nobody else would read end-to-end. — god must be atheist

And this would ensure that people would not do something else. — god must be atheist

Wot?

I tried this kind of thing on another forum where there were topics with 50+ pages ... mostly people went ape-shit when the intention was simply to lock a thread, assess how it had developed, and then provide links to new threads that continued the discussion and advanced in some way.

Such a system isn’t needed here as most of the threads don’t last more than a dozen pages before being rehashed and branched off in more manageable directions and details.

It may be an idea to have a trail run of having a minimum word count? Generally it appears the quality here is much higher than elsewhere though so it could discourage short succinct posts and make for needlessly verbose posts.

Speaking from my perspective, I suffer with the reverse problem so it doesn’t really bother me either way. That said I’m generally not encouraged to continue discussions with people who present nothing but one line replies to complex questions - in those cases I just cut my losses and move on, or maybe try and provoke a fuller answer.

Wot? — khaled

1. As stated, my brain was mush when I wrote the OP.
2. Wot is "something else" indeed? It is kind of a catch phrase to everything that could be written, or said, but haven't been said yet in a particular thread.
3. I assume "Wot" means "What". If i am mistaken, please let me know, as it is an honest mistake. Misspelled words are abundant in txt lingo and on the Internet, and I'm less conversant in these languages than in informal common English.

Speaking from my perspective, I suffer with the reverse problem so it doesn’t really bother me either way. That said I’m generally not encouraged to continue discussions with people who present nothing but one line replies to complex questions - in those cases I just cut my losses and move on, or maybe try and provoke a fuller answer. — I like sushi

I hear you loud and clear. I answer even one-liners, if I see merit in the one line or one word uttered. It is easier most of the time than to analyze and respond carefully and meritfully to some long, rambling post.

You're right in my opinion by making the assessment that this site is above others. There is one site that is completely bereft of idiots, (whereas this one is not) but they did that by heavy-handed moderation, and now their active membership is down to ten participants, with three posts total in any week on average. They call themselves Science Chat Forum, and they have a philosophy section. I was heavily moderated out of there in little time.

That site is not bereft of idiots at all. It was set up primarily as a science site and the philosophy side was tagged on later.