META: On Spamming the front board
A long time ago, when we first got to the Ning platform, a member who will remain nameless decided to spam the front board, because heck, it is possible to do. They thought it was funny. The site didn't. And so ensued a whole night of them spamming and me removing, until I grew tired and gave them a vacation. Right after that, I told the membership here, no more than 5 articles could be seeded in a 24 hour period. I felt that this was a very generous amount and that the forum is very dynamic and articles change up quickly by the amount of interest they draw. This became "policy'. Policy is not included in the CoC because it has to do with how the site functions and not about behavior. Spamming the board interferes with how the site functions.
So I am reminding everyone that there are to be no more than 5 articles in a 24 hour period. More than 5, and I will remove them at my discretion.
I am looking into a new home for NT and the various platforms have different things to offer. One of them is limiting posts automatically. This would save me a lot of work as right now, I can't be on 24/7, and so stuff gets by me that shouldn't. This will stop that from happening and also stop debates about what "policy" means.
Tags
Who is online
443 visitors
Sounds reasonable Mike. Takes the question out of if we removed an article just because we didn't like it. Make sure that you take a screenshot so that if it is contested, there is proof.
Totally agree because our membership SHOULD have the maturity and ethical responsibility to continue to help make NT an enjoyable venue for the rest of the membership.
Unfortunately one child has decided to place us in this position - someone who demands attention, no matter who he/she harms with their demands.
Wonderful idea, Mike. We can save the article in the archives, too... Going by time stamp is the only way to do this fairly.
That is up to Perrie, but it sounds like a good idea!
Actually, that is untrue and unfair. I have had several members go over the 5 article limit in the past, not just one. So don't lay the blame at the doorstep of one member.
John,
Stop making this personal.
Sounds reasonable to me
Not this past week - and, yes, it was one member - this week.
Early this morning another member had 9 articles up. That is what triggered this whole event, 1st. It didn't come from now where. And I had asked this member before not to have so many articles up at one time.... but there you have it. I am going to have to find a new platform at automatically limits the number of new articles in a day.
Thanks RIO!
Can we have some clarification here? Are we speaking only about the Front Board (which I must have mistakenly thought was called the Front Page)? Think about how many groups there are on NT based on a huge variety of topics that spammers probably would not use because they may be so egotistical that they think what they have to say (through their own article or by means of a seed) is so important it must be seen by all members. So my question is whether the limit would apply only on the Front Board or on all postings inclusive of on group sites?
To me, and remember that I am speaking as a member only-- to me, I think that the Front Board and the Front Page are synonymous, and that this would only apply to the Front Page. I think, and someone correct me if I'm wrong-- but groups are up to the group owner...
That's just my take, Buzz.
When are we gonna have a slander John Russell article ? Payback is a bitch ...
I like my big stick and I will use it if this ever happens again. Everybody gets a one time only pass.
Right now I have no articles on the FP . Do I get credits I can use for later on ?
No. We have a no roll over plan on NT. If you want that go with AT&T mobile
It means the forum and only the forum. Each group is ran by its owners.
If they offered a blog space I would strongly consider it ...
No, but I think there is a policy about going to your own articles and bumping them up with a comment after they have been dead for awhile. You're not supposed to do that, either.
No limit on the number of comments you are allowed to make, but there is a policy somewhere about bumping up your own articles that have fallen off the front page.
Right now, you have 9 articles up. That's almost 50% of all the articles on the front page. You've got to give the others a chance to shine, too... As I say, this site is very different from NV-- and I'm sure it takes a while to understand all the ins and outs.
Dear Mickey, sometimes, it seems that you and I are the only ones left up...
The choice is yours, of course!
Don't forget me Randy. It's usually a one on one after midnight for us.
A discussion forum with a comment count is death to a community. There will be no comment count. Spam comments will be decided either by the authors (as in RBRs) or by mods, like anywhere else, so no change at all.
3 of us, then... at least. I have restless leg syndrome and I can't begin to get to sleep, usually before 4 am...
No way can I get to sleep sometimes, even WITH my sleeping pill. I'm too twitchy. Thank heavens I have retired and usually don't HAVE to be anywhere at any set time. That helps!
I've tried them all, dear BF... The restless leg syndrome is just something I have to live with. It is a form of Parkinson's disease-- just not as bad. Parkinson's Disease runs in the family. I haven't been able to sleep normally since before Matthew was born.
I know this is a serious article, but the dramaticaaaaaaaaaa ! is hilarious.
I think that's a good point.On rare occasions I've seeded maybe 7 or 8 in a very short period. But if they don't get comments, they disappear very quickly. Other articles that do have lots of comments take over pretty rapidly.
I think it only starts to create a real problem if done in even larger volume, and repeatedly.
For example, if someone posted, say ten articles one after the other,and then took a 20 minute break and then returned to post 10 more-- well, that could create problems.
However, a limit of 5 seems to be about right (very few people will do that in a short period of time anyway).
