Despite his blaming the world problems on Jews, and calling me a liberal, I didn't neg him. If we can't have differing opinions, there is no point in off topic.
Shoot Cliff a PM, he doesn't watch the forum 24/7, and I don't know if he receives any sort of notification when someone is banned.
Just like real life, everyone has their vote, and is free to decide what to do with it. Does a particular comment, belief, opinion , or pattern of behavior "earn" a neg? Obviously, the answer for some is yes. This is not news, though. We comment in OT knowing this is the case. Toss verbal assaults at a diety(disrespectful), make fun of someone's momma(most uncool) or their Fiero(OMG, that's the WORST, dude!!!) then expect wild negs will start nibbling in your lush,green garden.
I don't often vote "negative", but when i do.... Stay frosty, my friends
( I didn't rate him negatively, the few eeeediots who earned that were overwhelmingly vote off Fiero island)
He did get a neg from me for constantly berating members, long time members, including myself. I forget all the threads I saw his trash in but those he started and could be found easily.
Here are some he just posted his BS in and didn't start, but this one Cliff even saw his dribble.
In the last 11 years I have been on here I have seen some trolls, think Stan, ( I am not so sure about Stan being a troll, more just a person who thought outside the box) WD88, Stimpy, and more. Some just went away on their own after seeing just how bad they were or tired no one would agree with them completely every time.
Since then I have become even more leery of anyone who joins recently and starts off by trying to degrade anyone else who doesn't agree with them. if they don't post a legitimate email in their profile, That can trigger the troll alert right away for me anyway. If they don't say where they are from it also triggers an alarm, then if they just can't do anything but disagree with anyone who doesn't agree with them.
Steve
------------------ Technology is great when it works, and one big pain in the ass when it doesn't
Detroit iron rules all the rest are just toys.
[This message has been edited by 84fiero123 (edited 11-20-2015).]
From Cliff's post about posting and the ratings system. Cliff has previously unbanned people but has stated he prefers to let the rating system handle it automatically.
No "Rate me" threads. I don't mind the occasional "if you think I gave you good advice, please give me a positive rating". But threads which have the sole purpose of raking ratings are a no-no. Such threads will be closed immediately. If you are wondering why someone has been banned (or someone else hasn't), send me either an email or a PM. Do not start a thread about it! [sub][/sub] The Rating System The rating system is a mechanism for the members to make their content or discontent about other members count. If you think someone's contribution to the forum is (mostly) positive, please rate him/her positive. If you think the opposite is true, you can rate him/her negative. You can only rate someone when you have been a member of PFF for at least 30 days, and when you have at least 30 posts. But, anyone who can rate, can rate you - no matter how long you have been a member, or how many posts you have. Your rating bar will show up after you have received at least 50 ratings. This is when the bar becomes active. When a certain negatives to positives ratio has been reached (which boils down to if you have waaaaay more negative ratings than positives), the system will "autoban" you. There's nothing I can (and will) do about that to prevent that. The bar gives you an indication of where you stand. If you have more green than red, than your contribution to the forum is considered mostly positive by other members. If your red and green are about the same, then you have about as much positive ratings as negative. Is your bar mostly red, than you are in the danger zone and an autoban might follow if more people decide to rate you negative. You can only be banned by the autoban if your bar is active (i.e. visible). The ratingbar is in no way a shield that protects you from banning! This is something most people (that have been banned) seem to complain about. Your bar can be all green - but blatantly disregard forum rules and I, as moderator of PFF, can and will ban you. In fact, I can ban anyone at my discretion if I deem it in the best interest of the forum.
[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 11-20-2015).]
He apparently was an individual banned a long time ago, multiple times, back again. One concern besides the ignoring of multiple questions was this which he also did not explain:
quote
Originally posted by mental floss: Firmula88, I will eventually retaliate to instigators with theur own tactics. You won't see me start such.
He apparently was an individual banned a long time ago, multiple times, back again. One concern besides the ignoring of multiple questions was this which he also did not explain:
quote
Originally posted by mental floss: Firmula88, I will eventually retaliate to instigators with theur own tactics. You won't see me start such.
"theur" is not a word. just sayin....
[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 11-20-2015).]
Despite his blaming the world problems on Jews, and calling me a liberal, I didn't neg him. If we can't have differing opinions, there is no point in off topic.
I probably gave him a negative, he wasn't interested in a honest exchange.
[This message has been edited by jmbishop (edited 11-20-2015).]
Well, can't say I'm surprised. Even I looked at their posts like "If you keep this up you're going to be banned".
The magic of the rating system is self censorship. The bad part is it's not self censorship in the name of what's right but what the mob wants to be right. Sometimes the mob gets it right but other times what's 'wrong' gets a total pass because of groupthink.
Even still, it's not that you disagree but how you disagree that keeps you from being banned for speaking honestly about the way you think and feel.
Originally posted by FlyinFieros: The magic of the rating system is self censorship. The bad part is it's not self censorship in the name of what's right but what the mob wants to be right. Sometimes the mob gets it right but other times what's 'wrong' gets a total pass because of groupthink.
