AonymousGuy wrote:

I don't think anyone's posts in the show and tell section are viewed more than others. And, if they are, it is because people with more experience make better projects. I guess there is not much harm in hiding posts, but I, for example, would trust someone's advice more if they had more posts, because it showed they were on scratch longer, and had more experience.

Either way, there may be the benefits of hiding posts, but no harm

pigletdiglet wrote:

I realize that some scratchers are not biased based on the number of posts, but others can.
Therefore, by not showing the amount of posts, it may decrease some discrimination against new scratchers' ideas/posts.
But even if it doesn't, there is no harm in not showing posts.

…
So because a small fraction of Scratchers is mean (you still haven't given any proof), you want no one to have a post count anymore?

And, imo, there would be harm. When I look in questions I look for ones made by people with low post counts because I am bias. I am biased since I answer people who are new to the forums first.

You can hinder new scratchers with this.

AmayaCreates wrote:

pigletdiglet wrote:

I realize that some scratchers are not biased based on the number of posts, but others can.
Therefore, by not showing the amount of posts, it may decrease some discrimination against new scratchers' ideas/posts.
But even if it doesn't, there is no harm in not showing posts.

…
So because a small fraction of Scratchers is mean (you still haven't given any proof), you want no one to have a post count anymore?

And, imo, there would be harm. When I look in questions I look for ones made by people with low post counts because I am bias. I am biased since I answer people who are new to the forums first.

You can hinder new scratchers with this.

That is not exactly the meaning of bias…
Also, that isn't a reason for harm, if you are going to answer posts anyways; the point of this entire hiding posts system is to not hinder new scratchers.

pigletdiglet wrote:

AmayaCreates wrote:

pigletdiglet wrote:

I realize that some scratchers are not biased based on the number of posts, but others can.
Therefore, by not showing the amount of posts, it may decrease some discrimination against new scratchers' ideas/posts.
But even if it doesn't, there is no harm in not showing posts.

…
So because a small fraction of Scratchers is mean (you still haven't given any proof), you want no one to have a post count anymore?

And, imo, there would be harm. When I look in questions I look for ones made by people with low post counts because I am bias. I am biased since I answer people who are new to the forums first.

You can hinder new scratchers with this.

That is not exactly the meaning of bias…
Also, that isn't a reason for harm, if you are going to answer posts anyways; the point of this entire hiding posts system is to not hinder new scratchers.

Well, what if some really experienced scratcher was kind of mean and decided to ask a whole bunch of low-experience questions? People would answer them, although this person already knew the answer.

Please reply to my new post in “questions in scratch” it's called “how to suggest a feature?”

CactusSoda wrote:

Please reply to my new post in “questions in scratch” it's called “how to suggest a feature?”

It has already been answered.

pigletdiglet wrote:

AmayaCreates wrote:

pigletdiglet wrote:

I realize that some scratchers are not biased based on the number of posts, but others can.
Therefore, by not showing the amount of posts, it may decrease some discrimination against new scratchers' ideas/posts.
But even if it doesn't, there is no harm in not showing posts.

…
So because a small fraction of Scratchers is mean (you still haven't given any proof), you want no one to have a post count anymore?

And, imo, there would be harm. When I look in questions I look for ones made by people with low post counts because I am bias. I am biased since I answer people who are new to the forums first.

You can hinder new scratchers with this.

That is not exactly the meaning of bias…
Also, that isn't a reason for harm, if you are going to answer posts anyways; the point of this entire hiding posts system is to not hinder new scratchers.

Actually, the meaning of bias is an underlying assumption in a person's actions, statements, and beliefs. AmayaCreates, as she said, does, in fact, have a strong bias. I have a bias in the same way.

firedrake969_test wrote:

pigletdiglet wrote:

AmayaCreates wrote:

pigletdiglet wrote:

I realize that some scratchers are not biased based on the number of posts, but others can.
Therefore, by not showing the amount of posts, it may decrease some discrimination against new scratchers' ideas/posts.
But even if it doesn't, there is no harm in not showing posts.

…
So because a small fraction of Scratchers is mean (you still haven't given any proof), you want no one to have a post count anymore?

