Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    9:25 AM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: Suggest a GasBuddy improvement > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Ban "do you" from forum topics Back to Topics
GrumpyCat

Champion Author
Alabama

Posts:5,197
Points:1,220,570
Joined:Jun 2009
Message Posted: Apr 19, 2013 5:34:28 PM

Ban the phrase "do you" and its variants from forum topics.

It is way overused. These postings are of little value. Make posters think before starting a topic.
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
pb88
Sophomore Author Virginia

Posts:165
Points:19,270
Joined:Jul 2013
Message Posted: Sep 13, 2013 1:04:16 AM

some people can only think of the terms of you if you they need us to bring for them that's why we have to do the thinking for those of us who are bright enough to think of a Downbrained society
Profile Pic
TxJeans
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:7,135
Points:774,900
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 1, 2013 11:40:38 PM

But Larry, most of the "do you" are not serious posts and we will continue to see them filled with JFF posts. Although on some message boards I have seen user created polls work well, I don't think they would work here unless there was some major clean up of the boards first with a notice that the JFF rules will be enforced.

Profile Pic
LarryMarg
Champion Author New York

Posts:2,281
Points:531,000
Joined:Feb 2012
Message Posted: Sep 1, 2013 11:15:31 PM

TxJeans,

> having more polls would not eliminate the JFF posting in non "JFF" categories.

The only poll I'm aware of is the weekly poll. What I'm suggesting is the ability to have anyone who can start a new topic be able to create a poll, which would show up under a new top-level category, something like "Member-created polls". The simplest case would be a "Yes" / "No" poll. It wouldn't be too much harder to allow multiple choice.

The incentive for the person starting the topic to place it there is that they'd automatically get a summary of responses.
Profile Pic
TxJeans
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:7,135
Points:774,900
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 1, 2013 6:22:31 PM

Larry,
Of course software can do almost anything with enough time and desire to make is so...but, at risk of breaking something else. The current code would likely not make this a quick change. And, the change would likely not accomplish the desired goal. You will still have folks posting "garbage" JFF posts where ever they
"land" to get their points. Most of the forum categories are filled with threads that do not follow the TOS and should have been closed or moved to JFF.
.
The General Forum is a good example. There is virtually no likelyhood of getting a truly meaningful discussion going as it would quickly age off with the JFF posting on the other threads.
.
Forum categories are "General Gas Talk", "All Things Ethanol", Suggest A GasBuddy Improvement". The polls are separate from these categories and having more polls would not eliminate the JFF posting in non "JFF" categories. They already have the "JFF" category that they largely ignore when posting the "Yes/No" type threads (topics).
Profile Pic
LarryMarg
Champion Author New York

Posts:2,281
Points:531,000
Joined:Feb 2012
Message Posted: Sep 1, 2013 2:16:51 PM

kwzh - If answering the JFF survey counted the same as posting a reply to the current "useless" topics, that would address that concern.

> the software does not make it easy to have a forum category behave differently from other forum categories.

First of all, software does what the programmers tell it to do.

Second, I'm not sure what you mean by "forum category". If "Member polls" were added as a new top-level category (at the same level as "JFF" and "Games & Trivia"), would that address this?
Profile Pic
kwzh
Champion Author San Jose

Posts:23,056
Points:4,220,255
Joined:Jul 2001
Message Posted: Sep 1, 2013 12:15:35 AM

I bet it would be next to impossible, actually. Evidence suggests that the software does not make it easy to have a forum category behave differently from other forum categories.

Besides, the JFF folks don't really want surveys. They just want to post their "answer" and get points -- even if they've already answered the same question before.
Profile Pic
LarryMarg
Champion Author New York

Posts:2,281
Points:531,000
Joined:Feb 2012
Message Posted: Aug 31, 2013 3:35:22 PM

I'll second what GrumpyCat wrote:
> The "do you" topics might be best served with a voting survey.

