How many average posts a day is a good amount?

[Tar-Jêx]

I've been looking at the member list, and there is a HUGE difference between how many people post on average per day.

I, myself, am going to maintain at least 1 per day, which is less of me wanting to post, but to ensure that I visit the Downs every day to see what is new, and to further my knowledge about Tolkien.

What about you?
How many posts do you average?
Why is this so?

[Andsigil]

Originally Posted by Tar-Jêx

How many average posts a day is a good amount?

To answer the question in the thread title: people here tend to go for quality vs quantity.

[Mithalwen]

I have made the most posts but since I have been here 10 years the average is umder 2.5 posts a day. However I did have a spell where I made only abot 40 posts in six months because real life kept me away. No doubt on peak time when I was playing werewolf, playing in a couple of RPGS I might have equalled that in a day.

Can't claim all were enlightening or amusing... and of course a palantir of fortune letter guess scores the same as a lengthy response to a question with citations. So certainly visit daily, contribute whereyou can but don't feel obliged. Some days even I have nothing to say

[Tar-Jêx]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

I have made the most posts but since I have been here 10 years the average is umder 2.5 posts a day. However I did have a spell where I made only abot 40 posts in six months because real life kept me away. No doubt on peak time when I was playing werewolf, playing in a couple of RPGS I might have equalled that in a day.

Can't claim all were enlightening or amusing... and of course a palantir of fortune letter guess scores the same as a lengthy response to a question with citations. So certainly visit daily, contribute whereyou can but don't feel obliged. Some days even I have nothing to say

When it comes to Tolkien, I will always have something to say.

I recently bought the Middle Earth Atlas by Karen Wynn Fonstad, and I'm wondering whether it is accurate enough to be used for research.

That aside, I will post where I can to contribute to the discussions.

[Mithalwen]

On that I can't say as I don't own it yet. I find the Journeys of Frodo invaluable.

[Morthoron]

As a rule, I don't post much at all, unless something really interests me. However, in this case I will simply add a banal post because I am only a few from hitting 2000, which is, in itself, a measure of banality.

[Mithalwen]

ENencouraging a newer member is a more positive spin Morth...

[Inziladun]

A high post count is not necessarily indicative of good-quality posts, and with that in mind, I try to limit myself to worthwhile contributions. I say try, because I have been guilty of letting annoyance or a desire to crack a joke induce me to post.

Originally Posted by Tar-Jêx

I recently bought the Middle Earth Atlas by Karen Wynn Fonstad, and I'm wondering whether it is accurate enough to be used for research.

Fonstad was, I believe, a geology professor, so the Atlas certainly has that sort of bent. I would agree with a lot of her extrapolations and theories, but I don't consider it a canonical resource by any means. Nonetheless, it's a worthy item for a Tolkien fan to acquire.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

ENencouraging a newer member is a more positive spin Morth...

I am positively trying to get my 2000th post.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Andsigil

To answer the question in the thread title: people here tend to go for quality vs quantity.

Correction: that is definitely not always the case. About a month after I joined (and until about a year after I joined), I began posting everywhere and about everything. I averaged about 8 posts a day. My goal was to get to 10, but I never made it. I don't know how I had the time to post so much. But most of my posts were either inane or very brief. Then, there was a combination of lack of time and lack of interest. There are only so many times you can discuss the unexistence of Balrog wings or the enigmatic nature of Tom Bombadil. Before, I was really interested in details and technicalities. Nowadays, I generally pass these threads by, but I still attempt to sift out those that touch on deeper ideas and not just the mechanics of the world. Every now and then I get really interested, but... time. Although I visit every day, I do not post that often.

However, I say there's no right or wrong with posting whatever you feel you want to post, regardless of quantity. Not all posts might get replies, at least right away, but even if you post more than average I can only applaud you for making an attempt to lift up the forum out of our hybernation. :-)

Originally Posted by Morthoron

As a rule, I don't post much at all, unless something really interests me. However, in this case I will simply add a banal post because I am only a few from hitting 2000, which is, in itself, a measure of banality.

Oh Morth, come on, you won't pass up an opportunity to trip on a thread and crack a couple puns or splatter some sarcasm onto it. And keep an utterly straight face while you're at it. :-D

[Formendacil]

If you go by the number of posts by the most highly regarded Barrow-downers and try to calculate the frequency with which they wrote them... you'd still have to account for the fact that they all go fallow for a while. We have a whole thread devoted to departed-but-not-forgotten* members. You're catching the forum in a sleepier time, and I have (not originally--but I don't recall who first used it) often compared being prompted back into posting to the waking of the Huorns.

At the moment, I'm an unusually lively Ent, and in addition to delving deep into the Books forum out of both nostalgia and restlessness, I have the ambition to make at least one Downs post every day--but I don't really expect it to be consistent. I know that we Ents are growing tree-ish.

Still, it is good to have some hasty young Hobbits about. If you have something worth saying on many topics, then by all means say them!




*But not, as far as we know, dead.

[Andsigil]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

Correction: that is definitely not always the case.

Very true, which is why I said "tend to". I like to avoid absolutes.

[Tar-Jêx]

Originally Posted by Andsigil

Very true, which is why I said "tend to". I like to avoid absolutes.

