What constitutes "abuse" of non-members in AH?

AlmightyCushion

strobe wrote: »

The mods seem to handle it in relation to personal abuse towards members, even in threads with 2000 posts.

I know I'm not the one that has to be doing it, and that everyone is a volunteer etc but they manage the work load so far from what I can see. I can't really see the merit in the 'it's a big thread' argument AC.

That's because we get it as it's happening and not after it has thousands of posts. Once a thread has gotten massive and requires some one to pick through it, we'll usually just lock it and issue a warning. On some occasions we will go through it and mod as appropriate but it wouldn't always be the norm especially not at 2,000 posts.

Let's put that 2,000 posts in context. If it takes an average of 3 seconds for each post which given that you have to read the posts, delete some and have about 100 page loads I think that's about right, the thread would take nearly 2 hours to go through.

starbelgrade

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

If it takes an average of 3 seconds for each post which given that you have to read the posts, delete some and have about 100 page loads I think that's about right, the thread would take nearly 2 hours to go through.

Sure, what else would you be doing?

Xavi6

strobe wrote: »

The mods seem to handle it in relation to personal abuse towards members, even in threads with 2000 posts.

I know I'm not the one that has to be doing it, and that everyone is a volunteer etc but they manage the work load so far from what I can see. I can't really see the merit in the 'it's a big thread' argument AC.

Why not? It'd take a few hours to go through a thread like that before you even start deleting posts and handing out infractions/bans. The limits of a volunteer only stretch so far.

To put it bluntly, fuck that.

Jazzy

i just want the ability to call someone a talentless hack if they are one. there are so many people in the public eye who try and take advantage of society and should be called on for it. the standards of entertainment and in some cases, journalism, are extremely low and those responsible should publicly be called out on it.

strobe

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

That's because we get it as it's happening and not after it has thousands of posts. Once a thread has gotten massive and requires some one to pick through it, we'll usually just lock it and issue a warning. On some occasions we will go through it and mod as appropriate but it wouldn't always be the norm especially not at 2,000 posts.

Let's put that 2,000 posts in context. If it takes an average of 3 seconds for each post which given that you have to read the posts, delete some and have about 100 page loads I think that's about right, the thread would take nearly 2 hours to go through.

Xavi6 wrote: »

Why not? It'd take a few hours to go through a thread like that before you even start deleting posts and handing out infractions/bans. The limites of a volunteer only stretch so far.

To put it bluntly, fuck that.

Ahh. Allow me to clarify. I am talking about in regards to future situations, not to threads that have already run to 10^99 posts. I obviously see why no one is going to go trawling back through thousands of posts ticking them all off as ok or not. I mean from now on, when a new thread is started, to deal with things as the thread develops, to avoid having to lock one up a long way down the line because 'you can't expect anyone to go back through 282828 posts and clean them all up'. A bit of pro-action and foresight, which would avoid a repetition of events, is what I am advocating.

OutlawPete

Jazzy wrote: »

i just want the ability to call someone a talentless hack if they are one. there are so many people in the public eye who try and take advantage of society and should be called on for it. the standards of entertainment and in some cases, journalism, are extremely low and those responsible should publicly be called out on it.

Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think that's an issue as questioning a non-member's talents seems to be tolerated quite well in AH. That is of course unless someone says something that is libellous ('they have no talent and only got that job cause they slept with the editor', for instance). Or how Kevin Myers was labelled by one user as a "fat pig".

The Rebecca Black thread is a good example of how the consensus can be be pretty much that a certain person has zero talent but yet not cross the line of out and out abuse. In saying that, I would imagine that there were a many posts deleted from the thread that did cross that line.

dr.bollocko

OutlawPete wrote: »

Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think that's an issue as questioning a non-member's talents seems to be tolerated quite well in AH. That is of course unless someone says something that is libellous ('they have no talent and only got that job cause they slept with the editor', for instance). Or how Kevin Myers was labelled by one user as a "fat pig".

The Rebecca Black thread is a good example of how the consensus can be be pretty much that a certain person has zero talent but yet not cross the line of out and out abuse. In saying that, I would imagine that there were a many posts deleted from the thread that did cross that line.

Is it this Rebecca black thread in AH?
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056213619
If its this one you're talking about I can confirm there were in fact no posts deleted from that thread to date.
One would hope that that is not taken as a challenge.

OutlawPete

That's the one.

I thought that was a good example of how a thread can critique a 'non-members' talent (or lack-there-of) and yet not get vicious, in fact mostly it seemed lighthearted and a good laugh. Nice to hear that no posts were made that needed to be deleted.