Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   "I was a paid internet shill: For a little over six months, I was paid to spread disinformation and argue political points on the Internet"   (consciouslifenews.com) divider line 1071
    More: Interesting, third floor, A/T/S  
•       •       •

26301 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Jan 2013 at 2:34 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



1071 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-10 03:46:56 PM  

James!: sprawl15: Nobodyn0se: sprawl15: And it's gotten far, far worse over the last few years, since that's an 'in' for being disruptive. And, from the end user perspective, I don't really care if the disruptive activity is honest opinion or paid troll, I just care that it's disruptive.

According to James!, Fark doesn't care.

Oh, but they do care. They care about very specific kinds of disruptive (non-over the top) activity, like calling someone a troll. If you say that someone's posts are worthless, you risk being banned on the basis that your posts are being disruptive. That's the ultimate problem - the horrific inconsistency of saying that disruption doesn't matter unless you're complaining about other disruption.

James!: For me, if someone calls you a retard that's just a personal attack but if they follow you from thread to thread calling you a retard and bringing up something from a thread two weeks ago that's trolling.

That's not trolling. That's just being an asshole, or potentially stalking. Trolling comes from the term for fishing - you throw out some bait and just let it sit there, waiting for 'bites'. This is a troll, through and through. And it's fine because of the moderating policy that if you aren't sure if someone is legitimately intending to post what they've posted, you have to assume it's legitimate. In terms of name calling, as long as it stays away from calling specific people names, you're golden. You can call the President a knob gobbler, or the DNC a knob gobbler, or all libs, or whatever, but if you call another specific poster a knob gobbler it's suddenly banbait. It's bizarre where that line is drawn - where you can be as uncivil as you like as long as it's not to someone else who is specifically a Farker.

And that rule can be gotten around by filling your post with content aside from the name calling - a post that says just "wow, what kind of asshole would post this" is immediately removed while a post starting with the same sentence befor ...


At heart, Fark is a humor website.  You can't easily divide people into troll/non-troll simply based on posts voicing an opinion, refusing to engage in dialogue, or refusal to change their mind when confronted.  Regardless of that, some of what is being posted in here isn't really an argument about trolls as it is a disagreement that namecalling is also against the rules.  You can still get a timeout for calling someone a name even if you think that person is a troll.  2 wrongs don't make a right, etc....  And the Fark definition of trolling errs more on the side of allowing more participation than as James! says becoming thought police.  And if you don't like repeat posts of opinions by those you deem trolls, you don't have to wait for the Mods to agree with you.  You can ignore them.

I tried a long time to not put people on ignore.  But when I finally did it, I found it easier to dialogue on here.  I didn't put them on ignore because the Mods and Admins agreed with me.  I did it because they didn't.  You can too.
 
2013-01-10 03:47:17 PM  

James!: I doubt that we're going to start policing peoples intentions though.


Again, nobody is asking you to.
 
2013-01-10 03:47:31 PM  
bearsharkaxe.com

Am I really the first one to do this?
 
2013-01-10 03:47:38 PM  

Nobodyn0se: James!: You don't want us becoming thought police.

You're right, which is why nobody is asking you to.


You are though.  Either you're asking that we assume someone isn't sincere or you're asking us to remove someone who is sincere but is posting in a way you don't like.
 
2013-01-10 03:47:58 PM  

Boxcutta: Well, I...a gift for me? Thank you! Is there any way I can avoid having my posts intermingled with the common 'liter gutter trash?


Explore Total Fark Discussion. It's not a thing of beauty, nor is it a joy forever, but sometimes people make really bad choices and then post the results, so that's fun.
 
2013-01-10 03:48:15 PM  
Sign me up. I've done worse for money.
 
2013-01-10 03:48:18 PM  

R.A.Danny: CokeBear: Has anyone ever changed their mind based on something they read in a comment thread? Seems like a big waste of time to me

I've learned a lot of stuff here. Farkers are generally good people.


Same here. Been reading politics threads since nigh '06. Interacting with folks here has been very enlightening. I learn the most when someone pwns my stupid view on something by posting information that I hadn't been exposed to prior. I love when that happens, even if it is a bit embarrassing.
 
