posted
Ok, I've been noticing a few things going on, and thought it was a good time to point out a few ideas and tips that we all have.
Not all fluff is good fluff. This is obvious. A thread that's topic is what is your favorite kind of bread, with the content of the first post being:
"I like wheat bread, what's your favorite kind?"
is not too efficient. Other posters CAN make it effecient if they do more than just say "white" "palmento" "rye" etc. etc. Just saying that is not quite unique and thus, not too interesting.
I am incredibly guilty of doing this, though, so for those of you reading, I am well aware of my lame threads. But I feel now is a good time to share your thoughts on what makes some good efficient fluff.
Posts: 9754 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
good fluff requires lots of people going off on lots of different tangents, and then other people yelling (typing) at them for it. a good fluffer might also make creative use of smilies. Posts: 981 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I might also add that this fluff has nothing to do with being a fluffer on a porno set, because if you read this thread over with that connotation in mind, you go away with a whole different meaning...
Posts: 1423 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
All fluff is good fluff. Well, most of it, anyway. I don't think you can really analyze fluff...
Posts: 7877 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ok, some fluff can be measured, just as the value of some dobies can be measured. Here are just a few tips that I have for some fluffers.
The first thing that one should consider when fluffing is creative originality. This is what I think the most important part of efficient fluff. Use some of that space in your head before posting, and ask yourself if it's already a beaten down topic.
Creative Original threads that have been major hits, are things such as "One line descriptions of people," "Begging the question," the lyric thread. And though not major hits, still good fluff threads worth mentioning are The Dobie Thread Thread, The Mastication Thread and The Chicken Thread. Those are efficient fluff threads, because they were original, creative, and easy to work with and add to.
Which brings us to our next point: the adding to.
In the adding to part, we have two subsections: what you give, and what other posters give. The content of the first post is going to set the tone for the rest of the thread. Its a lot more efficient if you try to argue why wheat is the best, then to just say "I like wheat, what do you like?"
Or like starting a thread on steaks. I think that the best tasting steaks are the medium rare ones. When you over cook a steak, it gets rid of all that juicy flavor. And see, by saying that it opens the floor for the other posters to respond in a fluffy argument of what the best way to cook a steak is, while at the same time expressing their opinions on the matter.
Also comes the response part. You need to make sure there is material in your fluff that people can work with, or add to, or, if needed, just laugh and add to your ego about how funny it was.
This is today's lesson/opinion of efficient fluff.
Posts: 9754 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well first of all, I am confident and glad that I do not know what a fluffer does in porn movies, but if the connotations I gathered in the posts lead me to the right conclusion, then you are wrong in your snort reply T! But that becomes an onanism thread at that point.
BTW, I say toast up some white bread, fry up some minute steaks, melt on some provolone or mozzerella, and apply some Lea & Perrins steak sauce. Voila! Bon Appeteit!
Posts: 1870 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Welcome to day number two, with a few more tips.
After reading a few things today, I have decided that todays tip will be on the derailment process, and how to derail efficiently while still maintaining a well-balanced friendly and efficient thread.
Something you should know about fluff is that it is one of the easiest things to derail. I have decided that there are 2 kinds of derailment:
Hijacking and Evolution
Of the two kinds of derailment, evolution is among the more efficient ways, though both can be efficient in their own way.
Evolution- when a poster continues to add to the thread thus making more of a discussion still pertaining to the original post. They don't change the subject, they don't twist what the thread is about, they add to it.
Like Banna's Nude thread today. The topic evolved when Annie posted, into a discussion about the types of nudity and basically, an overall discussion on nudity. This is seen because after she does, saxon pressed the question of what society can do to change as to not make it possible, which was then added to by Frisco.
The original link can still be discussed, but instead of a little joke to smile at, there is some (hopefully) harmless discussion where we can express our opinions and still chuckle at the same time.
Hijack- complete take over from thread, not pertaining to the first post. The most efficient hijacking I've ever seen was done by Emp Palpatine on the other forum. Someone posted about Hot Soup (Han Tsu) in which he replied that he liked chowder. After that, the whole thread was about soup, not the character. Still fluff, still efficient fluff, but a hijack, nonetheless.
When a thread is started about bread types, and then someone brings up what someone said in another thread some how linking it to Iraq, and then talking about war... that is not efficient.
Posts: 9754 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not only is it not efficient, I'd go as far as to say it's flat out rude. Particulary if the previous posts look like they've taken some significant effort to produce.
Posts: 4292 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know, Nathan, there are some people (I'll preserve their anonymity) who use the word "fluff" to mean "fart."
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would just like to point out at this juncture that the pr0n reference has nothing to do with farting. Or queefing. Or anything to do with gaseous emissions. 'Nuff said.
Posts: 1423 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Efficient fluff brings up a new way of looking at quality over quantity in posts. Fluff was always in the quantity category and quality was reserved for serious threads. I see now that there is such a thing as quality fluff. I hadn't thought of it that way before although I believe it has been mentioned.
Posts: 1056 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey, isn't there something about some type of bread way back during the Salem witch trials? I remember hearing something about how the bread contained a natural form of LSD and so the people were halucinating and thought that the other people were witches. That type of bread, with margarine. Posts: 1466 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
I've heard of that theory, yes. I never decided exactly what I thought about it.
If I'm not mistaken, it had something to do with flooding that made a mold or something grow on the wheat that year, and when they used the wheat to make food, they ingested whatever it was that was on the wheat.
I've also heard (and mostly believe) the theory that a couple of vengeful little girls got themselves in trouble, and that they were trying to get out of trouble. In the meantime, this put them in a position to get revenge on a number of townsfolk.
I don't think that either excuses the deaths that occured. Posts: 701 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
It may have been a mold, or perhaps a smut (another fungus, with an amusing name ), but was most likely a rust (another member of the fungus kingdom) called Ergot.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Party]](graemlins/party.gif)
![[No No]](graemlins/nono.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Taunt]](graemlins/taunt.gif)
![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)
![[Evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Oh no, the contradiction of terms! ![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
