Instead of “20 characters” I add noop HTML tokens of sufficient length.
For example: <div></div><div></div>. These are 22 characters to satisfy the check but don’t appear visually.
6 Likes
Or STORJ could set it to 4 characters like many other Discourse forums
1 Like
Compared to most of the posts, this 20 char limit is rarely hit. This avoids answers like: I agree, great and so on. It was probably a good choice
6 Likes
Or not if everyone can circumvent the limit by adding:
20 characters
1 Like
No. Your message should be meaningful otherwise why to write it at all?
You also can use a 
icon to mark posts what’s you like.
ok. Would you like that I applied this rule for you? (because you are failed to add a useful content so far in this thread, but I do not want to do so). Please do not force me to apply it.
This limit keeps reminding me that this forum is not Whatsapp. The like button is all you need to reply with a confirmation. Why add chat-like responses?
5 Likes
The only case for a short answer is if someone is asking a direct yes/no question, usually by the end of discussion, like: “so I’m deleting this file and setting this configuration, adjusting this policy, and then reboot, correct?”
Then responding “yes” would be appropriate, and artificially inflating the sentence would be waste of everyone’s time.
The heart here would be ambiguous — is this a yes, or do you also want to know?
Its the context that would make the heart icon meaningful. Here instead of making a new post for YES, clicking heart icon would suffice IMO. Personally, I use heart icon to agree, say thank you, notify OP that I did read the post/reply or just randomly click multiple post to get the “badge” 
I also do like the 20 characters limit as Storj’s way of saying, if you don’t want to add something of value to the conversation then don’t say anything.
1 Like
Oh, so there are at least two ways to work around this limit…
I would agree, but I find it also encouraged me to elaborate on my yes. Since I would need to add characters anyway, why not elaborate on why that would be the correct approach?
Then again, I’m also not exactly known for my short posts. I don’t think I’ve ever padded my responses artificially.
1 Like
…. Go on ….
In that my hypothetical scenario this would have been redundant and repetitive, because the reasoning was already allegedly provided in the earlier discussion and that was last all-green type of confirmation.
It’s a discourse thing, and I completely agree.
This is a good default, and should not be changed. But for those who don’t mind going out of the way to bypass it, and likely (hopefully) have a good reason — I’m glad there is a workaround. Because “20characters” statement brings zero value anyway.
Why?
Because it bugs me that I don’t know it 
1 Like