Though I'm not a VIP, I interact with many VIP members on a regular basis. If you are dividing your audience, then it might also drive down engagement and discussion.
If the standard member board is going to become a troll farm like the SCL boards, then I won't last long.
I don't submit reviews because I go to the same place a lot. Seems redundant...
Then again, if this would put a wall between me and SJG... huh... I need to think on this more.
You should put a restriction on how soon one can create a new discussion or post a new comment. Perhaps 30 minutes for a new discussion and 5 minutes for a new post. Something like that
I'm against splitting up the discussion board. You might miss something interesting. I have been putting up with the trolls for 20+ years on this site. I can live with the ignore feature and just following the only proven way to fight them of not feeding them.
How about a function that shows up after a certain amount of ignores, with an announcement on the site, as a warning like in a members tag line this member is ignored by 10 or however many ignores you feel is abnormal.
Something similar to shadowbanning on reddit would work well here. If a normal member gets ignored 10 times then their posts start stop showing up for everyone but themselves. For new members under 30 days make the limit lower (get ignored 5 times or prorated).
Bj99, could you clarify your comment? I didn’t understand it.
Then again, there are a lot of things I don’t understand. We aren’t exactly the most upstanding bunch to begin with and I probably don’t make the best use of my time but the incessant trolling makes no sense to me.
As far as two discussion boards, it seems tempting but my guess is that it would harm the site overall by dividing the participants. We are a fairly small group to begin with.
Could a new registration be blocked until the application/user is checked out? I'm not an IT guy. Could this be done without a lot of work? Automatically?
I really doubt ISP's are going to do anything. For illegal activity they might, but even then its hard to get the attention of the major players. Not that I don't think its worth trying/notifying, just that I wouldn't expect much response.
I think our bigger problem is that we feed them. I'm not talking about the questionable ones, the mtent, nichole1994, etc's. I'm talking about the ones who simply post "blah is a fag" or "its fun to shit" kind of posts. The trolls get what they want quickly.
Knowing that, there may be some technical options. A limit on # of posts for new accounts? A new account can post exactly one discussion topic in its first week of existence. An IP can create one account per month. Doesn't "stop" anything, but makes it a hassle for a single actor to be more than a minor issue.
Maybe go with a quasi-moderated style. All content receives gets a "score." Useful shit gets voted up, useless shit gets voted down. Your ability to post & vote depends on having points from posting useful shit. New users get a limited # of points. So, I create an acct & get my 3 points. I use 1 point to create a discussion thread or post a comment. If I get a positive score I get more points. If I get a negative one, I lose them. The default view for stuff is to not show stuff with a low score, but logged in users (or maybe just VIP?) can customize it. Again, doesn't stop abuse but makes useful content more prominent and makes it more effort for a single actor to cause problems.
I think lolruned had the best idea with the time limit for posting discussions. Limit it to one per hour or something like that. It'd be a lot harder to spam the board. Unless he created multiple accounts to spam. Which sounds like a lot of work but then again this guy seems like he had a lot of time on his hands.
Yeah. I don’t see why someone would need to create more than one discussion even per day, at least til bey have a certain number of trusts. The trusts are given by us, so someone we like, can post more. There are plenty of other discussion they can join in on until by earn some trusts. The discussion comments can be annoying, but it’s the starting discussions that’s the biggest issue.
im slow playing my trolling. One of these days imma light this board up, asking obvious questions ab whther men like oral sex, and claiming to have posted nudes, but the links won’t work. :P
I like simple workable solutions and Salty has a good one. Yes there will be more reviews to filter but soo what. It just means a little more delay which isnt much anyways. Two message boards would be a PIA for us and you.
Let the lurkers lurk but until they get some stripes then they are welcome to post. It also keeps the posers off the board.
As Ishmael pointed out, the trolls will find ways to use the anti-troll devices against others. Lets keep the discussions as they are. We can use the ignore function or we can just refuse to respond. New people need to be able to ask dumb questions.
In reality though, you dont have to post any racist, sexists homophobic discussions to spam this discussion board. i can do it with 1 letter if i wanted to.
It would be better to base it off trusts, bc you don’t want to encourage ppl to do a bunch of fake reviews. Someone who doesn’t care to post discussions won’t care anyways. If someone wants to post discussion, they can participate on the board, or write valuable reviews, and earn trusts from other members. That way we decide who should be posting.
Salty, if no one wants to hear from you (anyone), then that’s our vote to give, for whatever reason. So how does that not work? Seems like it would work perfectly.
