Jump to content

BIg babies realize that they cant control doing other people’s dirty work for them on Manx Forums


Recommended Posts

44 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

I should like to point out that I've never signed up for Facebook in my life (under any name).  And while Twitter has its uses, even with 280 characters it's very limited at discussing anything in depth - hence those very jerky (1/n) threads where people try to make a case that would be better done as an article or even a blog. 

Anonymity is essential for some people and it is often these who can make the most valuable contribution to a topic that concerns them.  So I think that Manx Forums is very useful.  And if you think that trolls are put off other forms of social media by the 'lack' of it, you obviously haven't been paying attention.

Ok, I’m genuinely surprised but thanks for clarifying that. The under your name but does lead me back to my original post though. Please don’t take anything I said as criticism as I really enjoy your posts. I agree with you on the anonymity point but it’s also the reason for a huge amount of total crap on here as well.    

Edited by thesultanofsheight
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 267
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Yeah, it's definitely all the establishment's fault and nothing to do with self-obsessed narcissists mouthing off in a disruptive manner.

Pop.

I’d prefer to see the moderating team deal firstly with the inordinate amount of vitriol & spite vented by the usual gang of Ted’s before an embargo on new memberships. Thread after thread de

Posted Images

7 minutes ago, twinkle said:

When did criticism become aggression,I'm no notwell

supporter either.

Saying some posters are mental goes well beyond criticism in my book. That’s purely notwells view and as I said so what if they’re mental anyway? Aren’t mental people allowed access to the internet or use Internet forums? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Lurker said:

 fortunately I’ve learned whose posts to read and whose to scroll past. 

 

^ That's the simple answer.

 

 

32 minutes ago, sausage said:

Apologies if already asked before... But is there any chance that the ramp up on the number of these argumentative wankers is an orchestrated campaign by those who don't like opinions/information shared on MF and would like to see the mods say we can't be arsed any more? 

If a twisted type with a chip on their shoulder wanted an internet site shut down,  email closed, or whatever, then they spam it to death. This is basically what has been happening.

 

 

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, gettafa said:

If a twisted type with a chip on their shoulder wanted an internet site shut down,  email closed, or whatever, then they spam it to death. This is basically what has been happening

 

You’re all pretty rubbish conspiracy theorists if you ask me who clearly attach far too much importance to the rubbish you post on here. Looks like a few people have managed to post even more angry rubbish than is already posted on here by the regulars. But it’s still just more of the same silly anonymous rubbish really. IOM News and Politics got Bustered for a very long time with similar meltdowns and end results (bans and account blocks). All it takes is a few nutters posting rubbish who are even madder than the regular nutters posting rubbish to tip the balance. Stop taking yourselves and what you post so seriously. 

Edited by The Faceman
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Robert Ebagum said:

I would agree here. On the very day they start banning new accounts Rob Callister starts posting on here again. It is very clear indeed that this forum is basically controlled by Rob Callister and his stupid mates who wish to eradicate any poster who dares the challenge or ridicule Rob Callister or his views. 

I always respected Rob's views although I didn't always agree with them, the problem is people like you, who highlight every little bit of detail and nit pick your way through posts, rather than just respect sometimes opinions differ.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Declan said:

But it presents the Pierrot Luinniere issue. If she posted a thread about a dead bike rider, Albert, dalligaf and others would automatically vote it down, but there's probably as many posters who view her posts as valid. 

Excuse me?

A poster whose username's 1st and 3rd letters are "D" and "c" should not take the piss or try to be smart be misspelling other's names.;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, twinkle said:

When did criticism become aggression,I'm no notwell

supporter either.

I think there are ways of politely disagreeing with people, some people can’t resist rubbing people’s nose in it when they have a differing opinion, as if that supports their argument!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dilligaf said:

Excuse me?

A poster whose username's 1st and 3rd letters are "D" and "c" should not take the piss or try to be smart be misspelling other's names.;)

You think habit would have seen him proof read that before posting the typo. 

Cant really see much value to this thread. One lot of anonymous posters disagree with another lot of anonymous posters. But one lot believe they are definitely not trolls when according to them the other lot clearly are. 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

But surely the problem with voting down a comment is that all Mr Troll has to do is set up another ten accounts and use them to vote down anything and everything he doesn't like.   If multiple identities is a problem, then that is more likely to encourage than discourage them.  And reddit, whatever its virtues, is hardly known for well-mannered discussion.

I'm not sure that there is a magic bullet solution for the sort of problem that Manx Forums has.  Using real names doesn't seem to make some people behave better (look at Facebook) and encourages the sort of personal attack that the minority that use their real names already tend to receive.   In the New Rules thread, some people mentioned how they had been reluctant to join for fear of identification under the current rules and some form of compulsory (if token) payment would presumably add to worries about traceability. 

