|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 299 responses total. |
richard
|
|
response 236 of 299:
| 
Apr 15 20:40 UTC 2005 |
keesan, you should care if the twits keep posting because it is how the
board looks that dictates whether new users decide to participate.
These new users, who won't know about twit filters or automatically
know who the twits are, will just run away. for grex to grow, to
attract new users, it must deal with its twit users, and not just put
up filters so they don't have to read the twit users posts. I repeat
that filters are not a solution, filters do NOT solve the problem.
filters are a way of ignoring the problem.
|
tod
|
|
response 237 of 299:
|
Apr 15 20:49 UTC 2005 |
re #236
Maybe you should be asking yourself what the mission of grex is rather than
worrying about perception to the unannointed.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 238 of 299:
|
Apr 15 20:58 UTC 2005 |
How exactly does Richard know which twits are driving away newusers? How
should grex define a "newuser-driving-away twit"?
|
naftee
|
|
response 239 of 299:
|
Apr 15 22:13 UTC 2005 |
i'm a newuser deriving twit
|
tod
|
|
response 240 of 299:
|
Apr 15 22:52 UTC 2005 |
Maybe a newuser survey:
Welcome Aboard!
Please let us know which of us annoys you the most.
Thanks!
-The Staff
|
cyklone
|
|
response 241 of 299:
|
Apr 16 01:30 UTC 2005 |
"Grex is dedicated to providing the blandest newuser experience possible, in
hopes you will give us money. If you have a problem with a user, please send
email to our Beginner's Assistance Program (BAP) @ cyberspace.org"
|
keesan
|
|
response 242 of 299:
|
Apr 16 02:10 UTC 2005 |
If all new users were offered the twit filter as a default, how would twits
drive them away unless other users kept responding to them?
|
nharmon
|
|
response 243 of 299:
|
Apr 16 14:33 UTC 2005 |
I really think that if Grex begins sponsoring censorship (private, whatever),
that we will be creating more problems than we will be solving. First of all,
I believe that such censorship will escalate from filtering profanity, to
filtering speech because the staff person does not agree. And I say this
because every other BBS, web forum, etc. that has attempted to do so, ends
up becoming a closed system of only those people who think like the sysadmin.
How long before we start deciding that someone needs to be filtered just
because we don't agree with the political slant of his/her message?
I feel that this part of Grex is not broken, and that it borders going against
everything Grex stands for.
|
cross
|
|
response 244 of 299:
|
Apr 16 15:41 UTC 2005 |
Isn't Grex pretty much already like that? It's a small, insular community
of people who think largely the same way.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 245 of 299:
|
Apr 16 16:05 UTC 2005 |
Well Dan, that may be so, but those few with different points of view are
able to express them here. I think that would change if system-wide filtering
were enabled.
So I guess it depends on what side of the fence you think you are on. If you
think your opinion is largely the same as everyone else on Grex, you probably
don't have anything to worry about when it comes to filtering.
|
richard
|
|
response 246 of 299:
|
Apr 16 21:38 UTC 2005 |
grex already has censorship. you can't edit your own posts. grex
won't allow it. that is in and of itself a form of control. grex's
fairwitnesses have the /kill and /freeze command to remove completely
any item or freeze any item, not just their own.
grex has censorship in its own way. The fact is that it is impossible
in this day and age to run a place like grex and not have censorship.
I think tod should stop preaching about 'no censorship' unless he
personally wants to pay grex's legal bills when grex gets sued for NOT
having enough controls on posts, and unless he's willing to pay grex's
hardware bills the next time some twit user damages a drive by
overloading it with useless text.
Grex is a private organization offering a public service, and it is
responsible for grex to take steps to protect itself and to maintain a
strong product that people will want to use. If new users come here
and see boards that will look like a mess unless they use all kinds of
filters, they will not come back. Is that what Tod wants? I
|
naftee
|
|
response 247 of 299:
|
Apr 16 22:27 UTC 2005 |
the next time you see a drive that's damaged because it was filled to capacity
with useless text, e-mail me. thisdayislong@gmail.com
|
keesan
|
|
response 248 of 299:
|
Apr 17 00:10 UTC 2005 |
The twits I thought we were talking about filtering out are not posting
opinions or content, just strings of obscenity, or 50 copies of Plato,
intended specifically to be annoying and waste people's time. I think
everyone could easily agree on who to put on this list. You can then
personally add people whose opinions you don't want to read, or whose spelling
errors drive you crazy. I have only three of those on my list, but two lines
of vandal logins (probably traceable to 2 or 3 real individuals).