2013-01-10 03:48:40 PM  
Jaysis, this thread grew fast. Bookmark for later reading.
 
2013-01-10 03:49:02 PM  

david_gaithersburg: Uranus Is Huge!: I have an alt account. I would tell you the name, but since he's not in the thread, I would risk a ban.

/over 200 ignored (most are seasonal election trolls)

.
That much bubble wrap must be expensive.


Nope. Free. You're in Derpstorm Red right now. You have the ability to make a coherent point on occasion. You choose not to, but you do have the ability.
 
2013-01-10 03:49:04 PM  

busy chillin': A chick called me a misogynist once. I said, "My my, that is an awfully big word for such a good looking girl like yourself."

/not mine


Yeah, I've tossed a flippant remark or two out there, but I never thought anyone took me seriously,
 
2013-01-10 03:49:30 PM  

James!: david_gaithersburg: NowhereMon: I wonder how many of these we have at FARK...

.
There sure are a lot here. Remember to OWS threads and how they were swarmed by posters in unison, and now the gun ban threads. Welcome to the world of the DNC.

In one OWS thread I got called a Wall Street puppet and a stupid OWS hippy.  Maybe I'm working both sides of the argument?


Well OBVIOUSLY that's because you forgot to switch alts at a crucial moment.

/Joking
 
2013-01-10 03:49:59 PM  

Weaver95: mainstreet62: Rev.K: How can I get paid to be a liberal shill?

Go on welfare.

oh very clever!  so...eat any good books lately?


I'm reading George Takei's new book on a government subsidized iPad paid directly by the increase of FICA taxes, taken directly from Tea Party members' pockets.

/seriously, I'm really reading that book
 
2013-01-10 03:50:04 PM  

Weaver95: James!:
It's not news, it's fark.com.  75% of the users scroll right past news and jump all over a derp article with a crazy headline.

lets face it - corporate news is bland, boring and excessively controlled.  one of the best things about fark is the ability to just unload on an article or topic without fear of being quashed by a series of automated scripts.  are there rules? sure.  and the lines are fairly well defined.  step over 'em and you'll know it...but even so, still we've got a LOT of room to rant.  And rant we do, about anything/everything.  ain't no sacred cows here.

the downside tho is that we get a lot of stupid mixed in with the insightful.  with a dash of crazy on top of it all.  which is great cover for paid shills to slip in their pre-digested talking points and then fade away in the background.


You know, I enjoy a lot of posts thadon't agree with. The folks who endlessly and repetitively parade talking points that have been conclusively debunked are a pain. The worst I put on ignore, but I hate to do so too often for fear I may miss either a cogent point that causes me to re-examine my views, or alternately, they say something so egregiously stupid that it would be a shame to pass up the entertainment.
 
2013-01-10 03:50:16 PM  
fake.

/I was paid $50 to say that
 
2013-01-10 03:50:31 PM  

Boxcutta: Well, I...a gift for me? Thank you! Is there any way I can avoid having my posts intermingled with the common 'liter gutter trash?


Man, you're either gonna love TFD and never go on the main page again except to pop in occasionally with an amazingly astute quip or witticism, or you're going to go into an incredibly deep depression when you realize what gets posted *after* you filter out the liter gutter trash and never log into Fark again  Have fun either way though!

/just kidding kinda
//welcome!
 
2013-01-10 03:50:37 PM  

Ctrl-Alt-Del: James!: You're kind of one the same page as me. Why would anyone need to pay someone to argue on the internet?

To stop the discussion.

Just look at a typical global warming thread. Instead of discussing the article, or the concepts brought up in the article, or the possible ramifications of the factual events described in the article, or possible solutions to the problems mentioned in the article, every single thread becomes a giant mucking shiatfest that the averge person would want nothing to do with

All it takes is for one obsessive astroturfer to come in and post a few really stupid, easily disproved "facts", and then follow it up by answering every single response with evasions, repetition, and lots and lots of insults, while ignoring any and all requests for actual discussion of the topic. One dedicated shill, paid or not, can completely destroy the entire conversation and make the entire discussion about HIM HIM HIM or force the participants to deal with the shiat-flood of falsehoods that he simply regurgitates en-masse in EVERY SINGLE DISCUSSION of the topic, regardless of how many times they are proven demonstrably false.