He probably doesn't love America, either. IMO he should be reported to Rudy Giuliani!
LOL
I do it from time to time.But i'm such a delightful person that no one seems to mind. (Or maybe its just because no one is interested, most of mine disappear pretty quickly).
And, BTW, there is another way to control this as well-- if members see a lot of articles on the front page by one person, all we have to do is not comment on any of them and they disappear pretty quickly (although granted that does take a bit of self control, so it may not be feasible).
Yeah, at least I know what it is! Good job, Krish!
Meta? We don't need no stinkin' meta.
Its really not all that difficult. ll you have to do is post an article that fulfills two criteria:
1. Its political, highly partisan and highly biased. (Doesn't matter if its left wing, right wing, or libertarian, or Klingon).
2. Its very inflammatory, and certain to really piss off at least a few people. People here love that stuff (whether they are for the position you take or against it) and they will go on and on and on for hours-- days even-- making comments which will ensure it stays on the front page for a long time. And after that-- they will continue to go on and on and on making comments....
Obviously the concept that it might be possible to actually ignore a stupid, obnoxious, and or generally inflammatory article-- thereby ensuring its rapid disappearance from the front page-- is a concept that most here are unaware of.
Which is why we continually have discussions proposing yet another new rule that attempts to fix the problem. And discussions about all the subtle nuances of proposed rules-- when a simpler (and actually more effective) solution is obvious-- simply ignoring a seed, or article will make it go away).
I think you are doing it on purpose. In fact, its pretty obvious that that's why you moved to the west coast.
(if you really cared about making this site better, you would move back to the east coast).
heh
I was diagnosed with restless leg syndrome LONG before I took any painkillers. I've taken valerian, drunk catnip and chamomile tea, done the works. I've been to a sleep clinic-- This is just the way it is. When I don't take the medicine, I involuntarily twitch. ZZZT! All day. At weird times.
I'm not a huge fan of herbal supplements, just because you don't really know what you're getting-- and they have interactions just like any other drug you take.
I don't take Ambien, can't. Makes me restless until I literally fall out of bed. Or the other.
I have it, too, D. It runs in families. Mom and grandma had it, too. Unfortunately, mine is restless body syndrome. It sucks to have someone tell you it isn't real. It's very real. Maybe you should do an article on it.
Is that really true? I never knew that. Really.
I do that occasionally. In the past I've done it a lot! And not only comment on old articles of mine, but also old articles of others.
On a previous site (the site whose name shall not be mentioned), for some reason my doing that really, really pissed off a bunch of people. It seemed what annoyed them (or so they claimed) was that since it was a news site, I shouldn't be allowed to resurrect old articles/seeds because they were no longer news. (One defense I attempted was arguing that if they should't be made prominent ever again, then way have them remain in the first place? Why not just delete anything that is, say,over a month old?
There was a long discussion. But eventually the admins had to admit that my doing that was not against the rules.
P.S: It was not some sort of ego thing-- I didn't do it to see my articles on the front page-- I did it because some of those old stories had suddenly become relevant in light of current events. Excellent background material. And sometimes of course, I did it in a very carefully thought out way-- I did it because it would really annoy one or more people on my "enemies List".
Hmmmm...
OK-- but certainly they must have appointed a new one by now (or someone appointed themselves)?
The Nigerian Scam will never die! Long live the Nigerian Scam!
Well, they may or may not work, but there are also other possibilities. Meditation is one (1/2 hr every day). Another possibility is treatment by TCM ("Traditional Chinese Medicine"-- accupuncture, special Chinese herbs, etc. Possibly even doing Yoga or Tai Chi or Chi Gong). For some people for some conditions hypnosis works.
Thanks Max
Except not so much the boss, but the person who keeps things rolling smoothly.
CH4P,
You realize that you are making an excellent case for those who say that 5 articles a day is too much. If you keep your comments to the more timely articles, you keep the conversation fresh and in the news, fresh is what counts.
Maybe I should! I'm sorry you have it too-- I have the whole body thing, too. It makes me fall out of bed, sometimes, it gets so bad.
Dowser,
I have RLS and I was given neurontin for it. Have you ever tried that? It works for me.
D and P, I take pramipexole (mirapex) for mine. It works fine. One of the many bad things about RLS is that your body will adjust to the drug and it quits working. Sometimes people have to change drugs.
I take primapexole, too! So far, it is working, but I'm glad to know that there is an alternative... My dad had it-- the other side of the family has full-blown parkinson's. So, I'm lucky...
This is quite interesting twist on spamming. [wink].
"I know a guy" who was seen by 3 neurologists and by exclusion they hung their hats on Benign FasciculationSyndrome.I say exclusion because they don't know what causes it or how to treat it. Many drugs were tried and fail. Also known as twitching or myoclonus. It can affect individual muscle fibers or an entire muscle group. Involuntary muscle movements occasionally appears in the horrible disclaimers of some drug commercials. So is it the drugs, the environment or systemic? This guy and three neuro docs have no idea how to deal with it going on 8 years now. Poor bastard, I'm surprised he doesn't self medicate.