|
scholar
|
|
response 249 of 299:
|
Apr 17 01:03 UTC 2005 |
I don't express opinions on Grex or make spelling errors, and I don't just
enter obscenity or 50 copies of plato, yet I'm on your twit list bakers dozen+
times.
|
naftee
|
|
response 250 of 299:
|
Apr 17 06:05 UTC 2005 |
All my comments are both witty and funny. Anyone who filters me is missing
out, guy.
|
happyboy
|
|
response 251 of 299:
|
Apr 17 19:28 UTC 2005 |
i think you're neat.
|
richard
|
|
response 252 of 299:
|
Apr 17 20:27 UTC 2005 |
keesan said:
"I think everyone could easily agree on who to put on this list. You
can then personally add people whose opinions you don't want to read,
or whose spelling errors drive you crazy. I have only three of those
on my list, but two lines of vandal logins (probably traceable to 2 or
3 real individuals)."
That helps you and me and other regulars. The problem is that it
doesn't help new users coming here for the first time. The objective
neesd to be how can we keep grex's conferences looking clean and
readable so that people coming here for the first time want to come
back? Filters just aren't the answer for that
|
naftee
|
|
response 253 of 299:
|
Apr 17 20:30 UTC 2005 |
keesan filters you, happyboy :(
|
nharmon
|
|
response 254 of 299:
|
Apr 17 21:05 UTC 2005 |
"The twits I thought we were talking about filtering out are not posting
opinions or content, just strings of obscenity, or 50 copies of Plato,
intended specifically to be annoying and waste people's time."
Who gets to decide what is opinion/content, and what is just strings of
obscenity? And who gets to decide the difference between playing devils'
advocate, and wasting other people's time?
All I am saying, is that it won't stop at filtering people abusing the system.
Censorship will expand to include any dissenting opinion. In the beginning,
there will be excuses..."I'm not banning scholar because of his dissenting
opinion, but rather the manner he expressed it"...and in the end it'll be
"what? advocating microsoft windows??? he must be a troll".
It should provide for an interesting ride, thats for sure.
|
richard
|
|
response 255 of 299:
|
Apr 17 21:29 UTC 2005 |
nobody is advocating BANNING anybody. I am against the closing of
newuser. All I'm saying is that the fairwitness ought to have the
flexibility, in fact does have the flexibility, to look at an item and
decide whether that item is appropriate and fits in with the subject
matter of the conference. If somebody enters Plato's Republic in the
Sports conference, it doesn't need to stay there. It is not sports.
Create a "Useless" conference and let fw's move any inappropriate item
over to that conf. this isn't banning users, it is just saying that
the fw's are going to start taking care of the conferences they are
supposed to be taking care of. Once twit users see that their most
twittified posts are not going to stay up in the conferences, and will
invariably get moved to the Useless conference, they will stop
posting. Because few people will read the Useless conference.
That is not censorship because nobody is preventing them from posting.
It is saying that an fw can and should decide whether a post is
appropriate for a particular conference. This isn't unusual, this is
the way the vast majority of the boards that I use on the 'net actually
operate. You can't have subject appropriate boards on the 'net without
having moderators who make some effort to keep the boards "on subject"
In Agora, which is a general conf, you can simply say that all subjects
are appropriate but that the fw's have the discretion to decide that
certain posts are more appropriate for OTHER confs. An fw should be
able to move/link a post out of that conf into any other appropriate
conf.
|
glenda
|
|
response 256 of 299:
|
Apr 17 22:05 UTC 2005 |
Great! Then we get fw wars where one fw moves/links a posting that he/she
feels doesn't belong in his/her conf to a different conf. That conf's fw
feels that it is better elsewhere or back in the first conf and links/moves
to back. FWs currently cannot move/link posting from their conf to another,
they can only link from another conf to theirs. As a fw, I would not want
another fw dumping the garbage from their conf into mine without my say so.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 257 of 299:
|
Apr 17 23:26 UTC 2005 |
Hot Potato Ping Pong!
|
tod
|
|
response 258 of 299:
|
Apr 17 23:27 UTC 2005 |
re #243
How long before we start deciding that someone needs to be filtered just
because we don't agree with the political slant of his/her message?
That's what happened in the parenting conference with items about
breastfeeding. Of course, those that sided with the abuser will lie about
it because they will never allow those items to be restored to prove it.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 259 of 299:
|
Apr 18 00:21 UTC 2005 |
This is absolute madness. Maybe we should just constitute "free speach zones"
on Grex so that you people aren't offended by differing opinions.
|
scholar
|
|
response 260 of 299:
|
Apr 18 01:43 UTC 2005 |
I must state that I will (within all legal limits) attempt to disturb any
attempts at censorship obn Grex.
|