Viewpoint Hot take: Multi-paragraph posts are unproductive

[Jet]

And there's the annoyance, yall think word count = the amount described. Someone who can turn phrases can describe equal/more with less. It's part of language mastery and why a good vocabulary is useful.

Also what's annoying me

Its always the super long winded 1k+ per post page stuffers who establish restrictions. I've never once - ever in my entire life - seen a post maximum. It's a one way street, and again pretty much every post I make is well above any/all requirements so this isn't me bitching about rejection. Currently writing a post that's gonna exceed 1.5k but that's because there's enough content & much of it is self contained withoutt cross character interaction. The issue is demanding length with posts that only move scenes slightly. I shouldn't have to dredge random bs content to fit reqs if all I have to answer IC is a couple questions from another character. Another issue is world building as a member is restricted, as a member in a group RP you can't do big world building like you can in a solo project/GMing. Reasons for that are obvious, inescapable and people who GM more than join do not see this issue because they can say/do anything with the setting.

Also, people who make very emotional characters have a pretty big word buffer. Let's say you need a 500 word reply for a conversation post where you've been asked one/two questions. Your character is Sandor Clegane and you're a member in a RP so you can't really world build. Sure it's possible, but have fun finessing that post my brethren! On the other hand if you have a hyper emotional ball of angst or whatever else you can riff and riff and riff and so on because your character is on mental crack. So there's a bunch of case-by-case things being ignored.

General end point cause I've said everything Im gonna say (not raging out the discussion or anything lol, that kinda sounds bad). Idk why there is a war against context as if we can't be adults and have ground rules in our RPs rather than one size fits all, zero tolerance shit as if we're deciding policy for millions of poeple. If a great writer is writing effectively they shouldn't be punished because they ran 50 words short.

 

[rae2nerdy]

They aren't though? People aren't out here with a calculator literally counting words or even paragraphs. Like the fact that people seem to legitimately think that is what is happening is baffling to me. Have you actually had someone do this? Or are you just making assumptions based on a single line of text in their interest checks?

A post minimum does not mean EVERY SINGLE POST must be exactly X number of words or X sentences or even X paragraphs. It is usually an average of what your partner needs to make a reply. But I have never seen someone quit a roleplay or throw a bitch fit because one post happens to be a little shorter than the one preceding it. Or if even a series of posts are short due to the whatever happens to be going on in the roleplay. As long as you are responding in a like manner to the content they are giving out they aren't going to give a shit what the actual word count/line count/paragraph count/etc. is.

So look if you think the idea is dumb, fine. But can we kindly stop with this tiresome strawman where anyone who makes a post requirement is some draconian elitist who is breathing down your throat with a calculator.

 

[Jet]

When people make the rule "500 words per post minimum" they are writing "500 words per post minimum" sorry for taking people's words on face value!

And sure if you're at 480 they'll let it slide but what if you're at 400? You act like there aren't elitist assholes on this site which is kind of naive. Also while I'm not gonna get hurt about your tone maybe relax with the aggro shit.

rae2nerdy

 

[rae2nerdy]

I mean do you honestly think they count out words? Like seriously? I can tell you they don't. They are eyeballing that shit 99% of the time. So if your post looks roughly the same length as their own it's all good.

Which is exactly my point. It isn't literal. For one thing it would take too long to put each and every post into some kind of word counter. And most people aren't going to have the time to actually count out lines or paragraphs in other people's replies either. Ain't no one got time for that.

What they are looking for is someone who posts roughly the same amount of content that they do.

 

[calypso]

This is exactly what I mean with these threads. It will always dissolve to this type of conversation/debate/argument.

People want what they want. I said I average 700 words or so per response, and that I like that range. I don't care if it's 200 above or 200 below, it fits the range. Others are different from me, others are the same. At this point it's best to stop increasing the aggression in posts before a moderator is pulled in.

 

[Jet]

You don't need to count out words you just look at someone's posting section. It shows exact word counts and takes about ten seconds.



Also yes, some people are that weird in this community and if post reqs aren't enforced than why are they even put on interest checks? Yeah there will be some wiggle room because it's small groups of poeple in a social circles, but if someone looks at your post history in a RP and sees multiple posts that fall short it will probably end up an issue.

rae2nerdy

 

[rae2nerdy]

I'm not being aggressive? I am maybe a little exasperated but I'm not out here slinging hateful names or calling for blood sacrifices.