Poor guy!
I know what works. Death.
RLS is not my only health issue. Just one of many!
I know what works.
Exactly. BTW, Dowser, have you tried toad's milk? Some people find it useful in the treatment of RLS.
Actually One,
That is what I have... myoclonus... both in my legs which they do call RLS, but also badly when I sleep, which is called nocturnal myoclonus, causeing violent jerks when I sleep. It is considered a seizure disorder. Neurontin in combination with Klonopin relieves my jerking at night, but during the day, neurontin works fine.
And yes, talk about going off topic, LOL!
Here's the Front Page this morning, February 27, 5:53 AM, Arizona Time:
It's an interesting mix, IMHO. When we look at the entire list at one time, it's pretty easy to spot the trolling.
Blah Blah blah.... I see no reason to limit the amount of articles that any one person can start, assuming that the person can then moderate them successfully.
I've never heard of toad's milk. What is it?
Yes, trolling is easy to spot, for sure. Looks like a good, normal page to me! More of what we expect to find here on NT, thank heavens!
What is considered "for a while"? Two weeks? 10 days? Suppose someone comes across an old article of ours, say a few months old, and they post a comment, bringing the discussion back to the front page, are we not supposed to respondbecause the article was previously 'dead'?
When were those articles first posted? Are they all on the FPbecausethey were just recently first seeded? Or are they there because they were first posted over the last 2 - 3 days and because they are very controversial (as is most of Cornys' stuff) and the nine articles are appearingbecauseof accumulated discussions?
Btw, anyone familiar with history between CornHusker and I on NV knows I certainly did not make that comment in his defense.
One of the problems contributing to this issue is that articles appearing on the front forum section do not show the date they were first posted, they only show the date of the last comment. IMO, the date of the last comment is the least important bit ofinformationweneed, as the comment has to be fairly recent or the article would not be on the FP.
What we really need is the date the article was originated on NT, that way we we would know how long the article has been around, and it will tell the mods when a person has exceeded the allowed number of new seeds in one day.
Ya have to milk a toad to get toad's milk.
Because the ME will be eventually drowned out by the WE...
It doesn't take all that much to determine what you are going to reply to and whether or not the content is spurious or not. If you feel you have a more pertinent article, Post it. I don't think that the poster's of articles could successfully keep articles going if they tried to blanket the front page: They need the help of others to do that. If the rest of us post to our own articles instead of laying on going spammer, then it seems that the issue is moot.
Everyone wants their own opinion to be heard, that is just human. We spend far to much time reinforcing our own opinion and not enough time listening to others because we operate under the mistaken premise that if someone else is right then we must be wrong, and so turn it on its head a make (believe in our minds) that we are right and everybody else is wrong. What a recipe for fights instead of constructive conversations.
Comment removed for context [ph]
BACK THE FUCK OFF MAX!
You mentioned something about "lack of etiquette", and then you go off talking like a fucking longshoreman boss! You've been member here for all of three months, and according to your homepage have posted one whole entire article. I hardly thinkthat qualifies you to to be talking the way you're talking, especially when you're addressing a member whose problem is being overly prolific.
Now lets' get somethingstraighthere, I am no friend of the Cornhusker, he and I have been hating one another for over 5 years. The issue here is not Corny, it is how to address the problem of people supposedly 'spamming' the front page.
FYI, when Corny first came aboard, he asked Perrie if there was a limit to the number of articles he could seed in one day and he was told there was a limit of five. I know thatbecauseI was a part of the discussion.
Cornhusker joined NT 6 weeks ago (Jan 15) that's 42 days. At 5 articles per day he would be allowed to start 210 new discussions. He has started 96, so he has been following the rules.
Obviouslythe problem is not that people are breaking the rules, but that the rules need to be modified.
Lets say CornHusker, or anyone else, posts 5 articles a day over a 3 or 4 day period. That's 15 or 20 articles within one week. In Cornys' case, most of his stuff is a lot of claptrap Right Wing bullshit, and it usually stirs up a strong response, so naturally it's going to keep a good portion of hisdiscussionson the FP.
If you don't like his stuff, don't read it. If you have something positive to offer regarding FP 'spamming', lets hear it.
Jerry,
About this:
Max is an original member here at NT. He just took a break. If anyone knows the rules, it's Max.
Who cares. If a member feels it is relevant, resurrect away!
Oh, and it's wonderful when she does.
I can say something and will provide cogent insight or downright blather as I see fit, be a week or three years after the article was originally posted.
That is why it is called conversation. You may be able to summon all the pertinent thoughts to the table in minute. It does not mean that everybody can or will or should.
Another possibility: a limit on the number on the FP at any one time. If the limit is five, and there are already five on the FP, then NO new posts would be allowed...
IMHO, a limit of some sort would incite member to raise the quality of their articles, rather than the same old same old button pushing.
Get the fuck out, cause you have been here longer than most?
I guess that makes you board daddy?