Since we aren’t the most social group of guys here - and since we might have a tendency to offend fellow users - maybe a combination of several factors could be used?
Just using trusts - or ignores - might be prone to misuse.
If there was a mix of trusts, ignores, reviews, and length of membership - combined weighting - maybe that would work?
Club Reviews are not good in vetting discussions/post because she's a dancer and cant or wont review clubs like men do. honestly, i didnt think of that angle.
I don't like the idea of reviews for posting in discussion at all.
For one, if the end game is to eliminate people asking for extras with no reviews, who cares? It's entertainment for me when everyone jumps on them anyway. And if it's that troubling, like everything else on the internet, just keep scrolling. Plus...how often does it happen that it bothers you so much?
I’m like Ishmael, I only go to one club that’s it, I pretty much live there even though I need to stop - so I’ve never done a review, I’m too paranoid I guess. I just pay for VIP and hope I still get respected here, sorry.
Mostly its just a few that insist on trying to drive people off of this board ( successful in many cases ), and then a few who want to post completely over the top racist hate speech.
With the latter, just suspending them and having them get an email which invites private contact, should do it. This way in case they are just being misunderstood, then they are not gone.
Few people will keep making new accounts when they know they won't get any response except suspension.
For those who insist on always going to negative meta-narrative and personal attacks, IGNORE still seems to work. Only a few reach the Dougster and Tixtittyfag level.
Problem with real moderation is that it actually can encourage more meta narratives and people to be more defensive, and when there are moderators they tend to be the worst trolls of all. TJA and lots of other forums are that way. Little Tin Gods, guys on High Horses, they always support the herd.
This forum has thrived because of only having the lightest of moderation. And so suspending an account with less than 6 posts, is not a big deal. That will stop most of the Trucidos types. And you can sequester threads as a first level response. Most important is that that means no one is responding to them.
@ salty. It doesn’t affect me, either way. I rarely start a discussion. Reviews are good for reviews. I wouldn’t think it would be a good idea to encourage fake reviews anymore than we already do.
The flag for moderation idea is good. That’s common on other discussion boards. As long as ppl didn’t abuse it by flagging posts they just don’t like.
could add an option to vote a user as a spammer if they are new and posting about the packers movers. 7 spam votes in a day and new threads must be reviwed by VIP users or founder after first r 30 days
I take it founder is pretty libertarian about the board, and isn't looking for any drastic changes. It'll either piss people off, get them to leave, or game the system (again resulting in the above)
Most of the OT shit doesn't bother me, and at times can be amusing if not entertaining or easily ignored. It's the spamming that's the biggest issue, and even done by some of the more established members. Members that contribute. And by spamming it's the starting pointless threads, bumping pointless threads, or overly bumping necro-threads.
My 0.02 is the waiting period between starting new discussions, limiting ability to revive a necro-thread, and have an 'ignore a thread' function.
Since we are talking about changes. Adding a discussion link at the top when already in a discussion thread would be nice for mobile devices. Have to scroll all the way down right now
I didn't read all the comments and I held off until now. I only have one review and to be fair I am coming from the perspective of not having enough by the yardstick set.
Now why only one? Pretty simple. If my experience and observations do not vary from the last couple what am I adding new? Not much. So do I just right "me too"
We don't mention specific dancers as I understand the protocol for multiple reasons.
I could submit reviews on the Christies in Cleveland ( but I already got PM'd when I first came on here about the owner and not giving away too much info.)
I could submit reviews on Christies in Canton--since I was seeing a dancer there I met on SA I doubt my experiences are going to be the same as guys who were not.
I could talk about Camelot in DC but we already know its like looking at Penthouse--nice looking women but no touching of any type.
I could write a review about the block in Baltimore --its past its prime and isn't headed up any time soon.
There are a few other places as well in NYC and Maryland....but the premise is the same the last few reviews were very close to what I experienced and since we don't go into details with particular dancers and I 'm not sure it would matter if we did since people interactions are always unique then is it really worth it?
Anybody can ask me by PM or on the board and I am more than happy to share information.
As for the one review I did CH3 in Bedford Heights at the time I submitted it the couple before me showed a much lower level of service and quality of women. It seemed to rise right about the time I first set foot in the place and has now for over a year been probably the best place in NE Ohio for the money.
We need to stop trying to reinvent the wheel. Use the ignore button, or if you don't like that, just don't respond. Eventually they will go away because they have no one interacting with them. They troll/spam because we respond. You can't reason with crazy and any response (no matter how witty or smart) accomplishes what they want, interaction.