Isn't the same true in all of life and society? There are lots of laws and rules in this country that I do not agree with, but I, as an individual, have to follow them, because a much larger 'mob' voted in those who wrote and signed the laws in to effect. We see laws and rules swept into being all the time due to what one 'mob' or another influences--we've gone to war over it/because of it and have at times done great harm and at other times, made the country and/or the world a much better place because of it.
Originally posted by FlyinFieros: The bad part is it's not self censorship in the name of what's right but what the mob wants to be right. Sometimes the mob gets it right but other times what's 'wrong' gets a total pass because of groupthink.
I'm surprised you don't believe in a pure Democracy.
Democracy: government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them under a free electoral system.
1 person, 1 vote. The people have spoken. The rating system is a far more fair democratic system than our political electoral system.
Originally posted by FlyinFieros: Even still, it's not that you disagree but how you disagree that keeps you from being banned for speaking honestly about the way you think and feel.
Originally posted by maryjane: Isn't the same true in all of life and society?
Absolutely for society. It's still mob rule even if you wrap a word shroud of 'law' around it.
I don't think its true of life itself though. I can't think of another species that self censors or has a need for it. "Frank! If I hear one more sonar wave about a birth certificate I'm kicking you out of this pod personally!"
[This message has been edited by FlyinFieros (edited 11-20-2015).]
When you give someone a negative rating, do you write WHY in the explanation box?
Do you think it would be beneficial for members to be able to see an anonomous list of the "WHYs" associated with their ratings?
Yes, you can. Only you see it. The person being rated never sees it. It's to allow you to make note of why you rated someone so you can refresh your memory later if you decide to change the rating.
When you give someone a negative rating, do you write WHY in the explanation box?
Do you think it would be beneficial for members to be able to see an anonomous list of the "WHYs" associated with their ratings?
Yes. no. No, because most people that do things that would garner themselves a neg already know full well they are engaging in poor behavior. This is a forum of adults. We've all read the rules, and know how life works. There's no real mystery at PFF OT.
I'm surprised you don't believe in a pure Democracy.
Democracy: government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them under a free electoral system.
1 person, 1 vote. The people have spoken. The rating system is a far more fair democratic system than our political electoral system.
That's the very definition of Mob Rule.
If it were up to you ,I'd have have been banned a long time ago, even though I haven't called anyone (even you) childish names the way some members do on a regular basis.
------------------
I own and drive American cars.
[This message has been edited by NEPTUNE (edited 11-20-2015).]
I highly doubt that Cliff wants his forum to be used as a medium to spread anti-semitic bigotry.
Antisemitism (also spelled anti-Semitism or anti-semitism) is prejudice against, hatred of, or discrimination against Jews as an ethnic, religious, or racial group. A person who holds such positions is called an antisemite.
While he was an ******* , what about the several accusation of being Anti Semite? I mean the term is thrown around really for saying anything that disparages the right wings precious Jews.
Much of the strife I can see is directly related to this. In reality you can not have a arbitrary or even a dissenting view on Jews without being called Anti Semite which means HATE.
This parallels many arguments people complain about being labeled racist if they disagree with anything one side is saying.
Antisemitism (also spelled anti-Semitism or anti-semitism) is prejudice against, hatred of, or discrimination against Jews as an ethnic, religious, or racial group. A person who holds such positions is called an antisemite.
While he was an ******* , what about the several accusation of being Anti Semite? I mean the term is thrown around really for saying anything that disparages the right wings precious Jews.
Much of the strife I can see is directly related to this. In reality you can not have a arbitrary or even a dissenting view on Jews without being called Anti Semite which means HATE.
This parallels many arguments people complain about being labeled racist if they disagree with anything one side is saying.
His assertion was that anti-semitism had nothing to do with Jews, rather, it meant a bias against Arabs, and therefore, he couldn't be anti-semitic because he was't referring to Arabs. Even after being shown at least one definition just as you have posted below, it was still his point that the definition was wrong and that anyone who believed it was just being politically correct. Even if, at some point in MidEast antiquity, Semites=Arabs, common usage for well over a century precludes his assertion. I'm pretty sure too, that I stated the thread was anti-semitic, and really didn't even go that far:
quote
Originally posted by maryjane:
Yet another 'hate the jews" thread? Well, go ahead and go for it, but I doubt your venom will garner many (if any) converts here.
Originally posted by mental floss: Your support for Israeli commandos executing prone Americans has been recorded. You rock at Black Lives Matter tactics. The good news is the cowardice and hatred of your type of Stasi ideology is being exposed.
Stasi? Me? As much as I have railed against police brutality, unwarranted data gathering, invasion of privacy by govt, the NSA lying in front of Congress, loss of rights by the law abiding US citizen? Stasi? Really? And a coward too?
quote
Originally posted by pokeyfiero:
Antisemitism (also spelled anti-Semitism or anti-semitism) is prejudice against, hatred of, or discrimination against Jews as an ethnic, religious, or racial group. A person who holds such positions is called an antisemite.
While he was an ******* , what about the several accusation of being Anti Semite? I mean the term is thrown around really for saying anything that disparages the right wings precious Jews.
Much of the strife I can see is directly related to this. In reality you can not have a arbitrary or even a dissenting view on Jews without being called Anti Semite which means HATE.
This parallels many arguments people complain about being labeled racist if they disagree with anything one side is saying.
[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 11-20-2015).]
His assertion was that anti-semitism had nothing to do with Jews, rather, it meant a bias against Arabs, and therefore, he couldn't be anti-semitic because he was't referring to Arabs. Even after being shown at least one definition just as you have posted below, it was still his point that the definition was wrong and that anyone who believed it was just being politically correct. Even if, at some point in MidEast antiquity, Semites=Arabs, common usage for well over a century precludes his assertion. I'm pretty sure too, that I stated the thread was anti-semitic, and really didn't even go that far:
He did get a neg from me for constantly berating members, long time members, including myself. I forget all the threads I saw his trash in but those he started and could be found easily.
Here are some he just posted his BS in and didn't start, but this one Cliff even saw his dribble.
In the last 11 years I have been on here I have seen some trolls, think Stan, ( I am not so sure about Stan being a troll, more just a person who thought outside the box) WD88, Stimpy, and more. Some just went away on their own after seeing just how bad they were or tired no one would agree with them completely every time.
Since then I have become even more leery of anyone who joins recently and starts off by trying to degrade anyone else who doesn't agree with them. if they don't post a legitimate email in their profile, That can trigger the troll alert right away for me anyway. If they don't say where they are from it also triggers an alarm, then if they just can't do anything but disagree with anyone who doesn't agree with them.
Steve
No, I don't know him on a personal level. Yes, he got on my nerves, but so what? Every single one of us get on someones nerves. I dunno, I just think negs should be used sparingly in off topic. In the tech forums, or the mall, I can see them be used more. If we ban everyone that doesn't hold our opinion off topic is going to get pretty boring.
This is a good question, but what would prevent people from throwing out a smoke screen "lie" to hide their vote?
As long as the reasons listed were anonymous, there would be no need for a smoke screen lie.
I prefer to tell people when I rate them, both positively and negatively. When negative, I give people a chance to reverse it. Some people choose not to take advantage of my "rare" (Fiero term) offer. If you are unwilling to discuss the reason for a neg, you have earned it. To neg someone and not tell them it was you or why you did it could be considered weak or dishonorable.
When you give someone a negative rating, do you write WHY in the explanation box?
Do you think it would be beneficial for members to be able to see an anonomous list of the "WHYs" associated with their ratings?
I am on another forum that has members rating each other. Comments added to the ratings and the rater are shown to the person being rated and it becomes part of the rated person's account. It turns into a tit-for-tat with the added bonus that the comment turns into a "final word" kind of insult added to an account that can't be erase. The only saving grace is that such ratings comments are only viewable by the person rated and the rater. No matter how badly someone deserved a negative rating in that system, they give you one right back if you give them a negative.
Trust me, you are better off with anonymous ratings.
I am on another forum that has members rating each other. Comments added to the ratings and the rater are shown to the person being rated and it becomes part of the rated person's account. It turns into a tit-for-tat with the added bonus that the comment turns into a "final word" kind of insult added to an account that can't be erase. The only saving grace is that such ratings comments are only viewable by the person rated and the rater. No matter how badly someone deserved a negative rating in that system, they give you one right back if you give them a negative.
Trust me, you are better off with anonymous ratings.
Not to mention that the rating and associated comment itself turns into a discussion all it's own and usually a thread all it's own--and they are rarely productive.
Trust me, you are better off with anonymous ratings.
In my first post I said the comments should be anonymous. The writer should be anonymous to the rated person. The member should be able to see a listing of the comments related to his own ratings, both pos and neg, but again, with no indication who wrote which comment unless that person chooses to put his own name in the comments. Members should only be able to see their own comments, not the comments for other member's ratings.
I have an issue with the rating system.. and that is,, to many follow their buddy.. if one person neg's you,, he makes a point to post it,, and then all his buddies add to it,, If you are having a pissing match with one member you shouldn't get 20 neg's.. That is not how life works,, that is how high school worked.. but not life..
sadly,, to many on this forum, and others get butt hurt real easy.. and on a forum that has political ,race, religion subjects as threads.. should NOT have a rating system. As most peoples negs, are from this part of the forum.. the "anything goes" o/t.. very few earn neg's and/ or banned hammer from the mall/ tech/General fiero chat/construction zone, it all happens in there O/T Some, need to grow up,, a thread, or subject doesn't always go your way, not everyone will have the same opinion or outlook on the world, life.. Most that are older have an outlook that they did not have when they were 20/30/40/etc.. sadly many forget this.. and act or claim they have always been this way... Sorry, that is utter b/s..
Did MENTAL go over the line, not sure as I don't know enough about the subjects he was putting threads out of, and the post in other threads.. Maybe he just wanted to push buttons,,
I didn't see anyone that was going rounds with him, as what happened in his life personally that gave him that, opinion .. No one is born with the ideals they carry,, something caused it..
I see no need to unban him, as I'm sure if he wants back, he'll just open a new account..
[This message has been edited by E.Furgal (edited 11-21-2015).]
Liar!
