I see Greywar already addressed the issue with youhttp://greywar.joeuser.com/articlecomments.asp?AID=91290&s=1 ....but he wasn't as nice as I was.

I just can't say 'fucktard' and keep a straight face.

Damn!  That was very nice!  You are an ambassador of goodwill!

LoL...it is a crazy sight to see...an alt news takeover..yikes.

SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM (if you have ever heard the Monty Python "SPAM" song, that is what I'm singing)

*sigh*

There's a little nugget of interesting substance in one of those links. 'Bout it, though.

Cheers,
Daiwa

I just can't say 'fucktard' and keep a straight face.

pseudosoldier can and will again

The bulk of these comments are examples of people happier with the supposed problem than with a finding a workable solution. Instead of the immature namecalling, why not use your energy positively and request an additional feature that allows blocking and filtering of the content that concerns you, from all "listing" features on the site?

Maybe it can't be included in tomorrows work schedule but it's not a terribly complicated thing to do. In fact it shouldn't be complicated at all. The primary resistence by the developers of the forum will most likely fall into the realms of time constraint.

To help them justify the "time expense" why not construct a petition blog entry which calls for support among other members of the forum for such a feature(s). This is a far more constructive approach to the problem that results in win-win-win-win.

Owners get solid user feedback and the opportunity to increase their feature set and service offering, so-called spammers get to continue "announcing" themselves, those like myself a.k.a the lefty looney liberals (or whatever it is) get the option of not filtering them out (for now) and everyone that's anti the behaviour can simply "switch" them off.

Calling someone a "fucktard" is an unintelligent response that does nothing to resolve "the problem" and only portrays the person using the insult as weak. Such insults only disempower the person throwing them, not the person at which they are being thrown.

pseudosoldier can and will again

All this says pseudosoldier, is that you anticipate you will find yourself in a situation that annoys you and in which you expect to lack the ability to deal constructively with the issue at hand. Thats hardly the type of behaviour expected of a soldier. I wouldn't want you in my unit should the shit ever hit the fan.

..

At the end of the day you, dharmagrl, dont have any right to "tell" (o.k you asked, but hopefully you get my drift) anyone when and what they may or may not blog. Quoting etiquette is all well and good but really doesn't amount to anything more than you getting on your high horse. One could resort to some onerous form of policy, outlawing the practice or one could suggest the use of a little bit, of what i suspect will be C# code, to resolve the problem, as above, for everyone, for all eternity.

The more time you spend pointing the finger at sixy and claiming yourself as victim the more it seems you enjoy baiting the forum for the kind of idiotic namecalling as seen above. If you consider yourself better than sixy, as i suspect is the case, then rather than getting down to his/her level, why not show us all what you're made of, by delivering a result as above, which offers the opportunity of a workable solution that delivers value for each of the identified stakeholders.

If nothing else such a feature set will allow you and everyone else here that dislikes "me" to filter out the articles posted by myself and others like me. You can live in your universe where me and my opinions wouldn't exist as far as you and your like minded chums are concerned.

Ah, where to begin...?

If nothing else such a feature set will allow you and everyone else here that dislikes "me" to filter out the articles posted by myself and others like me. You can live in your universe where me and my opinions wouldn't exist as far as you and your like minded chums are concerned.

You seem to be operating under the misapprehension that the objections stem from the poster's Liberal leanings. Not so. It's his bulk posting practices alone that have raised community ire.

The bulk of these comments are examples of people happier with the supposed problem than with a finding a workable solution.

I see it more as an expression of community frustration.

I offered a solution on kingbee's thread about the anti-plastic-bag spammer. It involved restricting the ability to post new articles till fewer than one by said author was still in the Recent Articles list. Another solution would be only allowing so many article posts per hour, or having to wait at least 90 minutes between article posts.

If not for the server performance hit issues I mention next, another solution would be to allow people to post as many articles as they want, but only have the first couple within any time frame show up in the various listings.

The primary resistance by the developers of the forum will most likely fall into the realms of time constraint.

Actually, the most likely objection would be server performance hit. What you propose would require a lot of on-the-fly page rendering, something that's been cut back on more and more as time goes by. There's a reason the "Most Recent Articles" on individual blogs is broken.

...why not construct a petition blog entry which calls for support among other members of the forum for such a feature(s).... Owners get solid user feedback and the opportunity to increase their feature set and service offering...

That's not how things work around here. When you've been here longer and are more familiar with Brad's positions on "free ice-cream" etc., you'll know how foolish you are sounding right now. He doesn't consider this a service or you a customer. Sorry.

It helps to learn the culture if you want to come up with effective solutions.

At the end of the day you, dharmagrl, dont have any right to "tell"... anyone when and what they may or may not blog.

Anybody has the right to tell anyone anything. Whether it has any force behind it -- which is what you are really getting at -- or what the various consequences are for teller and tellee are other matters.

Quoting etiquette is all well and good but really doesn't amount to anything more than you getting on your high horse.

No, it's called shaming and is still quite an effective tool for societal control. In the case of a high profile blogger, it can set an order parameter that influences others to the point of sealing the offending blogger's fate. In addition, enough complaints and group sentiment against a blogger can lead to that blogger getting restricted, warned, or -- in the face of ignored warnings -- bounced. It's happened before.

SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM (if you have ever heard the Monty Python "SPAM" song, that is what I'm singing)

*in best little old lady from spam skit voice* But I don't like spam!!!

 

There's a little nugget of interesting substance in one of those links. 'Bout it, though

Needle in a haystack, perhaps?

pseudosoldier can and will again

I know.  It gives me immense satisfaction that I can rely on you and Greywar to say 'fucktard', 'assclown' and 'moonbat' without laughing.

 Big Rick:  Like you said, I didn't tell anyone anything  So, you can fuck right off.  Go sit in the corner with the other fucktards on my blacklist, assclown. (Pseudo and Greywar: I giggled my way through that last sentence, and it felt wonderful!)

 

Ah, where to begin...?

Yes, it's overwhelming, isn't it?  So much stupidity, so little time...

 

No, it's called shaming and is still quite an effective tool for societal control. In the case of a high profile blogger, it can set an order parameter that influences others to the point of sealing the offending blogger's fate. In addition, enough complaints and group sentiment against a blogger can lead to that blogger getting restricted, warned, or -- in the face of ignored warnings -- bounced. It's happened before.

Gene's obviously been studying the way the JU community works....and I'm very impressed!

All this says pseudosoldier, is that you anticipate you will find yourself in a situation that annoys you and in which you expect to lack the ability to deal constructively with the issue at hand. Thats hardly the type of behaviour expected of a soldier. I wouldn't want you in my unit should the shit ever hit the fan.

Actually, I anticipate finding myself in a situation where a gentle pointing out of someone's mistakes is not the appropriate action or would not be sufficient to get them to desist in a timely fashion. The taunt of "fucktard" or perhaps "assclown" or the less offensive "flocko" may bring someone's attention to an issue more readily than sweet talking them.

Please also note that what you proceeded to do with your comment after pointing out what you felt was a failing was basically what you've decried me doing as well. Please let me know, perhaps by email, which unit you're in and I'll ensure that I never get there to bother you.

I don't have the inclination to be verbose or vulgar right now, however apropos. For someone against high horses, stallion boy.....ya sure picked the wrong attitude and name.

Have a trolling, it's on me.