haters??? i'm prolly out on a limb here, but i'm guessing this mutt is a fag...
Posted on 07/21/2015 5:15:17 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan
Decades of upgrades to the Internet have yet to fix one nagging problem: the people on it.
The recent drama at Reddit is just the latest example. The managers of that expansive archipelago of forums have apparently just realized that the site provides a platform for some singularly hateful people. And yet they don’t seem sure what to do about it, beyond hiding some of the site’s uglier neighborhoods from public view.
But let’s be fair to co-founder and now chief executive Steve Huffman (whose predecessor Ellen Pao resigned under fire after removing a community leader and banning some hate-mongering “subreddits”): People have been banging their heads against this problem for a long time.
Last Thursday, Huffman said (via Reddit post, of course) that the site would bury but not ban “content that violates a common sense of decency.” The most common response to that was: What about yourcommitment to free speech?
But Reddit is neither the government nor the Internet at large. It’s a for-profit firm that racked up $50 million in financing last fall and sells ads to name-brand companies.
For any company in that kind of business, unsupervised comments represent a risk. When some people inevitably act like jerks online, others may flee, and advertisers may not stick around either.
Twitter, for example, has proudly labeled itself “the free speech wing of the free speech party.” But after realizing that it was enabling online harassment, the service has had to come up with better tools for fighting abuse. The Islamic State’s use of tweets to broadcast mass-murder multimedia led Twitter to ban the promotion of terrorism.
Nonprofit forums can also collapse from trolling. The distributed system of message boards called Usenet foundered in the late ’90s largely because some of the unmoderated “newsgroups” became ungovernable.
(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
Simple fix. Hire Jim Robinson.
Darn those pesky human beings. The world would be a better place without them.
The author’s conclusion? “You need committed humans who feel ownership of the rules and who show up in the forums ...”
So, remember that the next time you get thumped by a fellow FReeper. ;)
Another know-nothing know-it-all tells us what’s wrong with us.
Carry-on ping.
I am finally getting recognition for my work, even if it was ruining the Internet for everyone.
Intolerant much, ladies? GROW UP, BOYS. GET OVER IT, P*SSIES.
The juxtaposition makes it sound like the two were related. They weren't. We don't know for sure why Victoria Taylor was fired, and we'll probably never know. Did it have anything to do with the fact that Taylor failed to rescue Jesse Jackson from a disastrous AMA? Probably that was a factor. But whatever the cause, Taylor was not running a subreddit even remotely associated with "hate mongering."
P.S. Rob thinks like a girl. Oh wait, most males do these days. Thanks single moms.
Actually, he’s not far off the mark. Part of what works at FR is a community of users who step in to reinforce rules set by the site moderators.
Usenet didn’t need to be governable. People could just avoid the bad areas.
Usenet simply became a haven for child porn.
Still, alt.binaries.tasteless was the highlight of the internet
Forgot the linky.
https://www.yahoo.com/tech/why-online-comments-suck-and-how-to-fix-them-124623194239.html
Usenet floundered due to the nature of it only attracts certain types. It’s not a bad thing that it’s ungovernable.
haters??? i'm prolly out on a limb here, but i'm guessing this mutt is a fag...
1st time I have ever agreed with a sentence in a Yahoo story.
I’ve been moderator on a computer tech support forum since 2001, I’ve heard the “you’re censoring us” line so many times it’s ridiculous...
Fact is, most any site that has a forum or comments section also has this pesky little item known as a “terms of use agreement.” Or some such. It almost always specifically states that you agree to conduct yourself in a certain manner, and will not insult, defame, harass and so forth, other users.
So that means if you come to the forum where I’m moderator and start bashing people, first thing I’ll do is offer a concise warning and post the appropriate section of the terms of use you just violated, and tell you next time you’re gone.
I haven’t been hanging out there much lately, I got burned out on computer stuff after building and fixing them daily for 15 years, but I’m still active now and then and still officially moderator. We’ve appointed 6 others since then, I handled things alone until it got to the point we had over 5,000 members and more posts every night than I could keep up with.
But that’s the way I handled it, I copied the user agreement into a text file on my computer so I could easily copy & paste the section I needed if it were necessary, after a couple of months it wasn’t done often, I could just post a warning, and the regular members would help me ride herd too, since they were liking a civil forum to work in.
It was interesting that a couple of the people that were originally trouble makers and had to be dealt with, usually more than once, ended up some of our best computer techs, stayed there for several years and taught other people to fix computers, which we did on a regular and ongoing basis.
As far as the free speech idea goes, you’re on a website owned by someone else, and that owner sets the rules. You follow the rules or get booted off the site. Your free speech ended when you electronically signed the user agreement.
What many people don’t realize, is that agreement is binding and can actually be used in a court of law against you in an extreme case. Any time you post a message here or on any other website, the webmaster has admin privileges and has your IP address. That IP address, in most cases, can lead right to your physical door. Your ISP, the company you pay to help you connect to the Internet, is obliged to cooperate with police in any legal investigation. That IP address is logged, and once police contact the ISP, you have a problem.
I’ve tracked down spammers that way, until it got to the point I was getting over 100 spam emails a day and didn’t have time to track down every IP and report them to their ISP. I had quite a few accounts disabled...I’m sure a number of small scale spammers would be very unhappy with me if they could find out who actually filed the complaint...I also got nastygrams from a couple of larger ones too...sent those to their ISP...
You’re not anonymous. you do not have total, across the board say-whatever-you-want-to freedom of speech. You have free speech up to the point the webmaster says that’s unacceptable.
Don’t like it? See ya...
Hahahahaha...perfect response!
Those poor, sensitive snowflakes out there just cannot handle discourse...everything has to be fluffy bunnies and unicorns...and anything that the left disagrees with, is the stuff that has to be rooted out and eliminated.
Of course, to them, that does mean people like us.
I don’t see the problem. I do happen to like the way FR is structured: clear site principles. Cross the line, ride the lightning. Plus the abuse buttons really do work. The mods are fast. And the boss is fair.
Fully agree. The ZOT! is not just myth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.