A proposed banning policy. | 35 comments (35 topical, editorial, 0 hidden)

Re: A proposed banning policy. (none / 0)

A policy is always good, but have there been any problems with, uh, anti-social behaviour?

I haven't noticed any.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

by Starvid on Mon Jan 29th, 2007 at 11:44:27 AM EST

Re: A proposed banning policy. (4.00 / 2)

Someone has been giving the hidden comments a lot of business lately.

It's pretty appalling stuff, Africans as savages, advocating eugenics, as well as comparatively innocuous things like calling other contributors evil, and being a bit too eager to express hatred for entire nations, etc... I personally think ET is walking on thin ice by tolerating some of this stuff, though I understand the desire to err on that end.

Just because a somewhat intellectual argument can be made for something (though I think there is a bit too much of the visceral in these comments to preserve any intellectual integrity they may have) does not mean ET should be obligated to provide a platform for them arguments. And the rest are just sophmoric attempts to ignite flame wars. Kudos for those who don't take the bait.

I don't know just where I stand on banning. It hasn't set well with me in the past. Doesn't ET have a mechanism like DKos where if you are troll-rated enough times you can no longer comment?

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. -Voltaire

by p------- on Mon Jan 29th, 2007 at 12:41:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A proposed banning policy. (4.00 / 2)

No, ET doesn't auto-ban.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Mon Jan 29th, 2007 at 01:06:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A proposed banning policy. (none / 0)

Well, that might be a good thing. At least this way Admins can make clear to someone what exactly they think is inappropriate. There are lots of people who've been banned from DKos after they've been troll-rated for meanness who go about declaring they've been banned for daring to disagree with Markos.

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. -Voltaire

by p------- on Mon Jan 29th, 2007 at 01:18:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A proposed banning policy. (none / 1)

I like the personal touch for as long as we can keep it. I understand the dKos problem though.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Mon Jan 29th, 2007 at 01:53:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A proposed banning policy. (none / 1)

Just before everyone over there puts on their on their pink jammies with the cute little rabbits feet (A Christmas Story) and toddles off to bed, wanted to get in a few thoughts.

the dKos problem:

Major problem over there right now is that the young Kossacks who self-appoint themselves to enforce the FAQ (the jaded among us refer to them as the Kostapo) are not learned in the law and the FAQs are not drafted with legal precision.

If ET goes this route, I suggest that a Code Jerome be drafted by a team of lawyers, where all offenses to the security of the Realm, both felonies and misdemeanors, be very precisely defined, with copies of the Code distributed to each reader.

Trial as well as appelate procedures should precisely spelled out also.

I much prefer the English system, but unfortunately the jurisdiction is apparently France.

Perhaps this conversation could lead to a second thread about what we see as positive going on here.

That would be nice too.

"When the abyss stares at me, it wets its pants." Brian Hopkins

by EricC on Mon Jan 29th, 2007 at 02:41:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A proposed banning policy. (none / 0)

Given the preponderance of those of the fairer sex among the enforcers, I've a friend who's coined something slightly less politically correct, along the likes of Kos' Keystone K---s, with the unspelled term usually spelled with a c, and translated into espanish as coño.

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

by r------ on Mon Jan 29th, 2007 at 02:51:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A proposed banning policy. (none / 0)

I really hate that word to be used as an insult, don't you?

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Jan 29th, 2007 at 02:54:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A proposed banning policy. (none / 0)

Yes.

That's why I can't spell it out in english, it's very crude.

I got his point, though.

I don't really get why one would invoke it as an insult though, seems to go against everything a heterosexual man in good health and spirit stands and strives for. Oh well. (In french of course it's another matter; though the word is invoked often, the content it carries is so far divorced from the original term that it carries no signifaction for the user; perhaps it did long ago, but its new meaning was reified so far into the past that the etymology is no longer relevant. Not so in english.)

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

by r------ on Mon Jan 29th, 2007 at 03:07:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A proposed banning policy. (none / 0)

I don't really get why one would invoke it as an insult though

Well, apparently you "got it" enough to find it worthy of repetition...

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. -Voltaire

by p------- on Mon Jan 29th, 2007 at 03:14:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A proposed banning policy. (none / 0)

Yes. It's kinda hard to miss.

And if the word is wholly inappropriate in all circumstances, if one were to hypotethically allow for its usage in english, then this might actually be that application given the antics of more than a few over there.

Other than that, have I expressed to you just how much I enjoy pies of all sorts?

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

by r------ on Mon Jan 29th, 2007 at 03:33:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Young Kossaks (none / 1)

Since the very beginning at DK, there have been groups that form to be "troll hunters". Periodically they get slapped around by the rest and slink away. Bide a wee, the McCarthyites will get their "have you no decency" pretty soon.

by HiD on Mon Jan 29th, 2007 at 03:52:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A proposed banning policy. (4.00 / 2)

ET does not fahren, fahren, fahren auf dem Autobahn?