Yee of not knowing what the fuck happened and how it was done to make it appear like there was a flood to respond too.
I was here when he did it, I reported it, I called him out on it.
He then makes up the lame excuse that FOUR other people spammed the board FOUR CONSERVATIVE people. which justified his spamming the board FOUR TIMES WORSE.
It wasn't about spamming, it WAS about liberal backlash. instead of his usual tactics which have met with failure lately he chose another.
It was a political statement disguised as a complaint.
He didn't post his META question on spamming until he has already spammed the board 12 TIMES and I had called him on it.
You do know after his spamming he arranged the posts on the front page so 5 of C4P posts were at the bottom of the front page and his 15 POSTS were above those.
IT was a political attack at Conservatives that he hasn't won a debate with since he has come back. And he said so.
EVERYONE needs to get a clue to what really happened.
I guess I've just misunderstood all these years. I thought it was ok to resurrect someone else's articles, but not your own. And only the "newly dead". Like, if it was more than 24 hours old, no, but if it had just fallen off the page, yes. But not your own...
Jerry-- 5 of the articles on the FP were posted on that day, and 4 of them had been posted the day before. You can go to the member's page and look at the articles and seeds on the list, call them up, one by one, and get an exact time stamp.
Jerry, in 42 days, C4P has posted 338 articles. That's about 8 articles per day. This information is also available on a member's page.
Totally agree BF. The only question becomes how to get the message out, when there is an important meta discussion going on.
Gotta agree with you Robert. In fact, I have checked out other discussion groups that have open boards like ours, and they do limit the number of seeds/ articles...
You have to do so-- or one person can make any forum only a reflection of himself/herself.
Not comments, Mike, articles. We can comment as much as we wish-- it's the number of articles we seed/post that is the bone of contention...
Not just the number of articles, it's when the brainy amongst us use the board facilities to deliberately trash the front page. Rearrange all the articles to make a political point.
Perrie is right, it self corrects most of the time, and the political point was expected, just not expressed in this fashion.
The issue is manipulation. The intentional disruption of the board which is the thing that must cease.
I wasn't trying to be ugly... Just thought I should clarify for all...
Yes, NWM.
Right, problem is you were the only one that has manipulated it, causing this bruhaha.
Despite your lame excuse that FOUR other people have done it.
THEY DIDN'T MANIPULATE IT LIKE YOU DID! they stayed within the policy parameters you deliberately broke them.
Cant win the debate, so your going to take over and blame it on others.
That is your usual tactic, you just used the board facilities to expand the notice of your whine.
metastasis: the spread of a disease-producing agency (as cancer cells) from the initial or primary site of disease to another part of the body; also: the process by which such spreading occurs
coincidence?
Yep and enjoying the hell out of it like the troll you are.
The shame really is, you have the intelligence to be much much more.....
It's is sad to see you denigrate yourself like this.
One of the problems contributing to this issue is that articles appearing on the front forum section do not show the date they were first posted, they only show the date of the last comment. IMO, the date of the last comment is the least important bit ofinformationweneed, as the comment has to have been posted fairly recently or the article would not be on the FP.
What we really need is the date the article wasoriginatedon NT, that way we we would know how long the article has been around, and it will tell the Mods when a person has exceeded the allowed number of new discussions started in one day.
Let's say someone posts 5 articles each day over a 3 or 4 day period. That's 15 or 20 new discussions within one week. If the articles are of sufficient quality to generate any kind of discussion, it would be very easy for 8 or 10 of of those discussions to show up in the FP forum at one time, especially if discussion from articles posted a week or two earlier get in the mix.
For me, starting 15 or 20 new discussions of any quality in one weeks time would be more than a fair pace to maintain on a regular basis. So, modifying the posting guidelines to a limit of 3 new discussions per day and 15 per week, IMO would not be overly restrictive.
Agreed Jerry and is the normal way the board operates. It's not the number of articles posted, it's when they are posted. the four people complained about in the spammers claims usually spread them out over time so they didn't spam the board.
Nothing really needs fixing except what to do when someone deliberately uses the board to disrupt.
THAT is the real question.
Deep Breaths everyone!
"What we really need is the date the article was originated on NT,..." Just so you know the date the article originated is always just below the title of the articles,....
Example:
META: On Spamming the front board
Only on eachindividualarticles' page. The 'NewsTalkersForum' section (right below the AP feed) only shows the date or time the last comment was posted. That is the section where the number of articles that are 'up' are counted.
How is a member suppose to control how many articles they have up in one day when that number reflects both new discussions started and continuing discussions from previous articles?
See comment .
Meanwhile, why not change 'Last comment posted' to 'Date Discussion Started' and let the Mods monitor the number of new discussions on the front page?
Two ways, post the forum as a direct link at the top like a group, and post an article announcing it with a link to the meta forum to the front page..
all you would have to do is bump it a few times.
