Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Do you know where your variables are?
 
PerlMonks  

Re^4: Can I please have multiple downvotes per (certain monk's) posts.

by BrowserUk (Patriarch)
on May 30, 2015 at 23:51 UTC ( [id://1128434]=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^3: Can I please have multiple downvotes per (certain monk's) posts.
in thread Can I please have multiple downvotes per (certain monk's) posts.

I can understand that BrowserUk is getting tired of it but everything else would amount to censorship....

If he came on here spouting misogyny, holocaust denial, eugenics, or sexual preference intolerance; (almost) no one would blink an eye at his being censored or censured.

Is his brand of widely recognised, deliberate, willful, disinformation any less harmful because the grouping he targets crosses the boundaries of recognised groups?

I recognise, and would defend, his right to free speech, when posted on his own web site. But here, he taints us all with his uttering, and by any legal convention, we have the right to defend our -- and this sites -- reputations, from association with him, and his incompetence and remorseless lack of attempt to either correct his mistakes; nor learn from them.

Two of my greatest hates are: nannying states; and the imposition of one man's opinions upon another; but both censuring and censorship have their place in a tolerant, but strong, knowing and defended community.


With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I'm with torvalds on this
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. Agile (and TDD) debunked

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Can I please have multiple downvotes per (certain monk's) posts.
by aaron_baugher (Curate) on May 31, 2015 at 00:23 UTC

    Yes, there is already "censorship" every time a post is reaped. The only question is whether another particular kind of posting should be censored as well. And not even censored in an absolute sense, if possible, but somehow discouraged more strongly than the current system allows, since that isn't working.

    Another thing to consider: maybe as long as only one member is doing it, BrowserUK and other experts can keep up with replies to all his harmful posts, pointing out to newbies what's wrong with them (though I don't know why they should be obligated to do so). But what if there were a dozen members doing it, or he retired from his day job and could post 12 times as often? Would they still be able to alleviate all the damage with replies? Should they have to?

    PerlMonks is the most open forum I've ever participated in, other than unmoderated Usenet groups. That's a good thing in a lot of ways. It makes the site very welcoming for newcomers; even those who post without reading the most basic instructions are treated respectfully and generously helped. But that openness and desire for loose enforcement of standards does have a downside, in that it can be taken advantage of by those who shamelessly flout the voluntary standards of the community.

    Aaron B.
    Available for small or large Perl jobs and *nix system administration; see my home node.

      PerlMonks is the most open forum I've ever participated in,

      I agree. And I wouldn't want that to change; certainly not in any autocratic way; and absolutely not in any way that gives me that right.

      But I do think there is a place for democratic censorship. And if that could be strengthened or extended to deal with this persistent irritation; I think that would be an acceptable trade.


      With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
      Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
      "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I'm with torvalds on this
      In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. Agile (and TDD) debunked
Re^5: Can I please have multiple downvotes per (certain monk's) posts.
by morgon (Priest) on May 31, 2015 at 01:09 UTC
    he taints us all with his uttering
    Why?

    I don't think in the least that you (or this forum or whatever) is tainted in any way by allowing nonsensensical posts that then get refuted by people that know better.

    As I said I can understand your frustration but nevertheless allowing nonsense to be uttered while unambiguously calling nonsense nonsense is the way to do it.

    And just because you mentioned it: I live in a country where holocaust denial is not only censored - it is actually considered a crime.
    However that does not bother the so inclined...

    But I must admit that I don't vote at all when at least I should have downvoted some postings...

      that then get refuted by people that know better

      I'm sick of making that effort.

      I was looking for a solution that doesn't allow this irritant to waste so much of my time; whilst preventing his garbage from wasting that of other people who might be taken in by it.


      With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
      Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
      "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I'm with torvalds on this
      In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. Agile (and TDD) debunked

      morgon: Why? ... unambiguously calling nonsense nonsense is the way to do it.

      Yeah few of us tried that -- a number of such nodes got reaped for trolling

      3809 nodes is a lot of garbage to refute

        3809 nodes is a lot of garbage to refute

        Yeah, that's a lot to expect from people who are participating voluntarily because they want to learn new ideas and help people who are open to being helped. I'll admit that I rarely read this irritant's posts anymore, which means I'm not down-voting them either. I use an RSS reader to show me new nodes, so if I see his username, I don't read it because I already know it's nonsense. That's normal human behavior -- if someone's consistently annoying, you learn to avoid him -- but in this case it works in his favor, since if everyone does that he gets to post his nonsense unopposed and un-downvoted.

        I enjoy PerlMonks very much and learn a lot here, but I don't know how much time I'm obligated to spend following one user around correcting his nonsense, just so we can say we haven't "censored" him. I owe the community some of my time, but not an unlimited amount, and I'd like to spend as much of it as possible helping people.

        Aaron B.
        Available for small or large Perl jobs and *nix system administration; see my home node.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1128434]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this?Last hourOther CB clients
Other Users?
Others pondering the Monastery: (5)
As of 2024-03-28 21:29 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found