads to posting a lot", is a weird conclusion.

 

[TheDart]

Yeah. And if we are to put people in boxes, it's probably better to use factors which have at least some face validity if we have no data.

"Being insecure leads to posting a lot", is a weird conclusion.

Quite a bold conclusion, certainly

Ironically, one might suggest that concluding something so bold with such limited information is a sign of security/confidence in itself.

But we must remember that being confident is not at all the same as having a good reason to be confident.

 

[bkrueger]

Yeah. And if we are to put people in boxes, it's probably better to use factors which have at least some face validity if we have no data.

"Being insecure leads to posting a lot", is a weird conclusion.

May be, but it would conveniently explain, why Dart changes his account so often. He wants to hide his insecurity by reducing his post count.

Edit: But completely seriously: Not every insecure person posts a lot, so being insecure is only a necessary but not a sufficient condition for posting much.

 

[TheDart]

I thought no one would figure it out

 

[SveNitoR]

Quite a bold conclusion, certainly

Ironically, one might suggest that concluding something so bold with such limited information is a sign of security/confidence in itself.

But we must remember that being confident is not at all the same as having a good reason to be confident.

The most prolific "poster" I ever had the unfortunate experience of meeting, was a person who was very confident. He was confident me and my colleagues were out to destroy his life. He was wrong, but boy was he confident. So confident he kept bombarding us with emails with "evidence" of our evil intentions. Ugh... He wasn't fun.

 

[TheDart]

The most prolific "poster" I ever had the unfortunate experience of meeting, was a person who was very confident. He was confident me and my colleagues were out to destroy his life. He was wrong, but boy was he confident. So confident he kept bombarding us with emails with "evidence" of our evil intentions. Ugh… He wasn't fun.

Sounds like a very unpleasant experience.

If I were to put that person in a box based on that limited information, I'd suggest he sounds like a candidate for PPD.