Problem with low effort threads

[nestivv]

What people complain about: signs of decline

Many users report that threads with barely any effort (sometimes just a sentence or a meme/video) are getting far more attention than thoughtful, well-researched posts. For example, one user wrote:

> “You can spend four hours revising, researching, typing, and citing a thread, and it will get three replies, yet a thread about [some superficial topic] gets 500 views and 70 replies.”



There’s a recurring sentiment that “high-effort threads suck,” i.e. detailed guides or serious discussion are seen as “cope,” too dense, or even ignored — while low effort content is praised for being “digestible.”

In a thread explicitly titled “Forum has reached a new low,” a user angrily complains about “this type of threads get traction while my high effort marvelous threads get nothing.”

Users mention that much of the low-effort content seems repetitive, shallow, and targeted at maximal shock value or quick gratification (e.g. provocative images, sensationalism), rather than genuine discussion.


In short: the community feels flooded by shallow, click-bait–style threads; valuable content gets overshadowed; and repeatedly people feel discouraged from contributing seriously because it doesn’t pay off.


---

What community members themselves say about why it happens

Several recurring explanations come up — not all “official,” but common in user complaints:

As one poster said, “any1 putting high effort into .org threads means they coping… my low effort threads mog.” In other words: there's a cultural shift where brevity, shock-value, meme-style content, or simply “whatever gets a reaction” is more rewarded than thoughtful writing.

Some believe the user base has changed: a small number of older/serious members remain, but many newer or more casual users are mostly “shitposting” or only interested in low-effort threads. As one put it: “a huge part of people here are just subhumans, who do nothing but shitpost.”

There’s also a “feedback-loop” effect: once a few low-effort threads get big reaction, more people post similar content because that’s what “works,” further drowning out high-quality posts. The site effectively rewards low effort — which encourages more of it.



---

What the “low-effort culture” does to the forum over time

It demotivates people who used to (or would like to) contribute serious, thoughtful content. Several experienced users expressed frustration that their “hours-worth of effort” got little attention, and eventually gave up posting.

The overall perceived quality of discussion goes down. Threads become shallow, repetitive, or purely for shock/comedy value rather than meaningful exchange.

It drives away some of the more “invested” or serious community members — those who preferred depth over clicks — which may lead to long-term decline in expertise, diversity of opinions, and quality of content.

For newcomers or lurkers who are trying to learn or improve, it becomes harder to find valuable threads amid the noise. The signal-to-noise ratio worsens.



---

Why this matters (and why some feel it’s not just “annoying,” but damaging)

The original purpose of the forum — sharing ideas about self-improvement, appearance, wellness, maybe even genuine help — gets undermined. When superficial content dominates, the site risks becoming little more than social media or meme-board.

There’s a larger systemic issue: the trend mirrors problems in many online communities where algorithms or social reward push for maximum engagement (fast reactions, clicks, shock value) over usefulness. Once that pattern sets in, reversing it is difficult.

For a community concerned about personal well-being, looks, mental health, etc — this decline might steer people toward unhelpful comparisons, unrealistic standards, or echo-chamber thinking — instead of constructive advice or support.



---

What some members propose (or wish) as a fix

Use filtering/search techniques to find quality posts — e.g. restricting search to certain subforums, requiring a minimum number of replies, or searching only thread titles + first posts to filter out “shitposts.”

Try to shift forum culture: some users suggest encouraging more high-effort threads, maybe by giving them manual promotion, rewarding good content, or moderating low-quality posts more strictly. But that seems difficult while the broader user base prefers the low-effort style.

Accept that perhaps the forum has changed fundamentally. Some users say the “real” looksmax-community has moved on, or that the old standards
are gone — which may mean individual expectations need adjusting.

 

[nestivv]

Too long didn't read.

 

[ikramy]

Too long didn't read.

You did what the users are complaining about btw

 

[aidenltn17]

did read, main takeaways.

high effort posts should get the traction they deserve if people want to read them. make a new section. low IQ threads may be the downfall of org.