I do think the board should be split but not between VIP and non-VIP, especially considering this board likes having dancers around. Dancers don't write reviews and therefore don't get VIP status. If we give free VIP to anyone identifying as a dancer, it opens up the VIP system for abuse.
I think the board should be split between two subjects or that something should be done so that there isn't new, unseen content past the first page of discussions. The best idea I can come up with for both boards is "Strip Clubs" and "Off topic." Going through the current page of discussions, I can see threads divided between both boards as follows:
STRIP CLUBS
-Tips for finding a new CF
-Best strip club 2018....in Boise ID.
-Has this happened to any of you?
-Who coined PL?
-Demographics of your favorite club
-Showers in the clubs ?
-What makes a club couple friendly ?
-Question for dancers ?
-Smoking in suburbabn Philly area clubs
-Strippers in the real world
-Best club to flirt with potential clients..
-Ok 10 questions answered on the thread I started long ago. Finally.
-The Best TUSCL Profile to Date
-Let's Discuss: Midlife crisis=go on a BG banging bender in TJ
OFF TOPIC
-mamisan say crazy man call me and ask question
-Washington Park 2AMer.
-founder, did the club comments get nuked?
-Site should take you back to original location after logging in.
-Time isn’t wasted when you’re getting wasted
-Porn Equals Mass Shootings (According to One Canidate)
-Praise The Lawrd. BrotherFogHorn Needs A New Jet
-Atlan Da
-The luckiest 14-year-old boy in the world
-Site Issue
-Missing Dancer Profile Info
You double the amount of threads you can see on the first page of each board and they are focused on the specific topic you want to read about, either everything related to strip clubs or everything else.
57 comments
That said, I can also see this producing a large number of garbage reviews that need to be moderated by VIP members. Could create a bottleneck.
If the standard member board is going to become a troll farm like the SCL boards, then I won't last long.
I don't submit reviews because I go to the same place a lot. Seems redundant...
Then again, if this would put a wall between me and SJG... huh... I need to think on this more.
Honestly, if I fall under that requirement, that's on me to fix.
So, a troll creates three different accounts and uses them to banish anyone he wants to mess with.
The problem with creating new features on sites like this is the first thing you have to ask yourself is "Can someone use this feature as a weapon?"
Then again, there are a lot of things I don’t understand. We aren’t exactly the most upstanding bunch to begin with and I probably don’t make the best use of my time but the incessant trolling makes no sense to me.
As far as two discussion boards, it seems tempting but my guess is that it would harm the site overall by dividing the participants. We are a fairly small group to begin with.
I think our bigger problem is that we feed them. I'm not talking about the questionable ones, the mtent, nichole1994, etc's. I'm talking about the ones who simply post "blah is a fag" or "its fun to shit" kind of posts. The trolls get what they want quickly.
Knowing that, there may be some technical options. A limit on # of posts for new accounts? A new account can post exactly one discussion topic in its first week of existence. An IP can create one account per month. Doesn't "stop" anything, but makes it a hassle for a single actor to be more than a minor issue.
Maybe go with a quasi-moderated style. All content receives gets a "score." Useful shit gets voted up, useless shit gets voted down. Your ability to post & vote depends on having points from posting useful shit. New users get a limited # of points. So, I create an acct & get my 3 points. I use 1 point to create a discussion thread or post a comment. If I get a positive score I get more points. If I get a negative one, I lose them. The default view for stuff is to not show stuff with a low score, but logged in users (or maybe just VIP?) can customize it. Again, doesn't stop abuse but makes useful content more prominent and makes it more effort for a single actor to cause problems.
Let the lurkers lurk but until they get some stripes then they are welcome to post. It also keeps the posers off the board.
People who join and post questions about 'extras' are not doing any harm.
This board has flourished, has a high post volume, and a high review volume because it has been open and friendly. No reason to change that.
Negative meta narrative, personal attacks, these people can be suspended for a while. That should be enough.
SJG
Something like if you get 15 more ignores than trusts.
Just using trusts - or ignores - might be prone to misuse.
If there was a mix of trusts, ignores, reviews, and length of membership - combined weighting - maybe that would work?
Club Reviews are not good in vetting discussions/post because she's a dancer and cant or wont review clubs like men do. honestly, i didnt think of that angle.
For one, if the end game is to eliminate people asking for extras with no reviews, who cares? It's entertainment for me when everyone jumps on them anyway. And if it's that troubling, like everything else on the internet, just keep scrolling. Plus...how often does it happen that it bothers you so much?
it's a non-issue to me.