How unKraftwerkian.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Mon Jan 29th, 2007 at 06:23:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A proposed banning policy. (none / 0)

God save us.

They want to throw people under trucks on the Interstate?

"When the abyss stares at me, it wets its pants." Brian Hopkins

by EricC on Mon Jan 29th, 2007 at 06:40:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A proposed banning policy. (none / 1)

I personally think ET is walking on thin ice by tolerating some of this stuff, though I understand the desire to err on that end.

What kind of water is under that thin ice? If t ose comments were in any way anonynous I'd see a reason to worry ore. But tge hidden comment mecanism is quite good at preventing the casual reader from seeing them, and that should preclude the need for banning.

"It's the statue, man, The Statue."

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jan 29th, 2007 at 01:33:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A proposed banning policy. (none / 1)

Well, I didn't say we don't know how to swim. :)

I just think it cannot help the reputation of the site, or encourage readership, when it seems that each time I pull up the recent comments list, there is something offensive to read. And not offensive in some ideological sense, but simply sophomoric. The hidden comments only work after so many people have rated a comment. I understand you and I probably see more of the recent comments than the "casual reader", but comments are comments. I often visit other blogs I know nothing about and try to judge from the comments what the vibe is there. If someone who is mean seems to be dominating threads, I probably won't go back.

But some of that is a matter of taste too. For example, I think Lana is funny, even though she can be mean. But she's also not contributing almost every other comment either...

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. -Voltaire

by p------- on Mon Jan 29th, 2007 at 01:47:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A proposed banning policy. (none / 0)

Taste or being sophomoric are not grounds for banning.

"It's the statue, man, The Statue."

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jan 29th, 2007 at 02:03:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A proposed banning policy. (none / 0)

Do you believe there are any grounds for banning?

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Mon Jan 29th, 2007 at 02:08:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A proposed banning policy. (none / 1)

Disruptive behaviour with utter lack of content. Poemless list of objectionable behaviours seems a little excessive.

"It's the statue, man, The Statue."

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jan 29th, 2007 at 02:35:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A proposed banning policy. (none / 0)

Please don't conflate that which I find objectionable with that which I think is grounds for banning. If you'd read my comment, you'd know I'm not even sure if banning is a good thing!

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. -Voltaire

by p------- on Mon Jan 29th, 2007 at 02:40:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A proposed banning policy. (4.00 / 4)

Bannez-les tous; Dieu reconnaitra les siens. ;-)

by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Mon Jan 29th, 2007 at 03:16:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A proposed banning policy. (none / 0)

LOL. But that would leave ET and heaven terribly quiet and boring places. ;)

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. -Voltaire

by p------- on Mon Jan 29th, 2007 at 03:38:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A proposed banning policy. (4.00 / 4)

Um... two American sandwiches walked into a bar and one was a salted...

I'm against any banning policy. This site has got a troll-rating feature and a God-given right (what's an atheistic version of this?) to ignore any posts/diaries, wouldn't it be enough? But then what do I know, being a citizen of a country where freedom of speech doesn't really exist and everything is being censored???

BTW, mr R Kulisz (is that him the last nasty offender, right?) may well be a Pole living in the Evil Twins Country or recently left it and is now experiencing a cultural shock. Then you may want to greet him with an authentic Polish word "Kurrrva" and he'll be happy.. or not

by lana on Mon Jan 29th, 2007 at 03:15:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

A proposed banning policy. | 35 comments (35 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Top Diaries

Shock Election Loss Rutte IV In Senate Race

Honduras Establishes Close Ties with China

A Return to Normalcy?

A Grand Slam for Ireland?

NI Protocol: It's all over bar the shouting?

Chinese peace principles for the war in Ukraine

The Windsor Framework

Twenty years of war in Iraq

Recent Diaries

Settler Extremism Blessed by Jerusalem Leaders

US Interference In Lebanon-Syria-Ira
q

City Agriculture - March 17, 2023

Shock Election Loss Rutte IV In Senate Race

Stalemate Endures, Pessimism Grows, Deaths Mount

Honduras Establishes Close Ties with China

A Grand Slam for Ireland?

Living In Spain and Social-Democracy

USA Censorship Act to Kill Disinformation

Flying Fortresses and Nuclear Threat

Universal Criticism Asylum Threshold EU Fortress

China Trade and Relations

SBU As a Terror Network

A Return to Normalcy?

Georgia and Foreign Agents or Spy Law

Nord Stream Blasts Timeline of Denial

Crimea As Endgame Before Going M.A.D.

Scourge of Joint Alliance USA, KSA and Jihadists

Israel's Fascists Call for Genocide on Palestinians

NI Protocol: It's all over bar the shouting?

Occasional Series