Grump - don't do it
Jerry, look to the bottom of the left hand column of a member's page, and underneath Articles and Seeds, hit the View All button. Then, when it pulls up, in the upper right hand corner, you can click, View all articles and seeds. THEN, you can go to each individual article/seed and open them to get the time stamp.
Or, you can open each article and make note of the time stamp.
It's not easy, but it can be done.
Well, you sure as hell don't get it by squeezing teats.
EW!
I don't think so NWM. The question, as I understand it, it's the number of one members articles showing in the NewsTalkers Forum section (right under the AP feed)
Of course something needs to be fixed. How is a member supposed to control how many of theirdiscussionsshow up on the FP, if they started 15 new discussions in the past five days and peoplecommented on 12 of them? It's the commenters that put most of the the discussions on the FP not the originator.
As I suggested, if the date the discussion was started is shown, rather than the date of the last comment, it will be easy for the Mods to spot when someone has exceeded the number of new discussions started by an individual member on any given day.
As far as people 'gamingthe system', that's going to go on no matter what. My suggestion is onlydesignedto make it more difficult to do.
"How is a member supposed to control how many of theirdiscussionsshow up on the FP, if they started 15 new discussions in the past five days and peoplecommented on 12 of them? It's the commenters that put most of the the discussions on the FP not the originator." ....That is NOT the problem being discussed. and that is NOT spamming. Spamming is when a person for what ever reason posts or seeds more than the allowed limit of articles in a 24 hr period. to sit at the keyboard and seed or post 12(more than5)articles about any one subject for the sole purpose of disruption is spamming.
I do not understand why we should hide the fact that we take the operation of this forum very seriously. Why would that frighten newcomers?
(?!) I'm aware how to find the time stamp of an article, but why would I go through all that?
I thought we were trying to find a way to limit the number of articles any one member has on the FP at one time.
Be nice HB4W! Bob is entitled to his POV
Meta is a mixed bag. Yes, transparency in running a site, is very important. On the other hand, it does bring out some freaky comments that could take some aback.
It is quite a quandary.
Anyone, conservative or liberal, who hopes to "win a debate" is delusional. Adults never change their minds. Anyone who has spent time on online forums knows this.
So... Anyone who persists in posting highly partisan articles is not really trying to convince anyone. They are doing something else.
Obviously...
Perrie's already answered this one, I agree with her, and will default to her judgment.
The only problem is Mods aren't on 24/7 to deal with it. (no nitehawk mod prowling in the early hours) But hopefully in the future that will change.
Truth to tell... That cat looks pretty cool.
But I quit smoking twenty years ago... and look just as silly as most people in a beret.
OTOH, your France-envy is not unexpected. It goes with intellectual pretentiousness.
I understand, but that is the normal function of the board and the system running it, hence we are trying to find an alternative that works better.
The showing on the front page rotates always keeping the latest commented article at the top which serves to show everyone where the action is. It's good for keeping comments on popular articles flowing, not so good for other topics that aren't so popular.
There are times that naturally, your going to have a prolific poster appear in the front page listing more than five times, natural function of the board. It results from the articles popularity and you don't want to change that.
It doesn't improve the board to force limits on posting, you post a policy and mods see to it that the policy is abided by.
Most efficient way, and practically the only way without draconian regulation.
I'm not a Mod I can't make that determination.
She's here ask her, (I don't intersperse my judgment over hers)
She did post her position, I'm sorry you missed it.
The balls on that woman!
Did HD close its doors?
Most of us can sniff it out based on instinct alone. (she typed whilst whistling innocently)
Considering the nature of your articles over the last few months, Robert... That looks like a very empty threat.
Ex cathedra...
Robert does not need data. A free-form graph is representative of his thinking.
I presume that the colors pleased you.
Guys.... stop talking about each other or deletions will follow.
[Perrie polishes her big stick]
Your tactics have been highlighted, you can twist and turn it all you want,
you did it.
as much as you would like to make it about me,
You did it.
Sorry you cannot take responsibility for what you did and still want to deflect such to others, it is bare for all to see.
Yes I have my role cause I allowed you and your antics to anger me, but not from a personal standpoint but from the damage you were attempting to put on the board.
I'm already past it, what angered me has been corrected.
And it won't happen anymore, correct?
Hopefully, the future will be improved. I'm going to do my best to effectuate that.
Something that you might consider.
HD is in-your-face meta. Why start something new when we already have it?
New members, or potential members,can't join or even get past the front door of HD for 90 days. How could they possibly determine how caustic, silly,ridiculous, smart-ass, holier than thou, bully-ish, and just plain mean,we truly are, until they can join and participate?
Absolutely fucking hopeless.
Prediction:
Your attitude is going to end badly, for you.
Guys,
Same warning I gave below...
Knock it off with the snarky remarks or I will start to delete.
Clear?
Not to my understanding-- just the number published in one day.
"I thought we were trying to find a way to limit the number of articles any one member has on the FP at one time." ...the number of article a person can seed or post in a 24 hr period.