 

[calypso]

So be it. If it falls short and someone doesn't want to RP with you, that's between you and them. It's just a hobby that some people practice differently. If other people are more lenient, then they're more lenient. Post reqs are there to give an idea of what the person will average and what they want in an average response. Wiggle room exists in majority of the cases, and if someone is more strict about it, then don't seek them out as a partner, or drop them. No one will care but you and them.

And no, rae you are not being aggressive. It was more of a general statement at this point.

 

[Melpomene]

Seriously, quality is not impacted by whether the post is long or short. Some people like long posts, some people like short posts. Neither of them are better than one another. Yes, someone is within their rights to not want to write with someone because they don't reach a specific word count. Why? Because roleplaying is a hobby and you are not entitled to roleplay with anyone.

So, in the end, if someone wants to write a lot, let them. Don't get on to them because you think that the stuff they put in the long posts are meaningless, a lot of the times they don't think it is meaningless fluff so you are being very rude in saying so.

Let people live. Let them roleplay as they wish. Find someone who matches your wants. if you don't like a minimum and only want to write what you feel is needed whether that be long or short, find someone who thinks the same. If you want a word count, find someone who matches a similar length to you.

But don't go around shaming people for the post length they want.

 

[Hella Downweather]

I may talk out of turn, since I'm not in the same school system as you guys, but when my teachers asks for a word count, there's always a +- 10-20% associated with it before they take away points. So I've always thought it was the same when asking for it here? Like an implicit norm?

Plus usually there's the word "average" associated with the restriction, so if you write 700 words one time, and 400 words another, it still has an average superior of the 500 words limit.

The only time I've seen the word limit being really strict is for novella writers, who actually wants someone writing above 1000 words as much as possible, or when the word difference is something pretty effective that changes the style of writing (200 words VS 400 for example).

At the end of the day, yeah I'm going to check at people's post length and if I find them consistently too short, I'm going to pass on them, but someone else will stick with them. And...that's ok? Not everyone is going to match with everyone, and people have the right to refuse to write with you for whatever reason they see fit, just has you can decide not to RP with someone for whatever reason you want. At the end of the day, if you pass on 10 writers to keep 2, even if in the 10 there would be someone that MAYBE you would have matched well with if you didn't consider post length, you still have your two other partners that have matched your criteria.

 

[rae2nerdy]

You don't need to count out words you just look at someone's posting section. It shows exact word counts and takes about ten seconds.

View attachment 706651

Also yes, some people are that weird in this community and if post reqs aren't enforced than why are they even put on interest checks? Yeah there will be some wiggle room because it's small groups of poeple in a social circles, but if someone looks at your post history in a RP and sees multiple posts that fall short it will probably end up an issue.

rae2nerdy

Wait how did you do that? It isn't showing up on my end. As for some people being weird, well yeah it's a diverse community. Your bound to run into assholes if you get unlucky. All I can say is that calypso hit the nail on the head. It's about ranges of posts. But I mean if you wanna see it as something different you do you.

 

[Grey]

As we approach N, the probabilty of Y increases until it becomes inevitable.

This applies to drops in quality, people being strict about post lengths, people being chill about post lengths, and a poster getting real fuckin' heated because people are having fun the wrong way.

 

[Idea]

Strongly disagree. Since post length minimums don't ensure stylistic similarity and deter what quality comes with short posts, they don't comply consistently with preference. If one's preference is florid language and extensive inner monologues, then one is more likely to ensure stylistic matches by saying as much. In that situation, one avoids both fluff and deterring quality posts, and is more likely to ensure stylistic similarity. In keeping with the value of a good, short post: Say what you mean.

I used to think like that, until it failed me. And again. And again. I tried various things, several times, from directly stating "these are the things I want from each post" to just saying "I want detailed posts" to all kinds of different rules and consistently they failed until I gave in and tried length minimums, and then it worked. And, for me, it's been working since. I fully aknowledge that it isn't a perfect method and I wish I could find a better one, but it's hard to argue with the results.

 

[Idea]

They aren't though? People aren't out here with a calculator literally counting words or even paragraphs. Like the fact that people seem to legitimately think that is what is happening is baffling to me. Have you actually had someone do this? Or are you just making assumptions based on a single line of text in their interest checks?