Yes, avoiding absolutes is especially vital in the sort of debates we have. It means you don't get backed into a corner, because you can redact your statements if need be.

[Andsigil]

Originally Posted by Tar-Jêx

Yes, avoiding absolutes is especially vital in the sort of debates we have. It means you don't get backed into a corner, because you can redact your statements if need be.

No, that's not the reason. I'm just old enough (well, closer to being old than young anymore) to know (and appreciate) that there are exceptions to nearly everything.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Andsigil

No, that's not the reason. I'm just old enough (well, closer to being old than young anymore) to know (and appreciate) that there are exceptions to nearly everything.

Even the above statement.

[Tar-Jêx]

Originally Posted by Andsigil

No, that's not the reason. I'm just old enough (well, closer to being old than young anymore) to know (and appreciate) that there are exceptions to nearly everything.

That is effectively what I said, but in a different way.

[Mithalwen]

It isn't really. There is a difference between keeping a get out cause as a safety net in case of bejng proved wrong and knowing you may be fallible from the outset. Which may be the result of age, though there have been some astonishingly mature entings here while some displaysof childish petulance can be ascribed to those of riper years... so I should refrain from endorsing whoever it was who said that they weren't young enough to know everything.

[Tar-Jêx]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

It isn't really. There is a difference between keeping a get out cause as a safety net in case of bejng proved wrong and knowing you may be fallible from the outset. Which may be the result of age, though there have been some astonishingly mature entings here while some displaysof childish petulance can be ascribed to those of riper years... so I should refrain from endorsing whoever it was who said that they weren't young enough to know everything.

I did say effectively, as 'Nothing is absolute' and 'Make sure you remember nothing is absolute as to not get backed into a corner for forgetting' are very similar.

I don't think age matters at all, as I have seen mature young people, and immature older people.

[Mithalwen]

We may have to pink hat this as I think there is a clear distinction in intention if not action.

[Andsigil]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

It isn't really. There is a difference between keeping a get out cause as a safety net in case of bejng proved wrong and knowing you may be fallible from the outset.

Mithalwen hit the nail on the head.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Tar-Jêx

When it comes to Tolkien, I will always have something to say.

I recently bought the Middle Earth Atlas by Karen Wynn Fonstad, and I'm wondering whether it is accurate enough to be used for research.

That aside, I will post where I can to contribute to the discussions.

Just in regards to the amount of posts per day - you will see after, say, a year has passed. When I joined, I usually posted quite a lot, feeling like an overflowing kettle suddenly in an environment where I can let the steam out. Then I calmed down, settled down and it became posting on a regular basis, often, but more posts only when there was something really interesting (and that said, often there was). Lately, I must say, I haven't been around as often, so also my post count has probably dropped... It is obvious, as a new member, that you will have very high post-per-day count, but believe me, it will drop. Hopefully you'll find yourself still full of energy and posting also as the time passes.

As for Fonstad's Atlas, I've had it for years and it is very good. She tries to work as close to the sources as she can, taking really the scientific approach (it was supposed to be her own scholarly publication, after all); that said, LOTS of the maps just have to be based on guesses (e.g. the big 1st Age/2nd Age maps, Valinor - an essentially unmappable place anyway - or then some of the maps of the journeys). But she usually points that out herself in the comments, where she isn't sure. In any case, the Atlas is a very, very good source and very reliable, unlike some other stuff (the infamous Bestiary by David Day comes to mind).

[Tar-Jêx]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

Just in regards to the amount of posts per day - you will see after, say, a year has passed. When I joined, I usually posted quite a lot, feeling like an overflowing kettle suddenly in an environment where I can let the steam out. Then I calmed down, settled down and it became posting on a regular basis, often, but more posts only when there was something really interesting (and that said, often there was). Lately, I must say, I haven't been around as often, so also my post count has probably dropped... It is obvious, as a new member, that you will have very high post-per-day count, but believe me, it will drop. Hopefully you'll find yourself still full of energy and posting also as the time passes.

As for Fonstad's Atlas, I've had it for years and it is very good. She tries to work as close to the sources as she can, taking really the scientific approach (it was supposed to be her own scholarly publication, after all); that said, LOTS of the maps just have to be based on guesses (e.g. the big 1st Age/2nd Age maps, Valinor - an essentially unmappable place anyway - or then some of the maps of the journeys). But she usually points that out herself in the comments, where she isn't sure. In any case, the Atlas is a very, very good source and very reliable, unlike some other stuff (the infamous Bestiary by David Day comes to mind).

I have heard of the Bestiary by David Day. On the topic of lore fails, Shadow of Mordor. By Eru, that is just blegh. What a relief that they aren't calling it canon, as that would likely cause them to be stoned.

I usually find that immediately after joining, posts aren't that often, but will soon speed up to become a few a day, but slowly drop down. The purpose of posting once per day is to stay involved in all of the discussions and community, as well as staying active.

[Rikae]

I never bothered to look at mine before - somehow, though I was absent for years, it's surprisingly high at .99!

Also, my next post will be my three-thousandth. Better make it a good one...

[Snowdog]

I've been 'officially' here since December 2002, though I posted maybe 5 times on the old EZ board from my EZ global account. Since December 2002, I have, counting this one, 485 posts. So for me a number of posts per day with the decimal point well to the left.