And there's the point that John Wright has often made about how light-touch and reactive regulation is a legal necessity.  The more heavily you moderate, the more liable the moderators and owners become for any content that remains.  If you only intervene when an offending comment is brought to your attention, they are only responsible if they fail to act them.

In the end all most of us can do is try not to behave like dicks.  Don't accuse poster A of also being poster B (or real life person C) even if you think they are.  Something is still idiotic no matter how few or many people say it - address what they say instead. 

Evening Roger. As I noted in my first post in the other thread, I think full on voting up and down as per Reddit is perhaps not right for Manx Forums, as it sort of changes the feel / intent from a general free form discussion to something which feels more like it's trying to reach a conclusion, and I don't know if that's want the owners of MF want. I see @ans has made a reference to what they feel the purpose of MF is - without really saying what it is - but my assumption is that trying to reach conclusions is not it. 

My suggestion was simply something that I thought would mesh in with the light touch approach, but improve it's efficiency. Purely for the reporting of abusive behaviour - and if that in itself was abused then you have a self notifying troll. So you have a simple rule - no abuse. No calling people names, threats, insults or other pointless aggression. If people feel that rule is broken they hit a button, and if a set number do the post simply disappears automatically without the mods having to do anything. The person who made the post can appeal if they like, but the likelihood is that people know when they're being idiots. If the process itself is trolled by someone who uses multiple accounts to simply remove a post they don't like via the automatic process, then that will be immediately evident when the mods review the removed post - whether or not the person who made it requests. Easy multiple ban. Ultimately the mods would always have the power to reinstate any post, and indeed to moderate in the conventional way by removing anything they like with or without reports. I see it as light touch, but removing the immediate pressure and workload from the mods. It would also eliminate the argument that mods are trying to influence discussion. If your post is automatically removed it's because a number other users think you're being a knob, not just the mods. 

It's not fool proof of course, but I would hope that it would at least act as a sort of base level filter on a standard of acceptable behaviour. The amount of effort required to persistently troll such a system would hopefully be enough to put someone off, but you never know I guess. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, James Hampton said:

My suggestion was simply something that I thought would mesh in with the light touch approach, but improve it's efficiency. Purely for the reporting of abusive behaviour - and if that in itself was abused then you have a self notifying troll. So you have a simple rule - no abuse. No calling people names, threats, insults or other pointless aggression. If people feel that rule is broken they hit a button, and if a set number do the post simply disappears automatically without the mods having to do anything. 

But apart from the automatic disappearance, that system already exists - you just click on the 'Report post' symbol in the top  right of each comment and submit the complaint.  You don't even have to give a reason, but presumably it carries more weight the better argued it is.  Making censoring automatic just invites people to game it, but the mods will presumably react if they get a number of reportings - or if they get a flurry of bogus ones.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

Good idea but people would probably still abuse that James. If there is a group of people who know each other they will just gang up and blitz any poster they dont like no matter how innocuous their posts might be. 

Yup, I don't doubt that they would at first, but how many times are you going to set up ten accounts just to remove one post you don't like, only to have all ten of those accounts then deleted when the moderators see that you're just being a knob, and the post you tried to remove is then reinstated. I realise we're dealing with a serious fixation issue here, but it's about making such activity a fully pointless waste of time. The point we're trying to get to is that anyone can make any point they like so long as they're not abusive in so doing. Such a system would simply make it a tiresome process if all you want to do is call someone a wanker.

3 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

But apart from the automatic disappearance, that system already exists - you just click on the 'Report post' symbol in the top  right of each comment and submit the complaint.  You don't even have to give a reason, but presumably it carries more weight the better argued it is.  Making censoring automatic just invites people to game it, but the mods will presumably react if they get a number of reportings - or if they get a flurry of bogus ones.

My assumption is that it's not used enough because people are aware that they are then burdening mods, and most people would feel awkward about inconveiniencing someone else for something so trivial. That's basically why I would likely never use that button as is, but I don't know how other people feel about it. If it were a simple anonymous automated system that relied on a number of others to agree I wouldn't hesitate to use it I think, as the post would only be removed if a number of other users feel the same as me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Being able to downrate comments to oblivion sounds like a nice idea but it's dependant on two things. Firstly, you'd need enough people actively interested enough to take part (and I dont think we have that on a round the clock basis, this isn't reddit) and more importantly, it's not something the forum has as a feature and I definitely don't have any appetite to waste my time coding up a mod for it. 

Seemingly, and I'll freely admit I've not read everything, the toxic element of posting behaviour seems to have taken a sharp decline. Either we've managed to weed out the prime offenders straight away or (more likely) they're just withdrawn as they're keen to retain the accounts they still have given they have no ability to create more currently. So in general, it seems to be a better place in the last few days. 

The trick is finding a way to maintain that while re-opening registrations. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • ans locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...