A post minimum does not mean EVERY SINGLE POST must be exactly X number of words or X sentences or even X paragraphs. It is usually an average of what your partner needs to make a reply. But I have never seen someone quit a roleplay or throw a bitch fit because one post happens to be a little shorter than the one preceding it. Or if even a series of posts are short due to the whatever happens to be going on in the roleplay. As long as you are responding in a like manner to the content they are giving out they aren't going to give a shit what the actual word count/line count/paragraph count/etc. is.

So look if you think the idea is dumb, fine. But can we kindly stop with this tiresome strawman where anyone who makes a post requirement is some draconian elitist who is breathing down your throat with a calculator.

Speaking personally, I do try to impose limits more strictly at first, and ease on it over time. My reasons are twofold:
1. I don't want to create a precendent where posts are consistently lower than the minimum and it goes unnoticed. If one just lets it be, posts will tend to become smaller and smaller over time, as people often resort to mirroing until circumstances force them to make a smaller post which others in turn mirror. To combat this, a precendent for the right length has to be established early on, I find, so that exceptions due to circumstance remain that: exceptions.

2. As time goes on and I and my partners or group become more familiar with one another, it becomes easier to give more leeway and trust enough with more leeway, because as time goes on people do give me posts that are closer to what I want to see, provided I laid the foundation for it to begin with.

 

[rae2nerdy]

Speaking personally, I do try to impose limits more strictly at first, and ease on it over time. My reasons are twofold:
1. I don't want to create a precendent where posts are consistently lower than the minimum and it goes unnoticed. If one just lets it be, posts will tend to become smaller and smaller over time, as people often resort to mirroing until circumstances force them to make a smaller post which others in turn mirror. To combat this, a precendent for the right length has to be established early on, I find, so that exceptions due to circumstance remain that: exceptions.

2. As time goes on and I and my partners or group become more familiar with one another, it becomes easier to give more leeway and trust enough with more leeway, because as time goes on people do give me posts that are closer to what I want to see, provided I laid the foundation for it to begin with.

Fair enough. My point was more in the sense that I don't think you are actually counting out whatever your requirement is for each post in the roleplay. I mean I tell people a paragraph minimum so you can't really go lower without just writing a sentence per reply. But when I did three paragraph minimums for groups I didn't stress if someone posted a paragraph once. I just made a note of it and kept an eye on them going forward to see if it was a consistent issue or if they just happened to be having a bad day OR was just at a loss for that particular scene.

 

[Grey]

I may have missed something here, but I am suddenly very curious.

What is it that makes posts above a minimum desirable?

 

[rae2nerdy]

I may have missed something here, but I am suddenly very curious.

What is it that makes posts above a minimum desirable?

Well in my case it means that my partner is engaging with the world building as much as I am so that's always nice. I love it when people play in my sandbox as much as I do.

 

[Idea]

Fair enough. My point was more in the sense that I don't think you are actually counting out whatever your requirement is for each post in the roleplay. I mean I tell people a paragraph minimum so you can't really go lower without just writing a sentence per reply. But when I did three paragraph minimums for groups I didn't stress if someone posted a paragraph once. I just made a note of it and kept an eye on them going forward to see if it was a consistent issue or if they just happened to be having a bad day OR was just at a loss for that particular scene.

Yeah, I know what you meant, I made that response because I do count, I do make that precise measure, and if it falls under a certain threshold I am going to warn a player in one of my RPs that they went under and by how much. I don't generally ask them to fix the post anymore, but I do count for the reasons I mentioned in my previous post.

What is it that makes posts above a minimum desirable?

What makes posts above a minimum desirable? The increased likelihood that the post will have the kind of content the person asking for the minimum wants to see in it.

What makes asking for posts above a minimum desirable? The vastly increased likelihood of matching style in terms of descriptiveness and matching values when it comes to content. What a player finds important, meaningful or fun will influence what they think about and how they write, which in turn plays a big role in how much they write and like to write by nature.

As such a length requirement creates a reliable filter for people with relatively matching writing styles when it comes to level of detail and valuing in description.

 

[Dov]

I'm so glad this is still going back and forth. I'm glad to finally see a reasoning I can get behind. Post limit requirement to have a better chance of finding people who write like you, solid.
I dislike the reasoning that people don't actually mean the requirement and intend on being lenient with them. Rules are too important to create ones that one anticipates will not be adhered to. I've had several really terrible experiences with the gradual break down of rules. Those experiences have built me up to feel strongly about absolutely concrete rules. Maybe interest checks would benefit from dividing rules and preferences into separate lists. Thoughts?

 

[Idea]

Maybe interest checks would benefit from dividing rules and preferences into separate lists. Thoughts?