Moderation for new posters for a period of time, or a certain number of posts, like USASG does it.
VIP moderation for X number of posts, with founder review and passive approval, i.e., when found does nothing, posts happen automatically.
New posters post immediately, but X number of flags and they’re on moderation.
A flag button on posts for “spam” that does nothing but count up, and then shows up next to each poster’s name in the discussions.
Do nothing.
With the latter, just suspending them and having them get an email which invites private contact, should do it. This way in case they are just being misunderstood, then they are not gone.
Few people will keep making new accounts when they know they won't get any response except suspension.
For those who insist on always going to negative meta-narrative and personal attacks, IGNORE still seems to work. Only a few reach the Dougster and Tixtittyfag level.
Problem with real moderation is that it actually can encourage more meta narratives and people to be more defensive, and when there are moderators they tend to be the worst trolls of all. TJA and lots of other forums are that way. Little Tin Gods, guys on High Horses, they always support the herd.
This forum has thrived because of only having the lightest of moderation. And so suspending an account with less than 6 posts, is not a big deal. That will stop most of the Trucidos types. And you can sequester threads as a first level response. Most important is that that means no one is responding to them.
SJG
The flag for moderation idea is good. That’s common on other discussion boards. As long as ppl didn’t abuse it by flagging posts they just don’t like.
Most of the OT shit doesn't bother me, and at times can be amusing if not entertaining or easily ignored. It's the spamming that's the biggest issue, and even done by some of the more established members. Members that contribute. And by spamming it's the starting pointless threads, bumping pointless threads, or overly bumping necro-threads.
My 0.02 is the waiting period between starting new discussions, limiting ability to revive a necro-thread, and have an 'ignore a thread' function.
The trolling problem is just a few, and some who believe it is there job to drive people off of this board.
SJG
Now why only one? Pretty simple. If my experience and observations do not vary from the last couple what am I adding new? Not much. So do I just right "me too"
We don't mention specific dancers as I understand the protocol for multiple reasons.
I could submit reviews on the Christies in Cleveland ( but I already got PM'd when I first came on here about the owner and not giving away too much info.)
I could submit reviews on Christies in Canton--since I was seeing a dancer there I met on SA I doubt my experiences are going to be the same as guys who were not.
I could talk about Camelot in DC but we already know its like looking at Penthouse--nice looking women but no touching of any type.
I could write a review about the block in Baltimore --its past its prime and isn't headed up any time soon.
There are a few other places as well in NYC and Maryland....but the premise is the same the last few reviews were very close to what I experienced and since we don't go into details with particular dancers and I 'm not sure it would matter if we did since people interactions are always unique then is it really worth it?
Anybody can ask me by PM or on the board and I am more than happy to share information.
As for the one review I did CH3 in Bedford Heights at the time I submitted it the couple before me showed a much lower level of service and quality of women. It seemed to rise right about the time I first set foot in the place and has now for over a year been probably the best place in NE Ohio for the money.
I think the board should be split between two subjects or that something should be done so that there isn't new, unseen content past the first page of discussions. The best idea I can come up with for both boards is "Strip Clubs" and "Off topic." Going through the current page of discussions, I can see threads divided between both boards as follows:
STRIP CLUBS
-Tips for finding a new CF
-Best strip club 2018....in Boise ID.
-Has this happened to any of you?
-Who coined PL?
-Demographics of your favorite club
-Showers in the clubs ?
-What makes a club couple friendly ?
-Question for dancers ?
-Smoking in suburbabn Philly area clubs
-Strippers in the real world
-Best club to flirt with potential clients..
-Ok 10 questions answered on the thread I started long ago. Finally.
-The Best TUSCL Profile to Date
-Let's Discuss: Midlife crisis=go on a BG banging bender in TJ
OFF TOPIC
-mamisan say crazy man call me and ask question
-Washington Park 2AMer.
-founder, did the club comments get nuked?
-Site should take you back to original location after logging in.
-Time isn’t wasted when you’re getting wasted
-Porn Equals Mass Shootings (According to One Canidate)
-Praise The Lawrd. BrotherFogHorn Needs A New Jet
-Atlan Da
-The luckiest 14-year-old boy in the world
-Site Issue
-Missing Dancer Profile Info
You double the amount of threads you can see on the first page of each board and they are focused on the specific topic you want to read about, either everything related to strip clubs or everything else.