And thus pretty much every single discussion even remotely related to global warming is completely and utterly derailed and turned into a giant shiatfest that a LOT of regular folks will simply look at and say "Ew, why would I want to participate in that?"

Would it be worthwhile for multi-billion dollar international oil companies to throw a few bucks at some Internet Marketing Company to effectively shut down every conversation about global climate change on some of the more popular and well known internet discussion sites? I dunno, but the fact that there are companies that do Search Engine Optimization, Online Reputation Management, etc. I don;t really think it's farfetched at all


This was a great post with great points. People act like Fark and Reddit and Slashdot and you know a few dozen other big forum sites don't matter, are small drops in the bucket, etc. I disagree. In the 21st century, these are the townhalls. These are the seedstock of the national discussion, and it is WELL worth big money for big interests to SHUT DOWN meaningful discussion. A skillful troll does exactly that. Do it enough, with enough site coverage and you can shut down the national debate.

The flip side of the coin are the Big Serious Important forum warriors who put notes and colors for every user, so they can paint as a troll and completely dismiss anyone who once offended them in a thread or called them an asshoe for being an asshole.
 
2013-01-10 03:51:17 PM  
One thing I hold dear though: Using ignore is for pussies.
 
2013-01-10 03:51:54 PM  

Lenny_da_Hog: Anyone remember when, a couple of years ago, at least a dozen very zealous Farkers simply disappeared, all at the same time?

"The Great Purge," I called it.

It made Fark Pol Tab usable for a few weeks. It was great.


Yup. It was glorious.
 
2013-01-10 03:51:58 PM  
I consider trolling to be any post written to elicit a negative reaction. I will admit to this.

I am more curious about alts and sock puppets because this behavior is an order of magnitude more pathetic. You are literally talking to yourself.
 
2013-01-10 03:52:05 PM  

Genevieve Marie: Boxcutta: Well, I...a gift for me? Thank you! Is there any way I can avoid having my posts intermingled with the common 'liter gutter trash?

Explore Total Fark Discussion. It's not a thing of beauty, nor is it a joy forever, but sometimes people make really bad choices and then post the results, so that's fun.


Someone just coined a term.
 
2013-01-10 03:52:08 PM  

Begoggle: fake.

/I was paid $50 to say that


Bad news, the fine print says you're paid in Zimbabwe dollars.
 
2013-01-10 03:52:19 PM  

James!: You are though. Either you're asking that we assume someone isn't sincere or you're asking us to remove someone who is sincere but is posting in a way you don't like.


No, I'm asking you to police people's ACTIONS when those actions make it clear that they are intentionally disrupting the conversation to the detriment of the entire community. Sprawl wrote a wonderfully detailed description about the actions we are asking you to more closely examine. Please read it again, knowing that we're not asking you to "ban anyone who disagrees with us" or "ban anyone and everyone who says anything negative."
 
2013-01-10 03:52:39 PM  

udhq: I disagree with this statement, it operates under the assumption that all conservatives are as pants-on-head retarded as such Fark Independents as whinterwhile, randomsja, garypdx, etc


Hold one "conservative" thought in the wrong thread and you get lumped in with the whackos. It happens.
 
2013-01-10 03:53:14 PM  

people: Since the author is talking about training and internet propaganda on Israel.

Youtube video of an actual class to train pro-Israeli bloggers

Haaretz Israel recruits 'army of bloggers' to combat anti-Zionist Web sites
Israelis who speak a second language to represent Israel on 'problematic' Websites in new Absorption Ministry program.


In addition to the above, we used to have a certain poster expected to appear in any and all Israel threads to push the rah-rah-Israel line, even if the topic was shelling Palestinians with white phosphorus.

He's been gone a while, probably due to enough people here recognizing that he was a liar, and racist, and in defense of the indefensible. When I first came to Fark (2002?) he used to command a lot of respectful attention, since he seemed like an expert on Israel and the region, but near the end, he was getting hammered badly by other Farkers. TFA caught my attention here:

This section also contained a number of hints for de-railing conversations that went too far away from what we were attempting. These strategies included various forms of personal attacks, complaining to the forum moderators, smearing the characters of our opponents, using images and icons effectively, and even dragging the tone of the conversation down with sexual innuendo, links to pornography, or other such things.