And, imo, there would be harm. When I look in questions I look for ones made by people with low post counts because I am bias. I am biased since I answer people who are new to the forums first.

You can hinder new scratchers with this.

That is not exactly the meaning of bias…
Also, that isn't a reason for harm, if you are going to answer posts anyways; the point of this entire hiding posts system is to not hinder new scratchers.

Actually, the meaning of bias is an underlying assumption in a person's actions, statements, and beliefs. AmayaCreates, as she said, does, in fact, have a strong bias. I have a bias in the same way.

but in his/her point, bias is used in a way that implies that he/she is biased because she is answering people with low posts; bias is usually used in context against something. That's what set me off…
But definition debates won't really get anywhere

Bias can be used for or against something; it is not always against a thought. But true, definition debates don't help.

However, I would say most of us have a bias toward answering newer Scratchers (and therefore against answering older Scratchers).

firedrake969_test wrote:

Bias can be used for or against something; it is not always against a thought. But true, definition debates don't help.

However, I would say most of us have a bias toward answering newer Scratchers (and therefore against answering older Scratchers).

Yup

Well wait a minute…
In your signature, it says “CLICK HERE to help unanswered scratchers”

But then you want to hide the amount of posts?
Sure, there is the new scratcher / scratcher rank, but you might become a scratcher without ever even looking at, say, the video blocks, and now you want to know stuff about them, but someone spammed up the wiki or its articles are unhelpful.

Then us people who say we have a bias towards answering new scratchers will see “Scratcher” and think “Oh, they have experience.” But, if we could see the amount of posts, we would see that they have less experience and would be more inclined to help them.

So, in the end, this would HURT your campaign.

No support.
1st off, this post is rather ambiguous…
2nd off, you can see the number of posts for a reason. New scratchers often don't know what there talking about. In cases like this I think its OK to be bias. In most cases, scratchers with a slightly higher amount of posts have a better idea of what there talking about. Of course this isnt always the case, but it often is. The majority of unanswered posts are irrelevant and/or unnecessary posts, such as already implemented suggestions and show and tell. You don't seem to have any substantial proof to prove your point.

-Supreme

AonymousGuy wrote:

Well wait a minute…
In your signature, it says “CLICK HERE to help unanswered scratchers”

But then you want to hide the amount of posts?
Sure, there is the new scratcher / scratcher rank, but you might become a scratcher without ever even looking at, say, the video blocks, and now you want to know stuff about them, but someone spammed up the wiki or its articles are unhelpful.

Then us people who say we have a bias towards answering new scratchers will see “Scratcher” and think “Oh, they have experience.” But, if we could see the amount of posts, we would see that they have less experience and would be more inclined to help them.

So, in the end, this would HURT your campaign.

TheSupremeOverLord wrote:

No support.
1st off, this post is rather ambiguous…
2nd off, you can see the number of posts for a reason. New scratchers often don't know what there talking about. In cases like this I think its OK to be bias. In most cases, scratchers with a slightly higher amount of posts have a better idea of what there talking about. Of course this isnt always the case, but it often is. The majority of unanswered posts are irrelevant and/or unnecessary posts, such as already implemented suggestions and show and tell. You don't seem to have any substantial proof to prove your point.

-Supreme

These.

bi·as
ˈbīəs/
noun
noun: bias; plural noun: biases
1.
prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair.
“there was evidence of bias against foreign applicants”
synonyms: prejudice, partiality, partisanship, favoritism, unfairness, one-sidedness; More
antonyms: impartiality
a concentration on or interest in one particular area or subject.
“he worked on a variety of Greek topics, with a discernible bias toward philosophy”
STATISTICS
a systematic distortion of a statistical result due to a factor not allowed for in its derivation.
2.
in some sports, such as lawn bowling, the irregular shape given to a ball.
the oblique course taken by a ball as a result of its irregular shape.
3.
ELECTRONICS
a steady voltage, magnetic field, or other factor applied to an electronic system or device to cause it to operate over a predetermined range.
verb
verb: bias; 3rd person present: biases; past tense: biased; past participle: biased; gerund or present participle: biasing
1.
cause to feel or show inclination or prejudice for or against someone or something.
“readers said the paper was biased toward the conservatives”
synonyms: prejudice, influence, color, sway, weight, predispose; More
prejudiced, partial, partisan, one-sided, blinkered;
bigoted, intolerant, discriminatory;
distorted, warped, twisted, skewed
antonyms: impartial
2.
give a bias to.
“bias the ball”

