[Discussion] Rules on spam

Moderator: CmdrWilkens

Locked
User avatar
Connor MacLeod
Sith Apprentice
Posts: 14058
Joined: 2002-08-01 05:03pm
Contact:

[Discussion] Rules on spam

Post by Connor MacLeod » 2009-10-25 04:52pm

Sorry about the title. My mind had a complete blank on that. If anyone thinks of a better one tell me :P

Anyways, I'm reposting this from Mike's "re-write" of the board vote.

[quote="Connor MacLeod in rules rewrite thread""]I voted yes.

I do wonder if we should add some further clarification with regards to "spammy" zero-content posts or "dogpiling" (I think they could be of the same category)because I can see the possibility in the future someone clashing with the staff over a decision of what qualifies as "zero content" (in the appropriate forums)

I'd say: Me tooing or "+1" posts (eg "I agree"), one liner comments that have no relevance to the discussion or contribute anything meaningful to the debate (IE "stupid fundies" or "stupid conservatives" or the aformentioned "This game is retardeD" type comments in G&C), mindless parroting of other people's arguments (espeically pages later), chiming in on a thread just to flame a person even though you yourself have made no argument (tht would be dogpiling. I've long believed that only the people who actually involve themselves in an argument earn the right to flame someone who is being obtuse, dishonest, or just plain retarded. We do get people who lurk around simply to leap on some new chew toy and yell at them.)

Broadly I just think we should make it clear that 1.) we generally expect posts from users to contain SOMETHING worthwhile or of value, even if minimally (at least in the relevant forums). It doesn't have to be some stirring pages long dissertation on the argument, it just has to be something more than "hur hur morons". 2.) we expect people to exhibit a modicum of self control in what they post and where. Some "rampant flaming" may be expected occasionally - people get stressed or upset or snap unpredicatlby for no good reason, and occasionally a bit of spammyness isn't too bad. The point is that it should nto become a pattern with anyone, and the signal-to-noise ratio should remain more "signal" and less "noise".

We might also add the addition of that "wall of shame" for spammy posts and stuff as a warning.[/quote]

Browsing the Senate, I then saw this thread by Surlethe and then I figured that maybe its better to expand/clarify the SLAM guidelines on spam to the board in general since it covers most of my concerns already.

I still think formulating a list of examples of what might or might not qualify spam (what we can expand on in the future) probably would be a good idea too, as I can envision nitpicking ove rwhat is/isn't spam might come up at some future point.

Just want some thoughts or feedback on the issue.

User avatar
Lagmonster
Master Control Program
Master Control Program
Posts: 7717
Joined: 2002-07-04 09:53am
Location: Ottawa, Canada

Re: [Discussion] Rules on spam

Post by Lagmonster » 2009-10-26 06:42am

We do have a wall of shame now in the HoS, known for now as the Bottom of the Barrel thread. If it looks disjointed to anyone, that's because we've been unceremoniously stripping out and dumping spammy posts, necros, hijacks, chat, and one-liners into that thread from all over the board, as we find them. It hopefully will serve as both an indication of what the mods consider poor posts, as well as a nice tally of the users who provide it.
Note: I'm semi-retired from the board, so if you need something, please be patient.

User avatar
Edi
Dragonlord
Dragonlord
Posts: 12443
Joined: 2002-07-11 12:27am
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Re: [Discussion] Rules on spam

Post by Edi » 2009-10-26 07:14am

An indication of just how worthless many of the posts in that thread are is that you can read long sections of the thread and they seem consistent even though most of the posts came from different threads.
Warwolf Urban Combat Specialist

Why is it so goddamned hard to get little assholes like you to admit it when you fuck up? Is it pride? What gives you the right to have any pride?
–Darth Wong to vivftp

GOP message? Why don't they just come out of the closet: FASCISTS R' US –Patrick Degan

The GOP has a problem with anyone coming out of the closet. –18-till-I-die

User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30761
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: [Discussion] Rules on spam

Post by Thanas » 2009-10-26 09:37am

If I split a comment in the HoS, I'd rather it not be stuck in that large wall of shame, as a) I do not have the power to move it in there and b) I like editorializing why it is a bad comment.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs

User avatar
Lagmonster
Master Control Program
Master Control Program
Posts: 7717
Joined: 2002-07-04 09:53am
Location: Ottawa, Canada

Re: [Discussion] Rules on spam

Post by Lagmonster » 2009-10-26 02:32pm

Thanas wrote:If I split a comment in the HoS, I'd rather it not be stuck in that large wall of shame, as a) I do not have the power to move it in there and b) I like editorializing why it is a bad comment.
You can always edit the comment to say where it came from and why. As to the rest, other mods simply put [JUNK] in front of the posts they split and dump into the HoS and supers/admins can do the rest as we pass by.
Note: I'm semi-retired from the board, so if you need something, please be patient.

User avatar
Mr Bean
Lord of Irony
Posts: 21989
Joined: 2002-07-04 08:36am

Re: [Discussion] Rules on spam

Post by Mr Bean » 2009-10-26 03:20pm

The Bottom of the Barrel thread is for posts that add nothing. They are either pure spam. Pure me two. Or utterly worthless. Vanishing them from the thread in question should demonstrate the very fact they added nothing to the discussion because no one other than the original poster notices them gone.

To the mini-mods and others who have the ability to move posts but not to edit them putting [JUNK] in front of the new topic name will get it joined to the BoB thread as Lagmonster has said.

"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe
Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
I'll eat my boots if Clinton gets less than 48% of the vote in November.-maraxus2 August 4th 2016

Locked