 

[PrettyLights]

“hey chatgpt, how much of this was written by an ai”

 

[enriquecuador]

What people complain about: signs of decline

Many users report that threads with barely any effort (sometimes just a sentence or a meme/video) are getting far more attention than thoughtful, well-researched posts. For example, one user wrote:

> “You can spend four hours revising, researching, typing, and citing a thread, and it will get three replies, yet a thread about [some superficial topic] gets 500 views and 70 replies.”



There’s a recurring sentiment that “high-effort threads suck,” i.e. detailed guides or serious discussion are seen as “cope,” too dense, or even ignored — while low effort content is praised for being “digestible.”

In a thread explicitly titled “Forum has reached a new low,” a user angrily complains about “this type of threads get traction while my high effort marvelous threads get nothing.”

Users mention that much of the low-effort content seems repetitive, shallow, and targeted at maximal shock value or quick gratification (e.g. provocative images, sensationalism), rather than genuine discussion.


In short: the community feels flooded by shallow, click-bait–style threads; valuable content gets overshadowed; and repeatedly people feel discouraged from contributing seriously because it doesn’t pay off.


---

What community members themselves say about why it happens

Several recurring explanations come up — not all “official,” but common in user complaints:

As one poster said, “any1 putting high effort into .org threads means they coping… my low effort threads mog.” In other words: there's a cultural shift where brevity, shock-value, meme-style content, or simply “whatever gets a reaction” is more rewarded than thoughtful writing.

Some believe the user base has changed: a small number of older/serious members remain, but many newer or more casual users are mostly “shitposting” or only interested in low-effort threads. As one put it: “a huge part of people here are just subhumans, who do nothing but shitpost.”

There’s also a “feedback-loop” effect: once a few low-effort threads get big reaction, more people post similar content because that’s what “works,” further drowning out high-quality posts. The site effectively rewards low effort — which encourages more of it.



---

What the “low-effort culture” does to the forum over time

It demotivates people who used to (or would like to) contribute serious, thoughtful content. Several experienced users expressed frustration that their “hours-worth of effort” got little attention, and eventually gave up posting.

The overall perceived quality of discussion goes down. Threads become shallow, repetitive, or purely for shock/comedy value rather than meaningful exchange.

It drives away some of the more “invested” or serious community members — those who preferred depth over clicks — which may lead to long-term decline in expertise, diversity of opinions, and quality of content.

For newcomers or lurkers who are trying to learn or improve, it becomes harder to find valuable threads amid the noise. The signal-to-noise ratio worsens.



---

Why this matters (and why some feel it’s not just “annoying,” but damaging)

The original purpose of the forum — sharing ideas about self-improvement, appearance, wellness, maybe even genuine help — gets undermined. When superficial content dominates, the site risks becoming little more than social media or meme-board.

There’s a larger systemic issue: the trend mirrors problems in many online communities where algorithms or social reward push for maximum engagement (fast reactions, clicks, shock value) over usefulness. Once that pattern sets in, reversing it is difficult.

For a community concerned about personal well-being, looks, mental health, etc — this decline might steer people toward unhelpful comparisons, unrealistic standards, or echo-chamber thinking — instead of constructive advice or support.



---

What some members propose (or wish) as a fix

Use filtering/search techniques to find quality posts — e.g. restricting search to certain subforums, requiring a minimum number of replies, or searching only thread titles + first posts to filter out “shitposts.”

Try to shift forum culture: some users suggest encouraging more high-effort threads, maybe by giving them manual promotion, rewarding good content, or moderating low-quality posts more strictly. But that seems difficult while the broader user base prefers the low-effort style.

Accept that perhaps the forum has changed fundamentally. Some users say the “real” looksmax-community has moved on, or that the old standards
are gone — which may mean individual expectations need adjusting.