That reminded me of one late thread, where he was getting beaten, and started posting the words MIDGET PORN over and over. It made absolutely no sense in the thread context. I think that thread got removed from Fark, which I guess was what he wanted.
 
2013-01-10 03:53:19 PM  

R.A.Danny: busy chillin': A chick called me a misogynist once. I said, "My my, that is an awfully big word for such a good looking girl like yourself."

/not mine

Yeah, I've tossed a flippant remark or two out there, but I never thought anyone took me seriously,


You are like the mythical butterfly that flaps its wings in Indonesia causing a hurricane in the Caribbean.
 
2013-01-10 03:53:20 PM  

R.A.Danny: One thing I hold dear though: Using ignore is for pussies.


It's like skipping ads on Tivo.
 
2013-01-10 03:54:01 PM  

Nobodyn0se: James!: You are though. Either you're asking that we assume someone isn't sincere or you're asking us to remove someone who is sincere but is posting in a way you don't like.

No, I'm asking you to police people's ACTIONS when those actions make it clear that they are intentionally disrupting the conversation to the detriment of the entire community. Sprawl wrote a wonderfully detailed description about the actions we are asking you to more closely examine. Please read it again, knowing that we're not asking you to "ban anyone who disagrees with us" or "ban anyone and everyone who says anything negative."


See, intention. I don't know a posters intention.  We've stated multiple times that we have to assume that everyone is sincere.
 
2013-01-10 03:54:14 PM  
Why, this describes a whore not liking the taste of sperm!

/shocked, appalled.
//reads like a letter to Penthouse if that's not too obscure.
 
2013-01-10 03:55:02 PM  
I suggested this vary thing to a paper.. ie paying the commenters and everyone laughed at me.

mind you I would much rather get paid to jerk off to porn, so if someone has a job like that let me know,.
 
2013-01-10 03:55:16 PM  

James!: Nobodyn0se: James!: You are though. Either you're asking that we assume someone isn't sincere or you're asking us to remove someone who is sincere but is posting in a way you don't like.

No, I'm asking you to police people's ACTIONS when those actions make it clear that they are intentionally disrupting the conversation to the detriment of the entire community. Sprawl wrote a wonderfully detailed description about the actions we are asking you to more closely examine. Please read it again, knowing that we're not asking you to "ban anyone who disagrees with us" or "ban anyone and everyone who says anything negative."

See, intention. I don't know a posters intention.  We've stated multiple times that we have to assume that everyone is sincere.


And in the case of the politics tab...broken.
 
2013-01-10 03:55:29 PM  
Smells like bullshiat.

There's way too much flattering of the paranoia of ATS and stroking of the egos of those who'd probably *like* to think that shills would bother to keep notes on them and their habits.
The return on shilling is just the propagation of FUD and message control. You don't need to give a shiat what happened yesterday to do that. You don't need to 'turn' prominent posters. You just need volume and repetition.

Sounds to me more like ATS has some on-going spat that involves someone feeling wronged by what they feel is a "shill" and they want to inject some favorable uncertainty into the proceedings.

Also: why would a pro-Israel lobby need to hire unknowns to do this work? Wouldn't they just use their own True Believers in their own intelligence apparatus? It's not like the FBI outsources their stirring shiat up on Jihadist boards or kiddie-diddler chat rooms. Why would they ever risk hiring unknowns and handing them printed-out binders of evidence?
 
2013-01-10 03:55:41 PM  

James!: You don't want us becoming thought police.


I don't. But there is a middle ground between people just hitting F5 looking for personal attacks or pickle incidents and a cadre of psychic post Nazis. What is the role of a moderator at a debate? They don't control the opinions being put out, but they control the way they're being put out, to ensure a civil and productive discussion. They wouldn't tolerate Romney calling Obama a knob gobbler, nor would they tolerate Obama's pickle trick, but that's not the entirety of their job while the candidates are arguing.

