I also appreciate the lack of avatars and emoticons here, it's refreshing. Those "party" threads at DAZ Forums where people load their posts with tons of animated emoticons ... jeez, it's just so juvenile and useless. The bare-bones interface here encourages more substantial discussion. While PoserPros' format does allow for avatars and picto-emoticons, the fact is that there's a LOT of helpful information, lots of altruism to be found at that site, just like here.

While I DO have a life, a posting count would give one the opposite impression. :-) (Note charmingly Neanderthal ASCII smiley...efficient and effective.) I'm not very much against it, but don't happen to see a need, either.

The word "troll" is being used so liberally as to diffuse its original meaning, and the similar meaning that Renderosity seems to "officially" rely on. Originally, to "troll" (verb) meant to post something inflammatory for no better reason that to "stir the pot." Someone who does this habitually is a "troll" (noun.) If I understand correctly, Rosity also uses the term to mean people who regularly post un-helpful negative comments to gallery images. Unfortunately, many now use the term to mean a lot of other things, like "someone I disagree with" or "someone who said that my NVITWAS is underlit." I don't think someone should be labelled a "troll" unless they truly are.

igohigh, your post really cracked me up. That's not the kind of troll we have issues with. The guy under the bridge is a mythological critter. The second this community turns against mythological beasts, it's all over! :-) (Edited for typos. Now there's a great feature!)

Message edited on: 08/06/2004 13:13