This is a serious issue actuslly

But it’s only in offtopic

 

[ognencho]

What people complain about: signs of decline

Many users report that threads with barely any effort (sometimes just a sentence or a meme/video) are getting far more attention than thoughtful, well-researched posts. For example, one user wrote:

> “You can spend four hours revising, researching, typing, and citing a thread, and it will get three replies, yet a thread about [some superficial topic] gets 500 views and 70 replies.”



There’s a recurring sentiment that “high-effort threads suck,” i.e. detailed guides or serious discussion are seen as “cope,” too dense, or even ignored — while low effort content is praised for being “digestible.”

In a thread explicitly titled “Forum has reached a new low,” a user angrily complains about “this type of threads get traction while my high effort marvelous threads get nothing.”

Users mention that much of the low-effort content seems repetitive, shallow, and targeted at maximal shock value or quick gratification (e.g. provocative images, sensationalism), rather than genuine discussion.


In short: the community feels flooded by shallow, click-bait–style threads; valuable content gets overshadowed; and repeatedly people feel discouraged from contributing seriously because it doesn’t pay off.


---

What community members themselves say about why it happens

Several recurring explanations come up — not all “official,” but common in user complaints:

As one poster said, “any1 putting high effort into .org threads means they coping… my low effort threads mog.” In other words: there's a cultural shift where brevity, shock-value, meme-style content, or simply “whatever gets a reaction” is more rewarded than thoughtful writing.

Some believe the user base has changed: a small number of older/serious members remain, but many newer or more casual users are mostly “shitposting” or only interested in low-effort threads. As one put it: “a huge part of people here are just subhumans, who do nothing but shitpost.”

There’s also a “feedback-loop” effect: once a few low-effort threads get big reaction, more people post similar content because that’s what “works,” further drowning out high-quality posts. The site effectively rewards low effort — which encourages more of it.



---

What the “low-effort culture” does to the forum over time

It demotivates people who used to (or would like to) contribute serious, thoughtful content. Several experienced users expressed frustration that their “hours-worth of effort” got little attention, and eventually gave up posting.

The overall perceived quality of discussion goes down. Threads become shallow, repetitive, or purely for shock/comedy value rather than meaningful exchange.

It drives away some of the more “invested” or serious community members — those who preferred depth over clicks — which may lead to long-term decline in expertise, diversity of opinions, and quality of content.

For newcomers or lurkers who are trying to learn or improve, it becomes harder to find valuable threads amid the noise. The signal-to-noise ratio worsens.



---

Why this matters (and why some feel it’s not just “annoying,” but damaging)

The original purpose of the forum — sharing ideas about self-improvement, appearance, wellness, maybe even genuine help — gets undermined. When superficial content dominates, the site risks becoming little more than social media or meme-board.

There’s a larger systemic issue: the trend mirrors problems in many online communities where algorithms or social reward push for maximum engagement (fast reactions, clicks, shock value) over usefulness. Once that pattern sets in, reversing it is difficult.

For a community concerned about personal well-being, looks, mental health, etc — this decline might steer people toward unhelpful comparisons, unrealistic standards, or echo-chamber thinking — instead of constructive advice or support.



---

What some members propose (or wish) as a fix

Use filtering/search techniques to find quality posts — e.g. restricting search to certain subforums, requiring a minimum number of replies, or searching only thread titles + first posts to filter out “shitposts.”

Try to shift forum culture: some users suggest encouraging more high-effort threads, maybe by giving them manual promotion, rewarding good content, or moderating low-quality posts more strictly. But that seems difficult while the broader user base prefers the low-effort style.

Accept that perhaps the forum has changed fundamentally. Some users say the “real” looksmax-community has moved on, or that the old standards
are gone — which may mean individual expectations need adjusting.

Well you are absolutely right and i mirin the effort BUT off topic imo shouldn't be only high effort.

Why?

First off, off topic keeps the community alive. It makes users bond. Which often happens exactly because of not so high effort threads.

Second, only (or mostly) high effort threads will lead to less threads, less people posting and therefore we go back to my first point, the community will slowly die a bit.

That is only for Off Topic tho, every other subforum should be serious and filled with quality threads.

