Yes. I am suggesting to remove all public post counts below a user's status on the forums. But why?

If someone (let's call him forumaster) has, like, 67 posts, and they see someone with “1000+ posts”, forumaster could spam their way and get to 1000+ posts. But however, my suggestion DOES NOT include removing the private post count over there.

No support, higher post counts allow a user to identify a more reliable source.
The 60 second rule removes any possibility of the hypothetical you mentioned happening.

MudkipKappa wrote:

No support, higher post counts allow a user to identify a more reliable source.

How does a higher post count make a user more reliable?

MythosLore wrote:

MudkipKappa wrote:

No support, higher post counts allow a user to identify a more reliable source.

How does a higher post count make a user more reliable?

yeah i have 1000+ plus posts but my answers are usually riddle with typos or smal errors

MythosLore wrote:

MudkipKappa wrote:

No support, higher post counts allow a user to identify a more reliable source.

How does a higher post count make a user more reliable?

They have experience on the forums, and considering it takes a long time to post that amount, a lot of dedication.

not always but generally people with more posts dont post complete misinformation

MythosLore wrote:

MudkipKappa wrote:

No support, higher post counts allow a user to identify a more reliable source.

How does a higher post count make a user more reliable?

If a person has a higher post count, it mostly likely communicates they have more experience with the forums and know the rules.

ZippyZebraZoom85749 wrote:

MythosLore wrote:

MudkipKappa wrote:

No support, higher post counts allow a user to identify a more reliable source.

How does a higher post count make a user more reliable?

If a person has a higher post count, it mostly likely communicates they have more experience with the forums and know the rules.

Why is experience with the forums important?

Why not instead of removing the counter we just remove the post that gets dustbinned from the counter.

no support for reasons mentioned by others, but also what do you guys consider a high/reliable post count because i'm at 100+ but still an ABSOLUTE noob & i really don't wanna be considered reliable when i'm not

this is a good idea btw v

CosmicStarV1 wrote:

Why not instead of removing the counter we just remove the post that gets dustbinned from the counter.

Spamming 1 thousand times??? For sure they would get muted. I've seen many people strive to gain more posts and they post because they want to reach 1,000+ posts. No Support

ZippyZebraZoom85749 wrote:

MythosLore wrote:

MudkipKappa wrote:

No support, higher post counts allow a user to identify a more reliable source.

How does a higher post count make a user more reliable?

If a person has a higher post count, it mostly likely communicates they have more experience with the forums and know the rules.

Not quite. There's not much stopping someone from leaving unconstructive posts to try to speed run 1k posts, chasing fake internet points.
Maybe they can stop reporting post count at 100 or 500, to give a scope of age, without giving a milestone people wanna reach.

No support
There’s still the private post counter that people would want to spam to get a thousand posts on. Sometimes people want to see a bigger number, even if it’s private

GIitchInTheMatrix wrote:

ZippyZebraZoom85749 wrote:

MythosLore wrote:

MudkipKappa wrote:

No support, higher post counts allow a user to identify a more reliable source.

How does a higher post count make a user more reliable?

If a person has a higher post count, it mostly likely communicates they have more experience with the forums and know the rules.

Not quite. There's not much stopping someone from leaving unconstructive posts to try to speed run 1k posts, chasing fake internet points.

This, and having experience posting on the forums does not mean that a someone who posts frequently is any more reliable than someone who has only a few posts on the forums. All you need is a few posts to understand the rules of the forums (blockspamming, necropsting, duplicates, etc.).
Someone with more forum posts is not any more likely to be reliable in, for instance, the Help with Scripts forum, either. In fact, many forumers spend more time on the forums than they do actually coding projects, meaning that someone who has more experience coding (not posting) would be more helpful in that forum. The same goes for forums like Questions about Scratch, where all you really need is knowledge about Scratch, which comes primarily from experience on the Scratch website as a whole, not just the forums.
Additionally, people can get their post count from making posts in Announcements, New Scratchers, Show and Tell, Project Ideas, Collaboration, Project Save & Level Codes, TIMAC, or TIRAP. None of these (including Show and Tell, which is the forum with more posts than any other forum) could make a user more reliable in any way.