AmayaCreates wrote:

bi·as
ˈbīəs/
noun
noun: bias; plural noun: biases
1.
prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair.
“there was evidence of bias against foreign applicants”
synonyms: prejudice, partiality, partisanship, favoritism, unfairness, one-sidedness; More
antonyms: impartiality
a concentration on or interest in one particular area or subject.
“he worked on a variety of Greek topics, with a discernible bias toward philosophy”
STATISTICS
a systematic distortion of a statistical result due to a factor not allowed for in its derivation.
2.
in some sports, such as lawn bowling, the irregular shape given to a ball.
the oblique course taken by a ball as a result of its irregular shape.
3.
ELECTRONICS
a steady voltage, magnetic field, or other factor applied to an electronic system or device to cause it to operate over a predetermined range.
verb
verb: bias; 3rd person present: biases; past tense: biased; past participle: biased; gerund or present participle: biasing
1.
cause to feel or show inclination or prejudice for or against someone or something.
“readers said the paper was biased toward the conservatives”
synonyms: prejudice, influence, color, sway, weight, predispose; More
prejudiced, partial, partisan, one-sided, blinkered;
bigoted, intolerant, discriminatory;
distorted, warped, twisted, skewed
antonyms: impartial
2.
give a bias to.
“bias the ball”

I don't think a grammar argument is relevant to this topic. Stay on topic…. Stay on topic… Stay on topic!

They were saying our bias wasn't actually biased so it is relevant.

Ironically, I don't judge by post count, but by layout and the actual text. If the text is n00b-ish, yeah, it's a n00b, so don't pay much attention due to them not always knowing what they are talking about and that when they ask for help, many times it for a whole game engine design, and who' going to do that?
If the text is properly written, then I do pay more attention.

Also, how the text is structured. Walls of text suck, and anyone who has a lot to say will know to keep it short and simple, and properly separated.

If they have a layout, they are a scratcher, so they've been around, I know they have experience, and depending on the layout/icon, you can tell a lot about them.

So yeah, I don't really look at the post count, except on very scarce occasions, to see how much that person posts in the forums.

xlk wrote:

Ironically, I don't judge by post count, but by layout and the actual text. If the text is n00b-ish, yeah, it's a n00b, so don't pay much attention due to them not always knowing what they are talking about and that when they ask for help, many times it for a whole game engine design, and who' going to do that?
If the text is properly written, then I do pay more attention.

Also, how the text is structured. Walls of text suck, and anyone who has a lot to say will know to keep it short and simple, and properly separated.

If they have a layout, they are a scratcher, so they've been around, I know they have experience, and depending on the layout/icon, you can tell a lot about them.

So yeah, I don't really look at the post count, except on very scarce occasions, to see how much that person posts in the forums.

Exactly. That's what I think we all do.

AmayaCreates wrote:

They were saying our bias wasn't actually biased so it is relevant.

Like I said, definition debates are pointless.
Debates are ruined when they are turned into such.

Deerleg wrote:

xlk wrote:

Ironically, I don't judge by post count, but by layout and the actual text. If the text is n00b-ish, yeah, it's a n00b, so don't pay much attention due to them not always knowing what they are talking about and that when they ask for help, many times it for a whole game engine design, and who' going to do that?
If the text is properly written, then I do pay more attention.

Also, how the text is structured. Walls of text suck, and anyone who has a lot to say will know to keep it short and simple, and properly separated.

If they have a layout, they are a scratcher, so they've been around, I know they have experience, and depending on the layout/icon, you can tell a lot about them.

So yeah, I don't really look at the post count, except on very scarce occasions, to see how much that person posts in the forums.

Exactly. That's what I think we all do.

You can't assume that all people are unbiased by the amount of posts; human nature is NOT as pristine as it may seem to some.
I'm not saying that scratchers are intentionally biased, it's usually, in fact, unconscious.