[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums

The perils of reference positions

Posted By: Timothy Chow
Date: Friday, 2 July 2010, at 6:20 p.m.

In Response To: The perils of reference positions (Chuck Bower)

Thanks for your input, Chuck. You wrote:

You still get your point across and you're much more likely, IMO, to get unbiased replies.

I agree with that; however, my goal is not always to solicit unbiased replies. I have a variety of motivations for posting positions. One is to provide entertainment for others. Another is to solicit insights about the position that I have not obtained on my own. From your perspective as a consumer, I can see that you would like QF minimized. From my perspective, though, sometimes the question I want some input on is, "Why aren't the following two positions exactly analogous?" To minimize QF I could post one of them and then only afterwards post the other one. However, in my experience, a lot more people look at the initial post and respond to it than look at the followup and respond to that. So if I do it that way, I'll get only 20% as much feedback as I might get if I inject extra QF into the original post. Given that I don't get as many clicks to start with as posts that say, "Look at how this Giant blundered!!!" I would like to squeeze what I can out of the clicks that I do get.

Messages In This Thread

 

Post Response
Your Name:
Your E-Mail Address:
Subject:
Message:

If necessary, enter your password below:

Password:
 

 

[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.