Well, that depends. If I create a rule I want that rule to be followed, I make it a rule because either
A) I absolutely don't want to go without what the rule promotes

or

B) I want something on a greater scale than what the rule mandates, but include the rule to promote moving in that direction

A lot of the times preferences are made into rules because we don't want to RP with someone who doesn't match that preference.

That said I do in my own 1x1 interest checks, make a division of things I would like but can go without (which I call "bonuses") and things I absolutely need from a partner (which I call "requirements")

 

[Grey]

I'm going to briefly interject to specify why I prefer no post limits and generally prefer shorter posts.

A short post promotes economy of language, a focus on narratively relevant information, is generally more inclusive of varying skill levels or other considerations, and improves overall flow (which might be more accurately called momentum).

Also, at the risk of being harsh; very few people on any RP site are good writers. The longer a post is the more likely it's going to bore me, and in my personal experience, most posts in long-post required RPs lose me by the first paragraph. But that's equally a matter of taste, I suppose.

Maybe interest checks would benefit from dividing rules and preferences into separate lists. Thoughts?

I would endorse this. Not least because it reminds of Olivia Hill's roleplaying safety tools.

 

[rae2nerdy]

I'm so glad this is still going back and forth. I'm glad to finally see a reasoning I can get behind. Post limit requirement to have a better chance of finding people who write like you, solid.
I dislike the reasoning that people don't actually mean the requirement and intend on being lenient with them. Rules are too important to create ones that one anticipates will not be adhered to. I've had several really terrible experiences with the gradual break down of rules. Those experiences have built me up to feel strongly about absolutely concrete rules. Maybe interest checks would benefit from dividing rules and preferences into separate lists. Thoughts?

I mean I think it's just semantics really. For instance I don't label anything on my interest check "rules". I have - About Me, About You, (tab for world building), (tab for plots). So I wouldn't necessarily assume if someone had a tab labeled "Rules" they are the holy commandments of god almighty. I would take them as suggestions preferences unless the person indicated otherwise when I actually contacted them.

edit.
To use an example of this - Doubling. In 1x1 search threads about 99% of the time doubling is written as "You play X character for me, I play Y character for you." But if you actually contact someone about doubling and tell them that "I am happy to play X character for you. You don't have to play anyone for me." They're happy to adjust the character allotment accordingly and away the two of you go.

So I tend to assume everything listed is just a preference unless it is specifically listed under "Deal Breakers" or something to that affect. And usually that's more in line with "no child rape or no taking over my character" which ya know. fair enough.

 

[Dov]

The inconsistency of language is interesting. I'm gathering that many terms we all use are open to fairly broad interpretation. In this case, maybe the solution is more explicit definition of terms in interest checks.

 

[Kazami42]

It's not that black and white.
Someone could have a preference that is deemed as quality, and there could still be a quality post that doesn't fall into that. The post could be more narrative, environmental, or developmentally rich, and for your criteria still be considered an abject failure for not meeting every little bit of it.

To me from this, it has evolved beyond what we're talking about. Not a quality, not Length, nor quality preference. If any of this mess is to go by, the problem is moreso people trying to get a certain style, or the like minded, disguised as a concern for what is deemed as quality. But there's a difference. When one looks for similar style or like mindedness, the person might not actually care what the quality is, as long as it's uniform to the maker. While originally we all were talking about quality and preference, it's clear this has gone to a deeper level. Or maybe that's how all of this gets interpreted, because it seems to be expanded upon. The arguments no longer the same. It'd already be over with if everything was just quality preference proper.


It's kind of like sending an S.O.S. call to a friend but it's sending it to nothing at this point. It's just sorta there. I prefer the bullet in the head approach. Yeet, yeet, dab.

 

[rae2nerdy]

The inconsistency of language is interesting. I'm gathering that many terms we all use are open to fairly broad interpretation. In this case, maybe the solution is more explicit definition of terms in interest checks.

Well we did have a glossary of terms in the bygone days of RPN. But for now I think your best bet is to just shoot your shot. Contact the person letting them know what you can offer and if they say no, well no harm done. It's what I do. I basically look at their deal breakers, their interests, and whatever they call the "rules" section. Usually if I see only one thing there that doesn't exactly match up I contact them anyway. Cuz you never know if the person is open to a compromise unless you ask. And most of the time worst case scenario I get a very polite no thank you that takes up a grand total of like two minutes of my day.