*

Offline Jura-Glenlivet

  • *
  • Posts: 1537
  • Life is meaningless & everything dies.
    • View Profile

Junker was right, nothing he posts is informative, worthy of debate or the slightest bit amusing, he constantly bragged how he was fucking up threads, maybe there is no exact rule but there is common sense Blanko.
Just to be clear, you are all terrific, but everything you say is exactly what a moron would say.

Offline Blanko

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2471
    • View Profile
[...]nothing he posts is informative, worthy of debate or the slightest bit amusing[...]

So his posts are like everything else in CN. w0w better ban everyone who posts there then

*

Offline Jura-Glenlivet

  • *
  • Posts: 1537
  • Life is meaningless & everything dies.
    • View Profile
His stated goal was to screw things up, as yours seems to be, to become king of the pissy nitpickers.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2015, 07:58:16 AM by Jura-Glenlivet »
Just to be clear, you are all terrific, but everything you say is exactly what a moron would say.

Offline Blanko

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2471
    • View Profile
His stated goal was to screw things up, as yours seems to be, to become king of the pissy nitpickers.

Nice insult. Unfortunately it was devoid of information, worthiness of debate or amusement, so I'm going to have to ban you.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7654
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
There wasn't one single other person that engaged and enjoyed seeing those posts in CN. It was just one individual using the forum in an anti-social way. The purpose of the rules is to provide protection to the enjoyment of all, from those who abuse the forum. Doesn't really matter if it is in CN. That is just exploiting the relaxed nature of that particular section.

We have a 'don't be a dick' rule ... persistent spamming of a popular part of it is being a dick.
Yes but you had to click the thread to see the posts.


While it may have been excessive, I think a warning of "Ok, enough for now" would suffice.


Maybe a limit of 5 CN topics per user per day?
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

Saddam Hussein

[...]nothing he posts is informative, worthy of debate or the slightest bit amusing[...]

So his posts are like everything else in CN. w0w better ban everyone who posts there then

No, nobody else deliberately made posts so enormous that they crashed people's browsers.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7654
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
[...]nothing he posts is informative, worthy of debate or the slightest bit amusing[...]

So his posts are like everything else in CN. w0w better ban everyone who posts there then

No, nobody else deliberately made posts so enormous that they crashed people's browsers.
But did he do it to crash browsers?  Or was that just an unintentional side effect?
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16073
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
I'm sorry, I'm a little bit behind the curve on this one. Could someone please explain to me how a forum post could crash people's browsers? I'll admit that I'm asking this out of incredulity, but if it did indeed happen, then perhaps we should look for a technical solution instead of (or alongside) a social one. People shouldn't really have the ability to create posts that would cause that, so I'd be willing to consider that a bug.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2015, 11:24:47 AM by SexWarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

*

Offline juner

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10175
    • View Profile
Putting this back in S&C since it evolved beyond a profane angry rant.

*

Offline Hoppy

  • *
  • Posts: 1149
  • Posts 6892
    • View Profile
Those fe24.5 or whatever posts when just a pain in the ass. Hardly anyone was reading them. I am more oftenthan not on here on my phone, and it is hard to scroll through that stupid bs. I am glad he got banned. I normally read every thread, but those threads were just sinking to the bottom unread. The were not funny or entertaining in any way, just stupid and hard to scroll through.
God is real.

*

Offline Pongo

  • Most Educated Flat-Earther
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 754
    • View Profile
I don't think it needed to be handled at all. We don't moderate any other spam in CN, despite it being full of it.

That's not strictly true.  If a bot were to post an ad we would remove it.  Regardless though, can someone link some examples of the offending posts?  I clicked around for a moment until my CN threshold was passed and didn't find anything overtly spam-like or "browser-crashing."

Personally, I generally fall (perhaps in a self serving way) on the side of the person moderating in these cases.  If they deem something to be spam, then I agree that a short ban (1 day) is fine.  In the vast majority of the cases it's a one-day troll looking for a couple laughs and the short ban solves the problem.  In my opinion, the issue here is that the person with the moderating powers may have misjudged what is or isn't spam, not that the reaction was excessive.  However, the abilities to moderate an issue are given based on what bits of a person's character can be gleaned from how they comport their online-selves.  We should trust that character to administer judgment if we trust them enough to give them the power to do so.

In this case, it was an administrator that made the call, which dredges up the question of should admins be moderating?  As it stands, they can moderate and I have no issues with them continuing to do so.  If you don't give the people moderating a bit of leeway to make judgments then you are hampering their ability to do so.  If what I understand is true, the offending poster was spamming with an intent to cause harm, then I don't think that Junker was in error giving out a short warningless ban.

fwiw, my browser crashed when i tried to load this page about a week ago or something: http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=3550.0

Chrome, Win10, if it matters.
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

Saddam Hussein

I'm sorry, I'm a little bit behind the curve on this one. Could someone please explain to me how a forum post could crash people's browsers? I'll admit that I'm asking this out of incredulity, but if it did indeed happen, then perhaps we should look for a technical solution instead of (or alongside) a social one. People shouldn't really have the ability to create posts that would cause that, so I'd be willing to consider that a bug.

