Originally posted by fiercei don't get it: someone finding certain usernames is subjected to your vitriol, but banning under-13s is fine, and hiding posts because a number of people find them offensive enough to alert them is fine? do you actually have a coherent position at all?
Pure and utter genius.
-f
this is not to disagree with Russ's latest change - i'm fine with it. in fact it is consistent with my position taken in other threads. but it doesn't seem consistent with yours, unless i am missing something?
Originally posted by seanpbutlerSounds like alert abuse... perhaps you would be better suited to continue with your chess games.
ONE
I will put an alert on this.
If the next person puts TWO and an alert then we should find out what N is.
Russ this was a good callange but I fine chess more of a challange.
P-
Originally posted by dfm65how is this relevant? may i suggest you just PM him with your question instead of trying to air your personal grievances within a constructive discussion where nobody cares?
i don't get it: someone finding certain usernames is subjected to your vitriol, but banning under-13s is fine, and hiding posts because a number of people find them offensive enough to alert them is fine? do you actually have a coherent position at all?
this is not to disagree with Russ's latest change - i'm fine with it. in fact it is consistent with my ...[text shortened]... ken in other threads. but it doesn't seem consistent with yours, unless i am missing something?
Originally posted by LivingLegendI guess that's what would make it experimental?
Mr. Blue didn't say it really nice, but he is right, what stops Benett sending a message to Rob with:
"Hi Rob, Ivanhoe posted something silly again, let us alert it!"
Nothing personal here with the names of course. 😏
O.
Russ, will you be able to see exactly which posts are hidden and use personal discretion as to whether the post was offensive or if it were a kind of "gang" tactic?
Originally posted by darvlayGood point darv...but this turning into a productive discussion seems less and less likely all the time.
how is this relevant? may i suggest you just PM him with your question instead of trying to air your personal grievances within a constructive discussion where nobody cares?
The number of people who seem to think that logging on is license to act like a petulant child is astounding! 😉
TheSkipper
Originally posted by TheSkipperlol... there's still hope!
Good point darv...but this turning into a productive discussion seems less and less likely all the time.
The number of people who seem to think that logging on is license to act like a petulant child is astounding! 😉
TheSkipper
Originally posted by seanpbutlerThat will only work if everyone plays. For example, maybe I alerted this post and didn't put TWO, or maybe I will put TWO and not alert.
ONE
I will put an alert on this.
If the next person puts TWO and an alert then we should find out what N is.
Russ this was a good callange but I fine chess more of a challange.
1 edit
Originally posted by richjohnsonI only ask because the value of n will be an important factor in how many posts are moderated. If n=100, I would venture to say that hardly any posts will be removed. If n=5, then the system is rife for the type of abuses people are talking about: the "ganging up" factor. And the lower the n, the lower will be the common denominator for what speech is allowed; a few very sensitive members can dictate what the entire community reads. Ravello pointed out that there are other sites with similiar systems, but the number of alerts have to be n more than the number of recs; I think this would be better than the system implemented here. I fear that a small number of aggressive alerters will be able to tailor the content of the Forums to their wishes even though they are unrepresentative of the community.
I think there are good reasons not to publicize 'n'. As Russ said, 'n' may change. If the value is made public, then if and when it changes there will be a bunch of sqawking -- eg. "hey, me and my n-1 friends alerted that post! why is it still here?"
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderExcellent points no1. I agree the number should be high, but making the number public can lead to problems as well. ie Even if the number were 100, if everyone knew that it is not out of the question that something could be 'worked out' with PM's and clan alerts etc. This would end up skewing the number system so badly that the only way to remove a post would require massive coordination and the only reason people would cordinante to that extent is to "get even" with another poster or something like that.
I only ask because the value of n will be an important factor in how many posts are moderated. If n=100, I would venture to say that hardly any posts will be removed. If n=5, then the system is rife for the type of abuses peo ...[text shortened]... ven though they are unrepresentative of the community.
TheSkipper