What I want is for mods to be a moderating influence. You don't have to tell me that my opinion on X is stupid, just that if I'm going to argue X that I probably should do it through something other than an all caps rant about how all dims are stupid and furthermore comma.

The way the rules are set up, they're very, very easy to get around if you wanted to just be an asshole to people. And as long as you dodge the bans, it doesn't matter what people think.
 
2013-01-10 03:56:26 PM  

I_C_Weener: R.A.Danny: busy chillin': A chick called me a misogynist once. I said, "My my, that is an awfully big word for such a good looking girl like yourself."

/not mine

Yeah, I've tossed a flippant remark or two out there, but I never thought anyone took me seriously,

You are like the mythical butterfly that flaps its wings in Indonesia causing a hurricane in the Caribbean.


More like the gnat that gets squashed, unnoticed, and finally rots into something filtered out in diatomaceous earth
 
2013-01-10 03:56:43 PM  

El Pachuco: people: Since the author is talking about training and internet propaganda on Israel.

Youtube video of an actual class to train pro-Israeli bloggers

Haaretz Israel recruits 'army of bloggers' to combat anti-Zionist Web sites
Israelis who speak a second language to represent Israel on 'problematic' Websites in new Absorption Ministry program.

In addition to the above, we used to have a certain poster expected to appear in any and all Israel threads to push the rah-rah-Israel line, even if the topic was shelling Palestinians with white phosphorus.

He's been gone a while, probably due to enough people here recognizing that he was a liar, and racist, and in defense of the indefensible. When I first came to Fark (2002?) he used to command a lot of respectful attention, since he seemed like an expert on Israel and the region, but near the end, he was getting hammered badly by other Farkers. TFA caught my attention here:

This section also contained a number of hints for de-railing conversations that went too far away from what we were attempting. These strategies included various forms of personal attacks, complaining to the forum moderators, smearing the characters of our opponents, using images and icons effectively, and even dragging the tone of the conversation down with sexual innuendo, links to pornography, or other such things.

That reminded me of one late thread, where he was getting beaten, and started posting the words MIDGET PORN over and over. It made absolutely no sense in the thread context. I think that thread got removed from Fark, which I guess was what he wanted.


That, and a screw up or two revealed his alt/sockpuppet for all to see.
 
2013-01-10 03:56:45 PM  

James!: Nobodyn0se: James!: You are though. Either you're asking that we assume someone isn't sincere or you're asking us to remove someone who is sincere but is posting in a way you don't like.

No, I'm asking you to police people's ACTIONS when those actions make it clear that they are intentionally disrupting the conversation to the detriment of the entire community. Sprawl wrote a wonderfully detailed description about the actions we are asking you to more closely examine. Please read it again, knowing that we're not asking you to "ban anyone who disagrees with us" or "ban anyone and everyone who says anything negative."

See, intention. I don't know a posters intention.  We've stated multiple times that we have to assume that everyone is sincere.


See, action. You do know a poster's actions. We've stated multiple times that we are only asking you to interject when there is demonstrable actions that show the person is disrupting the conversation on purpose (notice, this has NOTHING to do with their opinion).
 
2013-01-10 03:57:37 PM  

sprawl15: James!: You don't want us becoming thought police.

I don't. But there is a middle ground between people just hitting F5 looking for personal attacks or pickle incidents and a cadre of psychic post Nazis. What is the role of a moderator at a debate? They don't control the opinions being put out, but they control the way they're being put out, to ensure a civil and productive discussion. They wouldn't tolerate Romney calling Obama a knob gobbler, nor would they tolerate Obama's pickle trick, but that's not the entirety of their job while the candidates are arguing.

What I want is for mods to be a moderating influence. You don't have to tell me that my opinion on X is stupid, just that if I'm going to argue X that I probably should do it through something other than an all caps rant about how all dims are stupid and furthermore comma.

The way the rules are set up, they're very, very easy to get around if you wanted to just be an asshole to people. And as long as you dodge the bans, it doesn't matter what people think.


Jesus christ, now we're responsible for maintaining a particular style of posting?  That is really what you want?
 
2013-01-10 03:57:54 PM  

R.A.Danny: One thing I hold dear though: Using ignore is for pussies.