His posts contained obscenely-large pictures.  My browser would usually take me to an error screen upon viewing those posts, or else just barely stay up.

Regardless though, can someone link some examples of the offending posts?  I clicked around for a moment until my CN threshold was passed and didn't find anything overtly spam-like or "browser-crashing."

Junker has edited all those posts now, so they wouldn't be up anymore.  Speaking of which, a reasonable person would have considered all that editing a de facto warning, so I don't think it's fair to characterize the banning as being out of the blue.  I'm certainly not saying that mod/admin edits of a post inherently count as a warning, because that was often used as a bullshit justification of banning posters (including yours truly) on Daniel's site without warning, but in this specific case, he knew that what he was doing wasn't acceptable.

also, i don't get why we would want to protect to ability to spam nothing but endless rows of periods or equals signs or whatever in every single thread in cn. 

it doesn't freeze my browser, but if half of the posts in a thread are nothing but literally hundreds of lines of dots and dashes, then i'm not going to ever check that thread again.  or, you know, any other thread in a forum where every thread is just a bunch of dots and dashes for, again, literally hundreds and hundreds of lines.

i mean i do get that that's super funny!!!!!!! times lolololol lmao get it cause it's like lots of text rofl copter imo imo imo imho
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

Offline Blanko

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2471
    • View Profile
also, i don't get why we would want to protect to ability to spam nothing but endless rows of periods or equals signs or whatever in every single thread in cn. 

it doesn't freeze my browser, but if half of the posts in a thread are nothing but literally hundreds of lines of dots and dashes, then i'm not going to ever check that thread again.  or, you know, any other thread in a forum where every thread is just a bunch of dots and dashes for, again, literally hundreds and hundreds of lines.

i mean i do get that that's super funny!!!!!!! times lolololol lmao get it cause it's like lots of text rofl copter imo imo imo imho

Moderating based on personal value judgments is literally the worst idea ever. Otherwise I would have gotten rid of Saddam a long time ago because I find all of his posts annoying :^)

Saddam Hussein

It doesn't need to be personal.  We can discuss this as a community, like we're doing right now, and then make the appropriate changes to the rules when we reach a consensus.

*

Offline juner

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10175
    • View Profile
... which dredges up the question of should admins be moderating? 

The general answer to this is no, admins should not be moderating. It is difficult for me to watch crap/spam build up and not take action, though. Similar to how I have seen the moderation reports queue grow and many reports go for days or weeks without action. When I notice it, I go in and clean them up, taking action where appropriate because nothing was done with them. In this specific instance if there is a question about what was spam or not, just take a look at the moderation log. I find it curious that no one brought up a concern while I was editing/removing FE43.2's posts, but some people have taken issue with a temporary, posting-only ban that was an extension of the very same action. I get it, though. A slippery slope that is going to lead to more tyranny, etc.

also, i don't get why we would want to protect to ability to spam nothing but endless rows of periods or equals signs or whatever in every single thread in cn. 

it doesn't freeze my browser, but if half of the posts in a thread are nothing but literally hundreds of lines of dots and dashes, then i'm not going to ever check that thread again.  or, you know, any other thread in a forum where every thread is just a bunch of dots and dashes for, again, literally hundreds and hundreds of lines.

i mean i do get that that's super funny!!!!!!! times lolololol lmao get it cause it's like lots of text rofl copter imo imo imo imho

Moderating based on personal value judgments is literally the worst idea ever. Otherwise I would have gotten rid of Saddam a long time ago because I find all of his posts annoying :^)

I'm not really sure how what I said is any more or less of a personal value judgement than any of the other rules for posting that already exist.  I'm not taking issue with the quality of the content.  I'm saying that the content makes CN unreadable.  That's a far cry from "I think Saddam should be banned because I find all of his posts annoying."
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 4139
    • View Profile
I'm personally fine with the ban.

The posts kept me from checking anything in CN. I don't really mind when it's just random shit posting, but when it's that fucking gigantic and you can't see anything else without scrolling down forever... well, I really don't have the patience for it.

Maybe there should be some kind of rule for how many necro-posts or new topics you can make in a day. Or even how large the damn font is.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16073
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Restricting the font size is something we could definitely do in software. It would likely be more effective than having a rule.

That said, it sounds to me like quite a few people here are missing the point of CN. As far as I understand, CN is quite literally the dumpster of FES. I would expect for actual discussions to take place in the Lounge.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume