114 Replies. 6 pages. Viewing page 4.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 ] Older >
 |
| 54. |
Re: Quick observation |
Aug 20, 2002, 16:03 |
Atomic |
|
|
Explain to me how I would of had the luxury of keeping track of you with anonymous posts enabled. That IP trunc could be anyone. There is a much better chance when I see the clickable name it is the same person (almost guaranteed, unless you give out your password or let someone on your machine).
And speaking of the clickable name, you can't do that with anons. There is something to be said for being able to see what other threads someone has participated in, particularly someone who's opinions you find interesting, even if they are wrong. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing."
-George Bernard Shaw |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 53. |
Re: Quick observation |
Aug 20, 2002, 15:56 |
anon@216.23 |
|
|
#48, I am not intending to be mean, but of course you would have had the luxury. You simply choose not to pursue it because you are letting a few people ruin it for you.
This is not the fault of the system, nor is it the fault of the trolls. This is the fault of yourself, as you would rather sacrifice the good with the bad. This is why changes to the system will solve anything -- ultimately, the only troll filter is yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 52. |
Hey Blue... |
Aug 20, 2002, 15:53 |
snide |
|
|
Without getting into the fight here I just wanted to say I've always loved your site blue and will continue to support it. I really don't understand what the big deal is, this is hardly a new issue to most of the regulars on these boards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 51. |
Re: Quick observation |
Aug 20, 2002, 15:53 |
anon@216.23 |
|
|
To an extent, I agree. I think that certainly you won't see any massive trolling occurring today, because things are still settling down. When everything becomes routine, then you can expect for more serious stuff to start happening. I've used a lot of messageboard systems, and this is always the cycle. I'm trying to simply warn off Blue from doing this, both because I don't think it won't work (and I think Blue will ultimately either be dissapointed with the results, or he won't notice a difference), and because on a personal level, as a former anon, I think it's unethical.
Finding any series of posts in any thread on Bluesnews as you challenge me to is useless, because you're trying to compare what is still an entirely new thing (the banning of anon accounts) to a previous scenario. Unless you're planning to ban anon accounts every day (which doesn't make sense anyway), I will take your offer in a month, when things have quieted down.
My main concern, which no one has addressed yet, is what happens once the trolls come back? The only solution I can see is Blue having to ban accounts and remove messages, and I think this is more work than he's been doing in the past (which goes against his goal of reducing the removal rate of messages). The only solution otherwise is to allow the community to police itself, and that's also a lot of work and database management for Blue.
I just think he really needs to sit down and rethink all this, with the insight from everyone who has posted to this so far.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 50. |
Re: Quick observation |
Aug 20, 2002, 15:49 |
Holmes |
|
|
Let's just say that this will be a bold experiment. Personally I think that a significant % of the anon trolls will simply go away because they are too lazy to take the time to register and will go find some other site to talk trash on. On the other hand, you are absolutely right, plenty of the trolls (however you define a troll) will register and continue to say whatever they want to say, because they have the freedom to do so. But if getting rid of anon posting results in a net loss of blatant trolling here, then so much the better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 49. |
Re: #45 Quick observation |
Aug 20, 2002, 15:48 |
:| |
|
|
#45, Yes, the quality of writing is higher today, and yes, it is probably because the lazy trolls won't bother to register. This won't do much to stop determined or professional trolls, which are the ones that end up causing the biggest problems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 48. |
Re: Quick observation |
Aug 20, 2002, 15:45 |
Atomic |
|
|
Why are you claiming that because you don't see any haxx0r speak as of this morning, that the trolls have been utterly vanquished?
Because so far, they have. Look at all the threads to day. No trolls or idiots in any of them.
I'm not naive enough to think it will always be this way, but so far, so good, and I'm very encouraged.
And, I'm glad you registered. Now I can keep an eye out for you and always expect an intelligent debate. If you had posted anonymously, I would not have that luxury.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing."
