We have a limited number of upvotes. Should we have a limited number of discussions?

While I can go days shaking my head at why X is s a topic or laughing at the idiotic responses (in my opinion), I hope the site can continue to police itself. As CSM (Join to see) and Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS have mentioned here and elsewhere, we have our roles as we see ourselves trying to contribute; many others consistently have their roles as well.

I personally would like to see less about politics, religion (not military specific or chaplain related, which I think have been interesting) and other curious threads (which military value was served by "showing our rack",especially on the heels of threads that makes one believe that we want awards based on our actions, not for superficial value...really?). But some of those threads have the most responses and as long as we are communicating, we are better off then being alone on our personal islands.

Truthfully, I didn't know there was a limit. And I don't think I could sincerely post that often if I wanted. The whole points thing is curious to me, but only because I feel I could always do more for the community, especially when I go silent for a few days -- I feel like I am not filling my role.

As Lt Col Fred Marheine asked, what can I get with points? If nothing, then I'll just contribute when I think I can be helpful to the community. I trust the rest of the team will keep each other in check...

I had no idea there was a limit to up votes!!! I guess that means I've been stingy!

So I have yet to start a discussion so it shouldn't make much difference to me. However, if you want to limit the numbers of discussions because people post ridiculous topics, well those same people don't care about the real topics. They will still post the exact same things in just a limited capacity. So while it's a good theory, I don't see it being an effective solution...

But... what about "flagging" the discussion if it's inappropriate? So you have your "up vote," your "down vote," and a "flag." the flag could then alert the admins to review for appropriateness. Reach 3 flags in X number of time, and you get banned from posting discussions for... Idk 30 days or so?

I have no idea the practicality of that idea as I said, I haven't figured out how to post discussions, but just an idea, perhaps?

And this way your down votes have a separate meaning, and you can still disagree, without flagging and banning, though perhaps it should be up to the admin if the flag stands or is invalid to keep things fair.

As long as they build the community posting responses and thread should be unlimited. If you want to do something, maybe stop awarding "points" after X number of posts per day.