Why? I'm here because enjoy the discussion and reading other thoughtful or intelligent or humorous posts. If someone is not contributing any of that, why bother reading their drivel. I even have a few libs on ignore just because they can't make a point without being nasty. Not snarky, nasty.
 
2013-01-10 03:58:13 PM  

Maud Dib: Lenny_da_Hog: Anyone remember when, a couple of years ago, at least a dozen very zealous Farkers simply disappeared, all at the same time?

"The Great Purge," I called it.

It made Fark Pol Tab usable for a few weeks. It was great.

Yup. It was glorious.


Where have all the dentists gone
Long time passing
Where have all the dentists gone
Long time ago...
 
2013-01-10 03:58:48 PM  

StreetlightInTheGhetto: Boxcutta: Well, I...a gift for me? Thank you! Is there any way I can avoid having my posts intermingled with the common 'liter gutter trash?

Man, you're either gonna love TFD and never go on the main page again except to pop in occasionally with an amazingly astute quip or witticism, or you're going to go into an incredibly deep depression when you realize what gets posted *after* you filter out the liter gutter trash and never log into Fark again  Have fun either way though!

/just kidding kinda
//welcome!


She'll get tired of the poop threads and "what did you have for lunch" pretty quick.
 
2013-01-10 03:58:53 PM  

CokeBear: Has anyone ever changed their mind based on something they read in a comment thread? Seems like a big waste of time to me


I got the president to change his mind on gay marriage.
 
2013-01-10 03:58:54 PM  

sprawl15: What I want is for mods to be a moderating influence. You don't have to tell me that my opinion on X is stupid, just that if I'm going to argue X that I probably should do it through something other than an all caps rant about how all dims are stupid and furthermore comma.


Honestly, that works on some forums. I participate in some that are heavily moderated and where moderators are a very active influence on how the thread goes. That's really never been Fark's style though- most people here seem to prefer the mods stay out of the way as much as possible and only really be active when things start to go off the rails.

There are pros and cons to either approach.
 
2013-01-10 03:59:33 PM  

Nobodyn0se: James!: Nobodyn0se: James!: You are though. Either you're asking that we assume someone isn't sincere or you're asking us to remove someone who is sincere but is posting in a way you don't like.

No, I'm asking you to police people's ACTIONS when those actions make it clear that they are intentionally disrupting the conversation to the detriment of the entire community. Sprawl wrote a wonderfully detailed description about the actions we are asking you to more closely examine. Please read it again, knowing that we're not asking you to "ban anyone who disagrees with us" or "ban anyone and everyone who says anything negative."

See, intention. I don't know a posters intention.  We've stated multiple times that we have to assume that everyone is sincere.

See, action. You do know a poster's actions. We've stated multiple times that we are only asking you to interject when there is demonstrable actions that show the person is disrupting the conversation on purpose (notice, this has NOTHING to do with their opinion).


How do I know they're disrupting on purpose or just expressing their opinion in a shiatty way.  Thought police.
 
2013-01-10 04:00:41 PM  

Giltric: CokeBear: Has anyone ever changed their mind based on something they read in a comment thread? Seems like a big waste of time to me

I got the president to change his mind on gay marriage.


I'm not sure, but I think if he still uses a Blackberry it is very unlikely Mr. Obama has a Fark login.
 
2013-01-10 04:00:42 PM  
Amazing how the usual suspects faded away after the elections.
 
2013-01-10 04:00:49 PM  
This guy's story may be bullsh*t...but there have been ad agencies that will admit to using internet posters to talk up movies and products to mold public perception...so I don't see why politics and politicians would be any different.
 
2013-01-10 04:01:19 PM  

James!: sprawl15: James!: You don't want us becoming thought police.

I don't. But there is a middle ground between people just hitting F5 looking for personal attacks or pickle incidents and a cadre of psychic post Nazis. What is the role of a moderator at a debate? They don't control the opinions being put out, but they control the way they're being put out, to ensure a civil and productive discussion. They wouldn't tolerate Romney calling Obama a knob gobbler, nor would they tolerate Obama's pickle trick, but that's not the entirety of their job while the candidates are arguing.