-George Bernard Shaw |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 47. |
Re: Quick observation |
Aug 20, 2002, 15:45 |
JHMirage |
|
|
Why are you claiming that because you don't see any haxx0r speak as of this morning, that the trolls have been utterly vanquished?
Fair enough... but give me a better explanation. Yes, I'm sure trolls will start to return, but we've dealt the a blow here. I suspect they'll never be as prevalent as they were before.
And I defy you to find any series of posts in any other thread on Bluesnews that spans three pages and is still on topic and without insults or trolls from before the Anon posts were disallowed. Seems fairly conclusive.
Jeff
This comment was edited on Aug 20, 15:50. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Computer over?
Virus = very yes?
That's not a good prize! |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 46. |
Re: Quick observation |
Aug 20, 2002, 15:43 |
anon@216.23 |
|
|
#44, it took me a grand total of about 40 keystrokes and 10 mouse clicks to register and log-in. This is not going to stop a troll. All it's going to do is inconvienice people who want to drop by and say a few words about Game "X". Why are we predetermining the quality of someone's post, just because they are anonymous?
Anyway, I guess I should start numbering these things. Even I'm starting to get confused.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 45. |
Re: Quick observation |
Aug 20, 2002, 15:39 |
anon@216.23 |
|
|
The quality of the writing here is up because there are no trolls on this page. You can claim this is because of Blue, or you can claim that this is simply because none have signed up and posted yet.
If Ray Marden stopped posting today, would you claim that he left the site, never to return? Why are you claiming that because you don't see any haxx0r speak as of this morning, that the trolls have been utterly vanquished?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 44. |
Re: Quick observation |
Aug 20, 2002, 15:39 |
Holmes |
|
|
"If anything, this shows that anon or registered, it matters little. The quality of a post is determined by the quality of the write, not his status. And this is why a universal banning of anon is counter-productive to the ultimate goal of a message board, which is transferrance of information."
You have something to say (which I totally respect), you felt it was important enough to take the time to register, so you did it. And the problem is what? That Blue is being unfair by making people spend a little extra time (a one time only issue) to make their voice be heard on his site? I think the potential benefits (filtering out the lazy, dumb ass trolls who just want to spew garbage, which has become a real issue) far outweighs the potential loss of good posts (which is likely very minimal). I think most folks (like you) who have something to say that they feel is worthwhile or important will take the time to register.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 43. |
Re: Anon posting |
Aug 20, 2002, 15:36 |
:| |
|
|
There are a few forums that have almost no noise and all signal, but they are rather small and have active moderators to keep things on track.
Hopefully any new readers to this board will find that the people that post here generally are friendly. Although, some will probably be discouraged by the anon posting ban.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 42. |
Re: Quick observation |
Aug 20, 2002, 15:36 |
JHMirage |
|
|
Uh... what?
Had I not registered, these comments would not be posted. Would the site better for that? Is destroying any chance of having a discussion like this worth keeping someone from making a joke about asthma?
But it didn't destroy any chance of having this conversation... I mean, here it is! And as I believe othres have said, this isn't really about asthma jokes.
In fact, my original post I intended to post as anon, but then I found Blue had disabled it. However, this was important enough to say that I registered. Hopefully, none of the trolls think likewise.
Exactly! You had something important enough to say that you registered. So far, no Trolls have. (Though I have no doubt that now some will take that as a challenge.)
If anything, this shows that anon or registered, it matters little. The quality of a post is determined by the quality of the write[r], not his status.
Yes, yes, yes! You have it exactly right, but somehow have failed to notice that the quality of the writers who are posting here has gone dramitcally up since Anon's have gone away.
[sigh] I originally planned not to get dragged into this discussion, but you seem to be making my points for me in a round-about way. I just couldn't resist.
Jeff
Edited to remove quote-weirdness. :-)
This comment was edited on Aug 20, 15:39. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Computer over?
