re: However, this board continues to face other problems: low-content posts and/or repetitive posts. Much of this spamming seems to be unintentional, ie the individuals don't seem to realize that they are saying the same thing over and over and over again. As the rules are currently written, there is nothing to prohibit this board-destroying behavior. Certain individuals take great pleasure in irritating board members with repetitive posts or low-value one liners. According to the current rules, as long as the poster is polite and stays close to the AMD topic, he can post the same basic thing 100 times per day. I propose that we add a low-content and/or repetitive post rule. If a member can identify 4 posts in a 24 hour period that break the rule, the matter would be put to a vote. The threshold for suspension would be higher, say 70%.
I think your observation is pretty much spot on, but I don't see any workable solution.
I'm not going to ban posters myself for this. I have no intent whatsoever in policing the board more than a bare minimum. I don't have that kind of time. The alternative is to use voting for this. This thread however only tends to vote if matters are way out of control, like I think it should (although I think a tiny bit more would be better). I think thread doesn't like to vote for smaller things than that. I don't like judging what post has too little content, and I don't expect many people here to like doing such a thing themselves. There is no objective threshold. So low-content can't be maintained without another form of chaos - namely the chaos of judging what is according to the 'average' 'regular poster' 'low content'. So I don't like it. It's not that I'm not willing to change the rules for this purpose: I'm not willing to do it without some form of objectivity or democratic process.
It's a turbulent period, with many people loosing money, and taking issue with those that oppose their views. A lot of emotion involved. Replying to a poster that you know will not change his view is such an emotion. It may be a human reaction, it is a dumn one too. Other posters can take up responsibility for calling on those they think will listen to them, and the discussion often stops.
And yes I've participated in a couple of fanning the flame discussions as well during the years. But I'm willing to learn too. I e.g. remember Drbes calling on me to stop a discussion with Elmer I believe, and I listened. That's normal group behaviour. Use it.
If that doesn't work irritation will probably have reached a high. Use that to innitiate a vote. The fines are pretty steep. Persons have been banned permanently over the years using that vote. Use the fact that the fines are steep. Voting has been a bit out of fashion, but it is your responsibility. I'm not going to take THAT responsibility for you.
Regards,
Rink |