The problem is, how does anyone know how many of the articles showing in the FP forum were posted onthatday and howmanyof them got there as aresultof comments posted in the discussion threads.
Take a look at this screenshot of the FP forum and tell mehow many of the articles were first posted today;
Well, the only way that I know of is to do the research by going to the person's page. Other than that, I don't know how--
Please, I'm not trying to make you angry, by any means, I promise. But, it seems to be the jobs of the moderators to check out these things... Once you have the list of articles published in front of you, it isn't that hard to open them, one at a time, and check to make sure that no more than 5 were published on one day.
It would be nice to have it available for viewing on the front page, or even on the person's page, by the article-- but that would likely be a programming thing, and I don't know if Ning will allow it. Or if Perrie would have time to do it. Perrie's got a lot to take care of right now...
Is that you, Robert? Nice wig!
ROFLMAO
A simpler rule would be "maximum X articles on the Front Page".
Two different things. When a new article is first started it shows up at the top of the front page, then every time a comment is posted in the discussion thread for that article the article moves back to the top of the front page.
If you had posted 2 or 3 new articles every day for the past week you would have started between 14 and 21 new discussions. If as few as 10 of those articles were relatively active at any given time, you could easily have 10 discussions on the FP forum at the same time without any intention of spamming.
But, no one has control over who comments on what articles... I could, theoretically, go to your page and comment on every one of your articles, flooding the front page with only one author's, (your's), articles.
That was Jerry's point, I think.
I think the real issue here is how to prevent someone from covering the front page with their own articles, (or another's), for the purpose of derailing the entire site. Limiting the number of articles published on any one day makes it harder for one person to control the front page.
Every article has a time stamp underneath the title at the article page. If you are really worried about policing this arbitrary and capricious policy, you can do as Dowser suggested. Or you could only intervene in cases of extreme abuse which would seem the thing to do to me.
Over and out.
That's why it is so important to check the time stamp of when the article was published. Also, the last comment. Authors can go back to their own articles and bump them up, to keep them on the front page. Excessive bumping is also a problem.
I don't think I could come up with 5 articles a day... At least 5 articles that would be interesting to anyone.
and when you multiply that by two or three posters doing the same thing it may seem like they are spamming the board. but they aren't.
It is just the way the board operates normally. if we do anything to stop that, especially on a political basis then your posting to the "Fairness" doctrine. Artificially squelching one side over the other side. which destroys free speech.
If the ideas expressed in the article cannot hold their own they should die their normal death. Not be artificially propped up. this is why we do not allow artificial "bumping" of articles.
Each articles content must carry it's own weight, we cannot favor one over the other, that goes for posters also.
And is what this whole latest spamming incident is over. Certain posters articles don't get the play where others do. and certain people have taken issue with it so they want theirs either artificially propped up or the opposition artificially limited.
Patently unfair.
I'm not sure that that is a criterion for everyone...
Yeah, Bob... I understand. I try to make my articles interesting, or funny, or something other than political.
I agree, however at present it is very difficult for a mod to know how many of the articles on the FP attributed to one member were posted on that day, or are there as a result of ongoing discussions.
IMO, all that needs to be done is change the time stamp from when the last comment was posted to when the article was first posted. That way it will be very obvious if someone has exceeded the limit for new articles allowed in one day.
If articles exceeding the daily limit are deleted by the mods, you can be damn sure people are going to keep track of how many articles they are posting on any given day.
There is one way it could be done I suppose, list all articles in the order they were posted, with a post count. You can easily scroll through the list and enter whichever suits your tastes and tell if it's popular by the number of responses. Kinda like the way MSNBC did it with their forums.
The issue becomes moot then.
I didn't know he was here before. But that doesn't change the fact that he has only seeded one article in three months and is getting mouthy with someone who is overly prolific.
If he's so aware of the rules why does his think he can call people stupid?
I don't think so, I may be a snarky bastard, but at least I'm not an arrogant prick.
I know you're not trying to make me angry, and I'm not in the least bit angry. I just disagree with you regarding how to find out when an article was first posted.
You only need to click on the article title, it will take you directly to article and the time stamp.
No, it isn't that hard, but with 20 constantly changing articles showing in the FP all day, it is not a practical thing to expect the mods to be able to do.
Which is exactly my objective.
I don't know either, I've posted the suggestion numerous times on the thread, but it's a big thread and I know if Perrie has responded or not.
Appeal the deletion. If the Head Moderator agrees with you, your comment will be restored.
And don't think you can call me "bub" and "son" without going to the top of my shitlist.
Marsha, in 42 days Corny has posted 391 articles, seeds and comments .
Go to his homepage and click on " Articlesand Seeds " (or use that link), it will take you to a page showing he has replied to 279 comments. then click on the drop down box, it will show you he has posted 94 articles.
Go to your own page, it will say "Articles and Seeds 8,673". Have you posted that many articles and seeds?
No, I didn't think so.
However, if you click on the " Articles and Seeds " link under your avatar,it will take you to a page showing you have responded to 7,228 comments and posted 229 articles and seeds.