No support.
This spam issue doesn't seem to exist…while forum spam HAS happened before, it is not the spammers' primary target (as someone who's interacted with lots of spammers before). Spammers focus on profile pages and studio-chats. I have literally only seen spam once in the forums (and that's only because I linked a Suggestion in a studio-chat that had a spammer online). Even if one spammed the forums and successfully obtained the 1000+ label, they'd just be banned afterwards and their spammy posts would be dustbinned. There are also some benefits to the posts count: you're more likely to get reliable info from someone with 500-1000+ posts as opposed to someone with less, like less than 100-500. This can help people judge answers with more information.

MythosLore wrote:

including Show and Tell, which is the forum with more posts than any other forum

Realistically, I don't think one person would advertise 500 or 1000+ times in Show & Tell. Most users don't even have that many projects or studios TO advertise.
Even if one spends more time in “simpler” forums, they've likely tapped into the other forums before. I mean, if you're opening the same forum page on the weekly or daily, then you naturally would end up exploring a little.

HollyEuca wrote:

No support.
This spam issue doesn't seem to exist…while forum spam HAS happened before, it is not the spammers' primary target (as someone who's interacted with lots of spammers before). Spammers focus on profile pages and studio-chats. I have literally only seen spam once in the forums (and that's only because I linked a Suggestion in a studio-chat that had a spammer online). Even if one spammed the forums and successfully obtained the 1000+ label, they'd just be banned afterwards and their spammy posts would be dustbinned. There are also some benefits to the posts count: you're more likely to get reliable info from someone with 500-1000+ posts as opposed to someone with less, like less than 100-500. This can help people judge answers with more information.

Just because most people with 1000+ posts do not spam does not mean that they make high-quality posts and provide reliable information.

HollyEuca wrote:

No support.
This spam issue doesn't seem to exist…while forum spam HAS happened before, it is not the spammers' primary target (as someone who's interacted with lots of spammers before). Spammers focus on profile pages and studio-chats. I have literally only seen spam once in the forums (and that's only because I linked a Suggestion in a studio-chat that had a spammer online). Even if one spammed the forums and successfully obtained the 1000+ label, they'd just be banned afterwards and their spammy posts would be dustbinned. There are also some benefits to the posts count: you're more likely to get reliable info from someone with 500-1000+ posts as opposed to someone with less, like less than 100-500. This can help people judge answers with more information.

Just because the post label shows a higher number doesn't guarantee that all that person's posts are reliable.

0_009 wrote:

HollyEuca wrote:

No support.
This spam issue doesn't seem to exist…while forum spam HAS happened before, it is not the spammers' primary target (as someone who's interacted with lots of spammers before). Spammers focus on profile pages and studio-chats. I have literally only seen spam once in the forums (and that's only because I linked a Suggestion in a studio-chat that had a spammer online). Even if one spammed the forums and successfully obtained the 1000+ label, they'd just be banned afterwards and their spammy posts would be dustbinned. There are also some benefits to the posts count: you're more likely to get reliable info from someone with 500-1000+ posts as opposed to someone with less, like less than 100-500. This can help people judge answers with more information.

Just because the post label shows a higher number doesn't guarantee that all that person's posts are reliable.

No, but it's definitely more likely than someone with, say, less than 500 posts.

HollyEuca wrote:

0_009 wrote:

Just because the post label shows a higher number doesn't guarantee that all that person's posts are reliable.

No, but it's definitely more likely than someone with, say, less than 500 posts.

What makes it more likely?

MythosLore wrote:

HollyEuca wrote:

0_009 wrote:

Just because the post label shows a higher number doesn't guarantee that all that person's posts are reliable.

No, but it's definitely more likely than someone with, say, less than 500 posts.

What makes it more likely?

Well, they've likely had more experience from the forums and learned from more mistakes.
Take it from me, I was corrected a LOT by more experienced forumers in mid 2025 when I started foruming. And now, I barely get corrected since I've learned from mistakes and can distribute accurate information. No offense, but new forumers haven't had enough time to be corrected and understand things fully, in my opinion.
I'm not saying that experienced forumers are always right; they're just more likely to be.