Youngcel out

 

[richoxne]

What people complain about: signs of decline

Many users report that threads with barely any effort (sometimes just a sentence or a meme/video) are getting far more attention than thoughtful, well-researched posts. For example, one user wrote:

> “You can spend four hours revising, researching, typing, and citing a thread, and it will get three replies, yet a thread about [some superficial topic] gets 500 views and 70 replies.”



There’s a recurring sentiment that “high-effort threads suck,” i.e. detailed guides or serious discussion are seen as “cope,” too dense, or even ignored — while low effort content is praised for being “digestible.”

In a thread explicitly titled “Forum has reached a new low,” a user angrily complains about “this type of threads get traction while my high effort marvelous threads get nothing.”

Users mention that much of the low-effort content seems repetitive, shallow, and targeted at maximal shock value or quick gratification (e.g. provocative images, sensationalism), rather than genuine discussion.


In short: the community feels flooded by shallow, click-bait–style threads; valuable content gets overshadowed; and repeatedly people feel discouraged from contributing seriously because it doesn’t pay off.


---

What community members themselves say about why it happens

Several recurring explanations come up — not all “official,” but common in user complaints:

As one poster said, “any1 putting high effort into .org threads means they coping… my low effort threads mog.” In other words: there's a cultural shift where brevity, shock-value, meme-style content, or simply “whatever gets a reaction” is more rewarded than thoughtful writing.

Some believe the user base has changed: a small number of older/serious members remain, but many newer or more casual users are mostly “shitposting” or only interested in low-effort threads. As one put it: “a huge part of people here are just subhumans, who do nothing but shitpost.”

There’s also a “feedback-loop” effect: once a few low-effort threads get big reaction, more people post similar content because that’s what “works,” further drowning out high-quality posts. The site effectively rewards low effort — which encourages more of it.



---

What the “low-effort culture” does to the forum over time

It demotivates people who used to (or would like to) contribute serious, thoughtful content. Several experienced users expressed frustration that their “hours-worth of effort” got little attention, and eventually gave up posting.

The overall perceived quality of discussion goes down. Threads become shallow, repetitive, or purely for shock/comedy value rather than meaningful exchange.

It drives away some of the more “invested” or serious community members — those who preferred depth over clicks — which may lead to long-term decline in expertise, diversity of opinions, and quality of content.

For newcomers or lurkers who are trying to learn or improve, it becomes harder to find valuable threads amid the noise. The signal-to-noise ratio worsens.



---

Why this matters (and why some feel it’s not just “annoying,” but damaging)

The original purpose of the forum — sharing ideas about self-improvement, appearance, wellness, maybe even genuine help — gets undermined. When superficial content dominates, the site risks becoming little more than social media or meme-board.

There’s a larger systemic issue: the trend mirrors problems in many online communities where algorithms or social reward push for maximum engagement (fast reactions, clicks, shock value) over usefulness. Once that pattern sets in, reversing it is difficult.

For a community concerned about personal well-being, looks, mental health, etc — this decline might steer people toward unhelpful comparisons, unrealistic standards, or echo-chamber thinking — instead of constructive advice or support.



---

What some members propose (or wish) as a fix

Use filtering/search techniques to find quality posts — e.g. restricting search to certain subforums, requiring a minimum number of replies, or searching only thread titles + first posts to filter out “shitposts.”

Try to shift forum culture: some users suggest encouraging more high-effort threads, maybe by giving them manual promotion, rewarding good content, or moderating low-quality posts more strictly. But that seems difficult while the broader user base prefers the low-effort style.

Accept that perhaps the forum has changed fundamentally. Some users say the “real” looksmax-community has moved on, or that the old standards
are gone — which may mean individual expectations need adjusting.

full agree

 

[greyyyfor3ver]

Read every single word, I completely agree. I joined recently and wanted to research much about looksmaxing since I am not good looking. However when I seen that the only way to actually see good high-effort threads is in best of the best section and many people don't even actually looksmax instead rot and lurk. It actually surprised me.