It's a glitch in the system I brought to Perries attention a year ago. Apparently it can't be corrected on this platform.
Yep just post five today and bump five from yesterday and another five from two days ago and it's all good.
Yeah, I know...
Some people have a problem when they feel their articles aren't getting the proper exposure, I mean all articles are equal right? We need the fairness doctrine here? Equal time?
Hell, simple is just not good, lets complicate the hell outta it.
It really only gets complicated when someone breaks the rules... Then, it is trouble for the mods.
I sometimes think that an occasional meta article flushes out the system. Like flushing the commode every now and then.
But, we all have a say, and we all need to say our piece, I guess.
A problem came up. And we're trying to fix it. So, let everyone have their say on how to fix it. If, in all this, we get the message out about the problem, good.
(?!)
No I didn't know that, nor do I know just how did he could possibly arrange that, orwhoyou'readdressing with your comment. (It's a common practice to posta quote at the top of your comment so people will know who your talking to)
Another (?!)
Why would Corny attack Conservatives, when he is one of the most conservative Right Wingnuts on either NV or NT.
Jerry, I don't really want to get into it, I have been instructed to allow it to drop. (and I agree with that decision)
It's a long story and yes it happened. I just happened to be on the board and watched it being done.
If your really interested in the mechanics of it I'll be happy to tell you but in PM not on the open forum. It's been beat to hell and back enough in public.
And it wasn't Corny (unfortunately, it was someone from your side of the aisle not that that matters)
Really?
ok, I'll leave you to your own delusions...
I'm trying girl, I really am. it's like everyone is on the rag today and thinks they know everything...
(and they weren't even logged on when it went down.)
Freaking hilarious, except for you of course, you get to deal with all the mindless drivel it generates..
It IS the problem beingdiscussed!
How is anyone to determine how many of the articles on the front page were newly posted by the originator, or are there as a result of the responses to the article by other members, if the article does not show the day it was originated?
WTF!
What happened to posting a quote from the commentyou'rereferring to so people know whothe fuck you're addressing?
Bingo!
Bravo Dowser!
If nothing else comes out of this after 233 comments, at least the issue got aired out, and everyone is knows (hopefully) that they have to be aware of how many new discussions they start in one day.
Thanks, Jerry! Take care!
Then stop bitching.
You may be right aboutthat, but the Mod probably reacted to theoverall nasty tone of your comment. (btw, around here they're CoC violations, CoH violations are where you should go back to)
For some reason I knew that is exactly what you would say. And that's fine, just keep in mind that you're there.
Thanks, Jerry-- I didn't know that! I read the number yesterday-- and it was obviously wrong.
No, I haven't written anywhere near that many seeds and articles!
Learn something new, every day!
I'll take your word for it,
No, I don't really care to get into the mechanics, but if you say it can be done, I'll take your word for that also..
Really. OK, then I owe an apology to the CornHusker.
She certainly does! (as well as a doctorate in zoo management)
Hi Jerry. I don't hate you and never have. I know we disagree with each other on almost everything and I can deal with that. Iwouldn't haveinvited you to be a friend here if I didn't respect you. I do have some liberals on my friends list here and you were once and can be again. We can disagree without being disagreeable.
I am probably not as conservative as you think I am. If you are familiar with the political compass and their test, I am fairly strongly conservative on liberal/conservative economic, budget, tax, and defense issues about a +7. In the libertarian/authoritarian axis I was very close to +/- 0. In a forum like NV or NT, I do seem or come across as seeming more conservative than I might be.
Four sentences, a simple notice--- brought on by a couple of folks who just had to be inflammatory twits. And in response to PH's short heads-up reminder... 21 pages of excuses, denial, deflection, insult, nit-picking, and (lest we lose them amidstthe brouhaha) a dozen or so actually useful & cogent contributions. The rest of it is akin to a 4th grade class with a substitute teacher...
60 more hours of masticating, ruminating & regurgitating on the same old topic--- "Is There a Polite Way to Keep People From Being Deliberate Dipshits".
Bravo, NT... another Pyrrhic victory for freedom of speech.
Evidently there are some who won't be happy until they drive Perrie to start acting like Sally...
Hahahahahahahasnorthahahahacoughsnorthahahahaha!!!! I can't wait to use that in a conversation! Let me know if I need to pay royalties.
but it isn't one day as I've found out by asking. It's every 24 hours. This means that you have to check through two different days thru 5 seeds to see if a sixth one shows up. So if a first seed was put up at8 AM and the 5th at 1:00 AM the next day, a person seeding later that next morning at 7:00 am would have too many seeds up for a short period of time.
Before internet access, they were scribbling on the bathroom stall wall, Mick...
Quite true! Perrie does deserve sainthood!
