Yay, I enjoy an intelligent discussion, it's something rarely experienced here.
Kym:
"What I feel is that Soft has grown in numbers exponentially since it first started. As more netizens join, there will be more ads, more questions and posts. It is about probability: if there is more posts, chances of encountering a stupid of unintelligent post will also be higher, no?"
Correct. And this is a problem faced by many, many forums all over the world. There have been solutions implemented, some not so successful, and yet others which have been very successful. Soft tends to rest on it's laurels and hope things turn out ok.
"Personally, you cannot expect everyone on Soft to ask intelligent questions. Soft is an open forum, not exclusively for veteran players only. Some members are less experienced hence they need more guidance and answers. Once in a while, they asked some stupid or rhetoric questions, but should we discourage others to ask questions because of this?"
I never diss "stupid" questions. Understandably, everyone is a beginner once. However, when I mention unintelligence, I am referring to the discussion. Consider the following:
Questioner: "wHat is the best amp?!?!? Help me plsssssssss!!!!"
Nice guy: "Maybe you could state what kind of amp you're looking for? Practice? Budget? What kind of music?"
Retard 1: "Get a Marshall MG15 dude, trust me it's the best amp"
Retard 2: "Hi we have stock of MG15, thanks"
Retard 3: "Get a DS1, my 2 cents"
Nice guy: "Erm, the DS1 is a pedal, why would you recommend that as an amp?"
Retard 2: "Hi we have stock of DS1, thanks"
Retard 3: "It works for me"
Questioner: "Hiii dudes tanks for your helpz, i bot the DS1, how come deres' no sound when i plug my guitar in??????"
Nice guy to himself: "Why do I bother."
Think this is an exaggeration? Look back, it happens a lot more than you might think.
"Anyway, just out of curiosity. Why is it that you claim the way that Soft forum runs dissuades intelligent questions and rewards stupidity and spam?"
Intelligent discussions actually. Soft does not run on moderators. Any society's culture is largely influenced by people who control the power. In a forum, they are the moderators. Be they good or bad moderators, these are the guys who will influence the culture, be in a conducive or lackluster one. However, in the absence of moderation, all we have is chaos. In chaos, it is always the loudest, most obnoxious and the majority that dedicates the culture. Any intelligent post, written after a well thought process taking maybe 15 mins, is quickly covered by 2 pages of posts with insults and banter from people not having even read the posts properly.
Here's an example right from this thread itself (nothing personal eugene):
"To be honest I don't understand much of the TS's rant. I can only gather that he's upset about young guitarists having good gear, and more obviously, young guitarists posting here asking for advise and/or help."
As pointed out by shredcow later on, Eugene has obviously not read the posts thoroughly and decided to post his 2 cents on a completely separate issue. Not that I blame Eugene. This has been the culture of Soft for a while, and any new user will immediately incorporate that attitude into his own posts. The thread starter may have opened 2 subjects in his first post, but quickly corrected in his 2nd post what the main point he is actually bringing up for discussion.
Our dear thread starter now looks at all the posts in his thread. Less than half of them are addressing his point. Should he spend another 15mins typing out a cleanly written post? Or should he just shrug his shoulders and have some kopi.
Maybe I should clarify what I mean by an intelligent discussion. To me, an intelligent discussion is one where every poster, before posting, reads every post before himself thoroughly and takes the words spoken into account. Then posts his views whilst addressing the words spoken before himself.
Most of the threads resemble the "whats the best amp" example I provided earlier. Where the poster asks a question, then everyone throws in his 2 cents. Meanwhile the poster skims through and ignores half the posts and makes his own decision.
The solution? Moderation. This is a giant subject with debates over banning rules, empowerment and such, but moderation is a step forward. However to my observation, James prefers to have no moderators, hoping everyone "just gets along".