I think the ideal solution might be if topics could be set up as surveys, but only under JFF. (That sounds like a lot of programming effort, but since GB is already set up to do surveys, it shouldn't be too bad.)
Profile Pic
TxJeans
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:7,135
Points:774,900
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: May 2, 2013 7:32:28 AM

I have watched what happens with volunteer mods over on other sites. With volunteer mods you have to consider their personality and how they interact with others. However, even then, you have to "review" your mods over time. Some start off with a very level hand, but over time allow their own posting and their mod interaction to merge and they lose objectivity or get burned out.

I have seen mods that complain about how others moderate, only to "become" that same sort of moderator over time and think of themselves as a supermod. I have also seen them forget when they are responding as a user or commenting as a mod and let their two roles become one.

Volunteer mods can be beneficial, but can be a two edged sword. Some forums allow the volunteer mods to lock/remove a thread from review to a private discussion area where the volunteer mods determine/discuss how to handle the situation. Posts/threads are NOT deleted by the mods but removed from view until discussed. Other posts are edited with a date/time stamp to show it was edited.

With this type of forum where there is no "reply to" a post, but just linear respond to thread, it would be important that the mod when responding in a thread to cool things down be specific as too whom they respond or they can leave one poster thinking they were taking their side and become emboldened.

I really think the first step should be promoting the JFF as the only/quickest place for points to reduce clutter in other areas of discussion.

jmho
Profile Pic
scoutmaster
Champion Author Pittsburgh

Posts:96,018
Points:3,795,090
Joined:Mar 2003
Message Posted: May 2, 2013 6:12:39 AM

I don't think volunteer moderators is a good idea. To many variables.
Profile Pic
kwzh
Champion Author San Jose

Posts:23,056
Points:4,220,255
Joined:Jul 2001
Message Posted: May 2, 2013 2:45:01 AM

I think that anyone who appears to have a vendetta against any other member should be disqualified from consideration as a volunteer moderator.

On a related note (and more relevant to the current system), I think that when reviewing abuse reports, instances of member A reporting member B for abuse should be automatically weighted by member A's history with abuse reports in general, and with member B in particular.
Profile Pic
kwzh
Champion Author San Jose

Posts:23,056
Points:4,220,255
Joined:Jul 2001
Message Posted: May 2, 2013 2:36:54 AM

Infidels, the site has already done that experiment, and it backfired in just the way predicted -- the fluffers would not suddenly stop posting fluff; they'll instead post longer fluff. This makes the situation worse, not better. And any other sort of machine-testable criterion is likely to have the same result. The problem needs to be attacked from a different direction.
Profile Pic
Don
Moderator
Message Posted: May 1, 2013 6:03:40 PM

Hi Infidels,

A minimum character limit is something easily worked around. Try using the Ignore Short Messages check box at the top of each forum topic. Think of this as a minimum character count for the reader. Messages below 60 characters will be hidden from display.

I hope this helps.

-Don
Profile Pic
Infidels
All-Star Author Alberta

Posts:635
Points:127,750
Joined:Apr 2013
Message Posted: May 1, 2013 5:46:02 PM

I'm new to this but I see a lot of short posts " do you", "really", etc. I think the posters are just getting points to enter the gas prize. How about a minimum character limit on posts?
Profile Pic
Don
Moderator
Message Posted: May 1, 2013 5:37:01 PM

Agreed, the idea does have merit, and there probably are number of users who would do well.

-Don
Profile Pic
maxstar
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:21,773
Points:1,353,125
Joined:Feb 2011
Message Posted: May 1, 2013 5:07:23 PM

Set aside my last tounge in cheek comments. I appreciate your comments. The idea of volunteer moderators has merit however I would not put the sole or final fate of a topic in the hands of one volunteer but rather a collective decision of several volunteers through a voting system. The system would require the concurance of say (pick a number) at least three anonymous volunteers for a topic to be temporarily locked (frozen). The frozen topics would stay that way until a regular moderator either moves it, permanently locks it or thaws it out. That method would keep a single volunteer from deciding a topics fate.
Profile Pic
Don
Moderator
Message Posted: May 1, 2013 4:39:51 PM

Additionally the decision behind of any volunteer moderators if ever would be handled by the site owners and/or admin staff. Whether participating users would prefer or not prefer someone else to moderate could be considered (granted we keep an eye on you guys and understand who does and who does not get along) but that wouldn't be a bottom line deciding factor.

