Posts that are only sharing of links without a decent 30-60 word summary of what is in the link should be discouraged. I have decided to not click any of the prime offender's links until he decides to save us some time and effort on whether we care to see what is in the link or not. Anyone else agree?
6
Be part of the movement!
Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.Create your free account
6 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.I have 2 youtube links that are less than 10 words each - both are explicit of what they are and are sufficient. "Bob Hope the Man", and "The most hunted humans - Stefan Molyneaux "
So, it doesn't have to be that long, so long as it explains what the reader will be looking at.
Paisley_Pirate
Level 6
Mar 26, 2019
0
In a similar vein, first reply points should only be awarded to a reasoned reply--which can seldom be done in less than 20-30 words. There is a "points game" being played regarding that , too.
MarPep
Level 7
Mar 26, 2019
0
@Guido_Provolone More like ruler-whacking, knuckle-busting 3rd grade teacher. At least every once in a while.
Reminds me of that joker on the Drudge Android app that posts all the time on the first post calling the second poster names... oughta get the snot slapped out of them...
SO yes, first comments should be well reasoned and not trolls. But then again, all comments shouldn't be trollish...
I try to get to the point in the thumbnails on my posts
Georgesblogforum
Level 7
Mar 26, 2019
0
Be part of the movement!
Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.