|
Nagy Vilmos wrote: the user has been nuked
But why? As far as I can work out there are two options spammer and abusive. None of which his post fits under.
|
|
|
|
|
It's not down-voting as such as that is disabled in the Soapbox. It's people using the report button as there isn't a down-vote for them to use. Johnny J has admitted there that he reported the message but didn't want to remove the member, but that is what happened. It's suggested there that it is a bug but I don't think it is because if used on a genuine spammer i.e. the live stream ones we are getting recently then you would want the report to both remove the message and the account so that they can't repeat it.
As the message is still there, I'm assuming most people went to his profile to report him directly, which is wrong. At the end of the day I think the report button should strictly be used for genuine spammers or, more rarely, somebody comes on and starts abusing people. I believe this is what it was introduced for and not for removing people that don't fit into the clique.
|
|
|
|
|
He always had the potential to go troll I thought, but wasn't there yet and might never have done, so I was giving him the benefit of the doubt.
His account was nuked (the message still stands), so it wasn't necessarily this message, perhaps he posted something somewhere else?
|
|
|
|
|
I think he started some discussions which were met reasonably well in the Lounge (apart from those jokes). I see no reason why he could have become a troll. I think that joke topic made people report him?
My Blog
Tai'shar Manetheren! Tai'shar Malkier!
|
|
|
|
|
Nithin Sundar wrote: I see no reason why he could have become a troll.
You might not I do. Trolling can be more subtle than just winding people up. Some people spend real time and effort on it.
We've had several such people in the past: They start off with a few more-or-less reasonable posts, then the poor jokes start, then they become obnoxious (especially posting unwelcome jokes). Before the report button came into play, it could take days/weeks to get rid of them as they'd play a fine line between winding people up and getting banned. We had one repeat offender who always had this MO, though he normally distinguished himself by putting his location as Lebanon.
I'm not saying he was a troll (I actually didn't report him), just that he showed early signs of being one. Personally I didn't see anything that was worthy of him getting banned.
|
|
|
|
|
I understand what you mean and I agree with the points you explained. It's a real pain to get trolls off the site and harder for everyone when the person keeps doing it.
I felt it was unfortunate since he did make a effort to contribute by creating some good topics and even replying in them as well. That I feel, in my view, is someone who did enjoy the Lounge in a normal way.
My Blog
Tai'shar Manetheren! Tai'shar Malkier!
|
|
|
|
|
This is unfortunate. I hope the account is given back since this is borderline unfair.
My Blog
Tai'shar Manetheren! Tai'shar Malkier!
|
|
|
|
|
The user has been reinstated.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, but I think it is the second time it has happened to that member so maybe it doesn't cure the overall problem of people wrongly using the report facility?
|
|
|
|
|
PB 369,783 wrote: I think it is the second time it has happened to that member
I have a recollection of this user trolling in the Lounge a while back, deliberately posting rubbish because he was bored. I thought he'd improved a lot since then.
|
|
|
|
|
Does he know? I'd have thought we would have seen something from him upon his reinstatement.
|
|
|
|
|
Chris didn't touch on the subject, but as far as I am concerned, it is not a bug.
If you use the red flag to report a message as Spam, the system automatically reports the member as Spammer on your behalf as well.
If you use the red flag to report a message as Abuse, the member is not reported as Abusive. As far as I can tell, the member is not even deducted any points.
I think it is obvious this behavior was put in place to quickly get rid of members that post actual spam in the forums - I am sure many members will see a spam message and report it as such, but not bother going to the profile to report the offending member directly.
The trick is to get people to red-flag posts like the one in question as Abuse and not as Spam. A few of those and the post is gone without hurting the posting member.
Soren Madsen
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
|
|
|
|
|
I think a "report message as crap" option in addition to spam/abusive might make things clearer.
"Real men drive manual transmission" - Rajesh.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Excellent idea!
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant Anonymous ----- Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience Greg King ----- I had the right to remain silent, but I didn't have the ability! Ron White, Comedian
|
|
|
|
|
That was unfortunate.
I think enabling down-voting on Lounge might help, I think when members have nothing to express their dislike they just reporting the post/member as spam.
|
|
|
|
|
Rajesh's idea of a "report message as crap" option seems like the perfect solution to me. It needn't do anything but count the number of reports, no minus points, no abuse/spam deletes or ahything like that. Just let the OP know how many people that didn't like his post...
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant Anonymous ----- Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience Greg King ----- I had the right to remain silent, but I didn't have the ability! Ron White, Comedian
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, that is a good idea, so if we don't want to implement something new, we can just turn on the down-voting without any minus points/deletes. just plain down-votes to tell the OP that we are not interested.
|
|
|
|
|
You mean add back down voting?
No. If you don't like something move on. If its inappropriate flag it. If you do like it give them an up vote.
But no, I'm not going back to the days of down vote wars
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
NO not quite - like downvoting but without point deduction. Like that, it does no harm, but still lets people know that you don't approve of their post. No war.
There seems to be interest amongst the other members for a feature like that.
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant Anonymous ----- Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience Greg King ----- I always wanted to be somebody, but now I realize I should have been more specific. Lily Tomlin, Actress
|
|
|
|
|
I think the intentions behind the current system are clear. If a message is being reported as spam, then the member is a spammer, which should in fact get them banned.
Unfortunately, incidents like this happen when people resort to reporting a message as they don't have any other means to vent their anger on an utterly nonsensical post.
But then I've also seen that incidents like this are not very frequent, and when it does happen, our members get the unintentionally closed account reinstated. This is a fair trade to ensure that the actual spammers will get kicked out by the system really quick.
I think everything is in order.
"Real men drive manual transmission" - Rajesh.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree, but we need something to let other know that we don't like certain threads.
Because most of the time when you reply with dislike, it tends to offend them as it's just finger pointing.
It seems, people are not learning anything from these life-learning-lessons. Why do people think that they need to represent themselves as either funny or wise. I just hate this nonsense.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I want to use a license (CPOL) 1.02
I want to use someone's code.
What should I do in my source code?
Best Regards
Michel
|
|
|
|
|
If I were you, I'd start by reading this[^] to get a general understanding of the article. Pay particular attention to the Restrictions section.
|
|
|
|
|
I spend a lot of time on CP and in my opinion 1..5 star rating (voting) system should be replaced with "recommend" button.
The sad fact (recognized by many high profile websites) is that multiple-grade rating doesn't work on the internet.
Too many people click 5-star rating if they simply like an article. They don't reserve 5-star for exceptionally well written and informative pieces. This is the reason why some short or badly formatted articles end up as "excellent".
I would like to click 5-star to distinguish great articles. But by clicking 4-star I would lower the average grade of good article below the rate of some mediocre articles (that have 5 star rating because most people simply don’t give a s**t about the meaning of 1..5 grades).
If dropping old 5–star system is not an option, maybe you should replace stars with actual words like "good", "exceptionally good" etc.?
|
|
|
|