Flagging Discussions & Articles?

18 comments

• Dougster

  •

  13 years ago

  Right now it's too small a problem to worry about. I am concerned, however, that with all the whackjob right-wing loony-toons we have around here that as we get closer and closer to the election they just won't be able to avoid spewing their crackpot theories here and there will be lots of noise to wade through. Wait until it proves to be a problem before dealing with it though, I say.
• mmdv26

  •

  13 years ago

  I agree w dougster; not currently enough of a problem to warrant censure. I can tolerate some off-topic blabbering and extreme beliefs. Adds spice.
• snowtime

  •

  13 years ago

  I don't see this as a problem now. It was several years ago when there were a couple of obnoxious posters who had nothing better to do than constantly criticize others. They have thankfully gone by the wayside for the most part. It seems easy enough to avoid off topic posts if you have no interest. Sometimes they are actually a nice diversion.
• staxwell

  •

  13 years ago

  LMAO
• CTQWERTY

  •

  13 years ago

  MJX, if anything Founder should enable commentary only from those who've written 5 club reviews or more.
• troop

  •

  13 years ago

  ^^ great idea ct!
• mjx01

  •

  13 years ago

  I do like CT's idea, but it would un-necessairly block some users like crystal
• shadowcat

  •

  13 years ago

  It would also block those people that are paying for membership. That ain't gonna happen.
• CTQWERTY

  •

  13 years ago

  Thank you. Has Crystal written 5 articles? Perhaps that would be her metric. Shadow, that's a crying shame. Instead we have to suffer the multi-id posters who stink up the place.
• Clubber

  •

  13 years ago

  It is so easy to just create another ID, what would be the purpose? Creating more work for founder and the posters, but the end result would likely be the same, just different ID's. Censorship is never a good thing, if for no other reason, where does one stop censoring? Use ignore, YOU censor what YOU wish and leave everyone else to their own vices.
• georgmicrodong

  •

  13 years ago

  Dougster's only half right. The left wing loony tunes are just as annoying as the right wing ones. And tend to be more sanctimonious about it.
• CTQWERTY

  •

  13 years ago

  One blog I read reserves the right to post the e-mail & ip addresses of any trolls, spammers, etc. A few weeks ago the owner did just that.
• Dougster

  •

  13 years ago

  Only left wing loony we have here is MisterGay who (blissfully) only posts once in a blue moon now.
• txtittyfan

  •

  13 years ago

  I agree with clubber. This is an open forum where we choose what we want to read/comment on. If you don't like a topic, don't read/participate in it. It's your choice.
• looneylarry

  •

  13 years ago

  I agree with (gulp) Dougster. It does seem that this site has more than its share of retired military, GOP, jingoistic, libertarian, xenophobic, nationalistic types. Seems like the other side is represented, sporadically, by potheads and IT nerds. As the election gets close, there will be more off-topic posts about Obama's birth certificate, Nancy Pelosi's alien love child, and the boners they have for Boehner. And I will choose to not read them.
• looneylarry

  •

  13 years ago

  And why doesn't Policeman's post consist of his usual rant about how LE will be monitoring all posts and wiretapping phones and placing GPS devices under customer's cars? Is he tiring of his own one-trick-pony routine?
• dudeanonymous

  •

  13 years ago

  So far, the trolls and spammers are easy enough to ignore. Those that take the bait are only feeding their egos and encouraging them. If you ignore them, they will go away when they don't get the attention they seek.
• Rlionheart

  •

  13 years ago

  I do like and cherish free expression and so I wouldn't like to limit anyone who wants to contribute until they begin to provide obvious shill reviews. I realize that I do tend to wander off on arcane subjects but at least I don't pump some club that doesn't necessarily deserve support. If the volume of spam increases to the point at which something must be done, could we not lighten founder's load by instituting a scoring system folks making comments on discussions/ artcles/etc woud have to insert before they go ahead with their point. Something like 1 to 5 with 1 being "No Spam" and 5 being "Spam to the core". Much like the club ratings, the score would quickly tabulate and when it reaches some number (eg: 4.5) it would trigger a review by founder to see if the rating required furhter action. More sense of consensus, greater inclusion in flagging and less work for founder, maybe.