The rules are changing, we are going to start showing the assholes the door

@Setanta,

I might be being dense here but what is the ironic part?

@Robert Gentel,

That while you were discussing that sort of mass "down voting," someone was just a page back doing exactly that.

@Setanta,

Ah. Yeah that was what I was referring to (and noticed it on other threads tonight). We'll be looking up who that was over the next week or and suspending them and any other accounts they used.

1 Reply

By the way, it has occurred to me that this may sometimes arise from someone who is glancing in to the site while doing something else online, and simply down votes the posts so as to collapse them, and isn't involved in any sort of comment or editorializing. It seemed rather unnecessary to me until i noticed how hard it is to keep your place when going back and forth between web pages. This site is not the reason i come online. It's just something i indulge in while doing other things online. I think, for example, that a lot of people do that with Facebook--rummage around there while at work. I don't care for facebook, so i rummage around here. It's only possible because, despite the ravages of age, i am still a fairly fast typist. (A lot of dysgraphia these days, though.)

2 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

By the way, it has occurred to me that this may sometimes arise from someone who is glancing in to the site while doing something else online, and simply down votes the posts so as to collapse them, and isn't involved in any sort of comment or editorializing.

Yeah I thought the same too, and we'll try to make that determination (should be fairly easy). It's also a good reason to separate the collapsing from the voting.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Your verbatim words:

Quote:

Entrenched anti-Semitic views” very rare among whites and Asian Americans, common among blacks and Latinos.

When I correctly represent your own words, what is your response? This:

Quote:

I translated nothing, and i did not at any time use the term common. This is part and parcel of your style--straw man and distortion .

See, this is why you generate so many arguments. You routinely deny what you said (or what an article said, or another poster said, or whatever), and then have the gall to accuse others of bad faith when they CORRECTLY state the issue in question.

Edit: After looking again, I see that is the HEADLINE of the article. I don't pay much attention to headlines. I just took the words you put in your post as being yours.

You have misrepresented other things in this post, but I'm not going to bother addressing them.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

Quote:

it's not something we do and you sound like a crazy conspiracy theorist to posit as much.

Then we have led different lives and met different people. But unless I am mistaken, you are a stranger on the internet so to what part of common sense would I trust you? But at least we know you are trusting...can I have your credit card details I need to fix up a error for you..oh, and deposit lots of money as you are now a prince in Nigeria! Congratulations!

0 Replies

@layman,

Either you're incredibly stupid, or, which i consider more likely, just indulging distortions again. Those were not my words--those were the words of the author of the article. It's a headline, fer chrissake, about an 80 point headline, and you can't distinguish what the article says and what i say?

You're the one who consistently misrepresents what people say, you've really got a gall to charge anyone else with that.

1 Reply

@layman,

I finished a post once and as soon as it was displayed it went to -1. This means two people read it faster than I could and voted it down. Of course it could be two idiots who hate me but it was very fast.

Quote:

Yet, somehow one gets 3 positive votes and one gets 3 negative votes for saying precisely the same thing.

I have three posts that others have copied exactly. They were voted up and I was voted down. Emotional ratbags. Very low emotional IQ...maybe they were abused children? I would like to see visibility of who votes what for the forum members only.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Quote:

Those were not my words--.. It's a headline, fer chrissake, about an 80 point headline

1. I've already edited my post (before reading this)

2. You used the exact same words in your post and did not make it known that it was a headline. It's not even in quote marks, let alone italicized, underlined, capitalized, or otherwise identified as anything other than your own words. I just looked at your post. I don't bother with headlines for content.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

Robert Gentel wrote:

The correct way to deal with this is to simply disallow such abuse of the voting (and we will) but till then we'll be manually looking up users who engage in indiscriminate mass-downvoting (or indiscriminate upvoting) and will be suspending their access.

What about mass upvotes that are targeted at countering mass downvotes? I've made a habit of trying to counter the mass downvotes when I come across them.

Of course, I only have one vote against their several, but I've considered it a way of mitigating the downvotes by a factor of one.

1 Reply

@layman,

It appears to me that you don't bother with content for content. I'll revise my opinion of you to stupid and dishonest.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

No doubt you will also be suspending the haters...people who continuously vote the one person down. It just occurred to me, wouldn't it be a good idea to change the rules, warn, then prosecute? You seem to be prosecuting and back dating the rules...illegal behaviour in most fair systems. But what do I know...I'm incoherent and paranoid. Perhaps I should report you for personal insults?

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

At best he might be reading the postings under another name and if he is

No account needed to merely read the posts.

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Robert Gentel wrote:

Do you really want this to be a community where members get to call each other "fag" or "nigger" or are you just being contrary?

I'd indeed prefer a community where that is prohibited, but I'd also like a community where someone is given a small suspension at first, and then only suspended for a long time if they continue to violate a rule.

Unless they do something truly egregious like use the site to sell heroin to children or traffic in kidnapped sex slaves or something.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

What is the correct use of the thumb?

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Quote:

It appears to me that you don't bother with content for content. I'll revise my opinion of you to stupid and dishonest.

There is no need for me to revise anything about my opinion of you. Same old ****, blowhard.

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Robert Gentel wrote:

Quote:
What's that tellya?

That the voting system needs to learn to discard votes from that pattern of behavior. When the new system is launched all votes will be run through the new filters so historically the indiscriminate mass voting will be removed.

If you check MY record...I think you will see that I have voted only one time the entire time I have been here...an up-vote for an EXCEPTIONAL post. (I'm just about positive I've only voted once the entire time.)

I think the voting is nonsense...and I think the people who up-vote something like "Happy Birthday" are just as silly as the people who down-vote everything.

I know you think the up and down voting is important, Robert. But, frankly, it is the least desirable facet of the site...and for some, apparently people with limited ego, it seems to be the focus of attention.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

I may be using the "thumbs" button in an unintended way, but I use it in the "New Topics" window to filter out the posts I don't want to see. Mostly this is for Spammers but it also includes all the DeKryptonite posts and Relationship posts (because I'm just not interested). It has nothing to do with whether I feel the content is appropriate or not, it's merely a way to clean up the New Topics so that I only see the ones I am interested in.

I use a combination of Thumbs Down and Ignore as a way to filter the Spam and Spammers out of the system as well. As such, I probably have hundreds of people on ignore simply because I thought they were Spammers or Bots. Only a very few are on ignore because I found them objectionable or boring.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

You should not worry about your voting unless it is clearly abusive and manipulative. I am only going to act on clear patterns of abuse and situations like that would never apply.

0 Replies

The rules are changing, we are going to start showing the assholes the door

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know