Virus = very yes?
That's not a good prize! |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 41. |
Re: Duke Nukem Guy |
Aug 20, 2002, 15:36 |
Bronco |
|
|
As I was getting to before, there really isn't a difference between an anon and a registered user except that your name is underlined.
It's been about a year since I registered so I may be wrong about this but...
Don't you have to supply a valid email address to register? And yes, I know you can provide a yahoo or hotmail email address as a valid email, it's what I did. I think that the amount of effort it would take to create a hotmail account, then create a BN account, then post something that really doesn't contribute to the discussion would def. reduce the one line anon posts that have added so much to the 'noise' here. This would require someone with a lot of free time once they were 'cancelled' a few times.
I frequented this site for about a year before I registered. At that point the boards seemed to be a mess and posts appeared when they wanted to. Blue, Frans, and Looni set up the new board and I registered.
I like the sense of community that registered posting provides. I like being able to reference a post with the past posts of a user. Anon poster have contributed in the past. However, there is no continuity to their posts. For that reason alone I would prefer no anon posting.
-TPFKAS2S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 40. |
Re: Quick observation |
Aug 20, 2002, 15:35 |
anon@216.23 |
|
|
The trolls simply aren't registering yet. This is only the first day of the instatement (really, only a few hours).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 39. |
Re: Quick observation |
Aug 20, 2002, 15:33 |
Atomic |
|
|
But you have to admit, JHMirage is right, so what do you attribute it to?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing."
-George Bernard Shaw |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 38. |
Re: Anon posting |
Aug 20, 2002, 15:30 |
anon@216.23 |
|
|
Please explain to me the difference between posting as "anon@123.123" (and unless you switch ISPs, this will never change) and "YouDontKnowMe".
This is not a sarcastic remark, I am genuinely interested in why this is assumed to be a difference.
As far as anon people not wanting responsibility, do you really think that a troll turned "YouDontKnowMe" suddenly cares? If anons have their entire IP logged, then so do registered users. The only difference is a registered troll has an entire page of made up information, linked to a hotmail account. So what's the difference?
If anon@123.123 never changes, why isn't that a name?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 37. |
Re: Quick observation |
Aug 20, 2002, 15:27 |
anon@216.23 |
|
|
I can only speak for myself, but I am a former anon poster. Had I not registered, these comments would not be posted. Would the site better for that? Is destroying any chance of having a discussion like this worth keeping someone from making a joke about asthma?
In fact, my original post I intended to post as anon, but then I found Blue had disabled it. However, this was important enough to say that I registered. Hopefully, none of the trolls think likewise.
If anything, this shows that anon or registered, it matters little. The quality of a post is determined by the quality of the write, not his status. And this is why a universal banning of anon is counter-productive to the ultimate goal of a message board, which is transferrance of information.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 36. |
Re: Asthma and programmers |
Aug 20, 2002, 15:25 |
Anvil |
|
|
KillSwitch wrote of deaths from asthmatic fits Is this a common problem?! It just really sucks
yes it is. and yes it does.
Anvil |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Anvil - from the land of warm beer and mad cattle. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 35. |
Re: Anon posting |
Aug 20, 2002, 15:23 |
Holmes |
|
|
"Psychologically (actually, socially) speaking, can this attachment be attained as well by opening everyone with welcome arms?"
Blue is not turning anyone away, and this is NOT segregation. He is simply asking that people be forthright and put a name to their posts. Being able to talk trash from behind the safety of ones monitor is a definite downside to the Internet IMHO. How many of the dumb ass anon posters (whose population seems to have exploded on this site in recent months) would actually say in public, to someone's face, *any* of the crap they post on this site? People want freedom of speech all right, but they don't want any of the responsibility that comes with it (such as being able to be held accountable for the things they say).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
114 Replies. 6 pages. Viewing page 4.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 ] Older >
|
|
Twitter 