I wish I had the time to spam! I barely have time to read articles, or leave comments. If it weren't for email notifications of comments/articles, I'd be a no-show for months on end! Might I suggest that those who have the time to post countless articles all in one day try to find other things to do that are more productive and satisfying? I really sympathize with those who post carefully thought-out articles/stories, only to have them crowded out by those whose lives are so devoid of meaning that they can post hundreds of useless spam comments/articles, utterly mindless of how that makes them look to thoughtful, reasonable and intelligent people. Spammers are vermin (with sincere apologies to Vermin-Americans, everywhere). Spammers should maybe try their hand at video games and leave intelligent commentary to those with the brain-power to respect others. And now I shall slink quietly back into my (spam-free) real life...
Good to see you, bitey! Glad you came by--
I can't help but think that if the site were a little less volatile, you'd come around more, out and about where everyone could see you...
John, most people who are members here that don't come that often have reasons not to-- either they have some sort of awful something to deal with, or when they come here, they are so disgusted by some of the shenanigans, they don't want to come back. A lot of them show up in their groups, and that's it.
Perhaps if you AND bf could just bury the hatchet for a bit, you'd find you have something in common with each other...
bf, please view my comment, which was directed to John, and see how you play into this, as well...
You nailed it, Dowsey. I do tend to stick with the private groups because everyone there is precious, polite, beautiful, classy... you know, all those wonderful things that YOU are! Of course, I really have been super-busy of late. Busy with real-life, real-time projects and commitments, and not enough time to spend online. I always thought retirement would mean LOTS of time to spend staring at the walls and twiddling my thumbs. Boy, was I ever wrong about that! I don't know how I managed when I worked full-time!
Anyway, I do avoid most non-private articles because I just don't tolerate trolls very well. Actually, I may read the article, but I rarely comment on it if it isn't private. It isn't all that different from the old Vine. I pretty much steered clear of mainstream articles there, too, after awhile. When one's time is limited, then it only makes sense to use it wisely.
My friends know I love them. That will never be an issue. And trolls know who they are. That really should be an issue... for them.
Hug Peep for me, and here's a hug for you: {{{{{Dowsey}}}}}
I don't blame you! Plus, unlike some of us, you have a real life!
I love you, too, dear friend-- and I wish I could see more of you! In real life and on-line!
Take care, and don't work too hard. Love all the little babies for me, please!
Thank you dear bf, and thanks, too, to John. I know that everybody gets on everybody else's nerves sometimes, but we're here because Perrie put this site up for us, and manages it, and works herself to death over it. If only for her sake, we should all try to get along just a little better...
{{{{{Dowsey}}}}} I wish I could see more of you, too! Maybe someday...? But not in winter. This horrible, endless winter! I lived 26 years in New York, but never, ever, endured a colder, more miserable winter than here. I thought Virginia was supposed to be the SOUTH! And isn't the SOUTH supposed to be warm?????
Sigh...
I thought it was a great song, and I should have said something earlier...
Good One Dowser!
Well Dowser,
Speaking of get a long little doggies,... do you know why good cowboys only wear one spur....
I'm afraid to ask...
Virginia is such a lovely state-- but it's like KY, bad in winter. It's been the longest, coldest winter I remember in a while. Spring will be lovely when it comes. If it ever comes.
Maybe this spring, sweet bitey, we can make a brief journey to your area... I'd love that!
((((((((((((bitey))))))))))))))) Dear friend, I love you so much!
well, you see a smart cowboy knows if you get the front half of the animal moving, .... the back half will soon follow.....
OK!!! Cute!!!
Oh, yesyesyesyesyes! Got everything crossed that can be crossed: fingers, toes, byealles - um, ooops! have to uncross the eyeballs or I can't type...
{{{{{Dowsey}}}}}
I just want to see you again, dear friend... I love you dearly!
I love you dearly, too, sweet Dowsey! Stay safe... and hug Peep again for me!
Georgie? Intimidating? He's a sweetheart! He may be intimidating to skunks, but not to us! He's a beautiful baby!
I thought about using this one, but it didn't seem to be really in-keeping to my smiling personality!
Aren't his eyes beautiful? He's such a good doggie!
LOL!!! Maybe I'll save that one for when I'm in a baddddd mood.
Your spamming rule is clearly not working...
In the "Latest Activity" section Perrie wrote:
It seems to me that common courtesy would inform anyone that flooding the front page with articles is inappropriate behavior. It is an example of a cavalier disregard for others of the NT community while, at the same time, they expect the NT community to hold them in high esteem.
Perrie, I would suggest that when someone goes over the 5 limit that you simply delete all their articles for that day. Deleting a single or two articles to bring the number of articles down to 5 seems rather light handed and puts you in the unnecessary and uncomfortable position of being the front page 'enforcer'. Since flooding the front page with articles has become such a distasteful pastime for some, maybe they shouldn't have any articles at all that day.
Did I miss something?
I second, or third or fourth Grumps suggestion.
Grump,
I will take your advice under consideration and see how this works. If there is no further problem then there is no need for such an action. If it doesn't, it's a good idea.
OK with that being said, I think we have talked this thing to death. I am closing down the article. Thank you all for your participation.