 

[Tomer Solomon]

What people complain about: signs of decline

Many users report that threads with barely any effort (sometimes just a sentence or a meme/video) are getting far more attention than thoughtful, well-researched posts. For example, one user wrote:

> “You can spend four hours revising, researching, typing, and citing a thread, and it will get three replies, yet a thread about [some superficial topic] gets 500 views and 70 replies.”



There’s a recurring sentiment that “high-effort threads suck,” i.e. detailed guides or serious discussion are seen as “cope,” too dense, or even ignored — while low effort content is praised for being “digestible.”

In a thread explicitly titled “Forum has reached a new low,” a user angrily complains about “this type of threads get traction while my high effort marvelous threads get nothing.”

Users mention that much of the low-effort content seems repetitive, shallow, and targeted at maximal shock value or quick gratification (e.g. provocative images, sensationalism), rather than genuine discussion.


In short: the community feels flooded by shallow, click-bait–style threads; valuable content gets overshadowed; and repeatedly people feel discouraged from contributing seriously because it doesn’t pay off.


---

What community members themselves say about why it happens

Several recurring explanations come up — not all “official,” but common in user complaints:

As one poster said, “any1 putting high effort into .org threads means they coping… my low effort threads mog.” In other words: there's a cultural shift where brevity, shock-value, meme-style content, or simply “whatever gets a reaction” is more rewarded than thoughtful writing.

Some believe the user base has changed: a small number of older/serious members remain, but many newer or more casual users are mostly “shitposting” or only interested in low-effort threads. As one put it: “a huge part of people here are just subhumans, who do nothing but shitpost.”

There’s also a “feedback-loop” effect: once a few low-effort threads get big reaction, more people post similar content because that’s what “works,” further drowning out high-quality posts. The site effectively rewards low effort — which encourages more of it.



---

What the “low-effort culture” does to the forum over time

It demotivates people who used to (or would like to) contribute serious, thoughtful content. Several experienced users expressed frustration that their “hours-worth of effort” got little attention, and eventually gave up posting.

The overall perceived quality of discussion goes down. Threads become shallow, repetitive, or purely for shock/comedy value rather than meaningful exchange.

It drives away some of the more “invested” or serious community members — those who preferred depth over clicks — which may lead to long-term decline in expertise, diversity of opinions, and quality of content.

For newcomers or lurkers who are trying to learn or improve, it becomes harder to find valuable threads amid the noise. The signal-to-noise ratio worsens.



---

Why this matters (and why some feel it’s not just “annoying,” but damaging)

The original purpose of the forum — sharing ideas about self-improvement, appearance, wellness, maybe even genuine help — gets undermined. When superficial content dominates, the site risks becoming little more than social media or meme-board.

There’s a larger systemic issue: the trend mirrors problems in many online communities where algorithms or social reward push for maximum engagement (fast reactions, clicks, shock value) over usefulness. Once that pattern sets in, reversing it is difficult.

For a community concerned about personal well-being, looks, mental health, etc — this decline might steer people toward unhelpful comparisons, unrealistic standards, or echo-chamber thinking — instead of constructive advice or support.



---

What some members propose (or wish) as a fix

Use filtering/search techniques to find quality posts — e.g. restricting search to certain subforums, requiring a minimum number of replies, or searching only thread titles + first posts to filter out “shitposts.”

Try to shift forum culture: some users suggest encouraging more high-effort threads, maybe by giving them manual promotion, rewarding good content, or moderating low-quality posts more strictly. But that seems difficult while the broader user base prefers the low-effort style.

Accept that perhaps the forum has changed fundamentally. Some users say the “real” looksmax-community has moved on, or that the old standards
are gone — which may mean individual expectations need adjusting.

They should make a subforum for high effort threads or do something to promote them more

 

[🌏Enjoying_ths_life🌲]

nice chatgpt

 

[iGoontoTheHolocaust]

facts but okay gptcel