What I want is for mods to be a moderating influence. You don't have to tell me that my opinion on X is stupid, just that if I'm going to argue X that I probably should do it through something other than an all caps rant about how all dims are stupid and furthermore comma.

The way the rules are set up, they're very, very easy to get around if you wanted to just be an asshole to people. And as long as you dodge the bans, it doesn't matter what people think.

Jesus christ, now we're responsible for maintaining a particular style of posting?  That is really what you want?


you know, I got banned once for mentioning a certain poster's name who likes to post some quotes about god and tinfoil hats and brainwaves and whatnot.

And all I said was he was trolling.

How is that farking fair?
 
2013-01-10 04:01:43 PM  

Lenny_da_Hog: Maud Dib: Lenny_da_Hog: Anyone remember when, a couple of years ago, at least a dozen very zealous Farkers simply disappeared, all at the same time?

"The Great Purge," I called it.

It made Fark Pol Tab usable for a few weeks. It was great.

Yup. It was glorious.

Where have all the dentists gone
Long time passing
Where have all the dentists gone
Long time ago...



Heh. I can't even remember the last time I noticed the dentist's supposed emasculated successor version hanging around here. It's been months...
 
2013-01-10 04:02:23 PM  

James!: Nobodyn0se: James!: Nobodyn0se: James!: You are though. Either you're asking that we assume someone isn't sincere or you're asking us to remove someone who is sincere but is posting in a way you don't like.

No, I'm asking you to police people's ACTIONS when those actions make it clear that they are intentionally disrupting the conversation to the detriment of the entire community. Sprawl wrote a wonderfully detailed description about the actions we are asking you to more closely examine. Please read it again, knowing that we're not asking you to "ban anyone who disagrees with us" or "ban anyone and everyone who says anything negative."

See, intention. I don't know a posters intention.  We've stated multiple times that we have to assume that everyone is sincere.

See, action. You do know a poster's actions. We've stated multiple times that we are only asking you to interject when there is demonstrable actions that show the person is disrupting the conversation on purpose (notice, this has NOTHING to do with their opinion).

How do I know they're disrupting on purpose or just expressing their opinion in a shiatty way.  Thought police.


I think if the post doesn't contain a modicum of humor, we should delete.  You know...just fodder for the Mods to think about.  Then again...some people don't like Carlos Mencia and I'm told he's a comedian...so humor might be a tough way to tell too.
 
2013-01-10 04:02:32 PM  

R.A.Danny: Hold one "conservative" thought in the wrong thread and you get lumped in with the whackos. It happens.


Which brings up yet another reason why the trolls need to be treated like trolls: Their infromed dick-waving and derp-herping makes the entire conservative side of the spectrum look insane, and in cases where the conservative side has a real point (gun control threads, for example), it ends up dragging down and one-siding the whole conversation. They're left alone to "Stop Fark from becoming a liberal circle-jerk," or so I've heard from the mods (paraphrased, of course), but it really has the opposite effect.
 
2013-01-10 04:02:43 PM  

The All-Powerful Atheismo: James!: sprawl15: James!: You don't want us becoming thought police.

I don't. But there is a middle ground between people just hitting F5 looking for personal attacks or pickle incidents and a cadre of psychic post Nazis. What is the role of a moderator at a debate? They don't control the opinions being put out, but they control the way they're being put out, to ensure a civil and productive discussion. They wouldn't tolerate Romney calling Obama a knob gobbler, nor would they tolerate Obama's pickle trick, but that's not the entirety of their job while the candidates are arguing.

What I want is for mods to be a moderating influence. You don't have to tell me that my opinion on X is stupid, just that if I'm going to argue X that I probably should do it through something other than an all caps rant about how all dims are stupid and furthermore comma.

The way the rules are set up, they're very, very easy to get around if you wanted to just be an asshole to people. And as long as you dodge the bans, it doesn't matter what people think.

Jesus christ, now we're responsible for maintaining a particular style of posting?  That is really what you want?

you know, I got banned once for mentioning a certain poster's name who likes to post some quotes about god and tinfoil hats and brainwaves and whatnot.

And all I said was he was trolling.

How is that farking fair?


Did you talk about someone who wasn't in a thread and call them a name?
 
Displayed 50 of 1071 comments

First | « | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report