I know, through display of messages and choice of language, that there are some users who do not like me, or some of the other mods, and often do not approve of the things we say or how we represent the company we work for (even if things are done in a straightforward and professional manner). One major consideration is what could happen if some of the more vocal, active users - people that we don't interact with and see every day - abused any given privileges. That is a whole kind of different accountability.

-Don
Profile Pic
Don
Moderator
Message Posted: May 1, 2013 4:18:27 PM

Good discussion everyone, keep it up.

"I do not think there is any easy way to automate the screening topics"

I've inquired with the developers previously for screening all message posts when posting for points in the Daily News Article and Discussion area was becoming extremely popular, the idea was considered with the main issue being the check/script to monitor every post being submitted into a topic and change the sort order of posts, then re-auto-populate the last 4 pages of responses potentially would bog site load times.

It would be effective when wanted it to be, but likely effective when not warranted, that idea is kind of a double edged sword.

I'd imagine screening topic titles would be less of a complicated task, solely because the check in place would only look for certain keywords in the topic title and not need to automatically review each message being posted into the topic.

"I agree moderators should move topics as necessary, but that doesn't mean (or is not the same thing as) continually monitoring the topics for topic misplacement. That's one of the things that moderators depend on members to do; monitor their own discussions, etc., and report them as necessary."

Correct, the forums are used cross-website and there is a lot going on every day, when there's an issue with a topic or message post we highly recommend using Report Abuse feature. Generally we will only respond what is brought directly to our attention.

If you notice a topic should be placed elsewhere, use the Report Abuse feature and let us know. It isn't guaranteed the topic will be moved but most people do have a good idea of when a topic of discussion should be moved to a more appropriate area.

Abuse reports are cycled through periodically and responded to when time allows, the action taken (if any) will be by a mods discretion (this meaning, if you don't see any results, like a message being removed right away or you don't see someone's profile suddenly become unavailable, that doesn't mean the user hasn't been contacted or the complaint hasn't been documented).

Ideally we're hoping members understand that certain topics and subject belong in given categories, but that isn't always the case.

There are topics that don't entirely have a 100% proper category, like a religious debate topic with political motivation, or an ethanol related topic concerning fuel economy, etc.

"I would guess that the mods don't have time to check all of them, but I expect the right thing will happen if they sort them by the number of complaints received. Possibly modified by number of past abuses."

Whenever a user is observed or contacted about their site/app activity, we do keep a record of when and why their actions were being noted.

If we see that a user has been previously contacted about personally attacking users in the abuse report area, and they're reported a third time after being contacted twice, it could be up to a moderator's discretion to contact them a third time or ban the member. Depending on the severity of the comments made, this could be done with or without notice (even on the first offense).

Reported posts are reviewed and hopefully still available in the topic to to read in context. If not, sometimes it's required to jump back and forth between user forum message histories which can be hard to keep straight.

You might find that a member was reported for personally attacking another user but after viewing the discussion, find they were lashing out in response toward a member that was being particularly nasty toward them beforehand.

The Report Abuse feature can also yield some funny results,

ie. A member is reported for posting a topic in the wrong forum, the reporting user's recommended action is "Ban User" - the more appropriate action should be "Move Topic" and suggest the new forum where the topic should go.

^ That's why we'll look things over before the "Perform Action" button is used. It can sometimes take a little while to correctly interpret a message or situation.

To the OP, "Make posters think before starting a topic." - I'm afraid there's not much we can do to improve upon this.

-Don
Profile Pic
Gas_Buddy
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:29,569
Points:3,576,445
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: May 1, 2013 3:59:56 PM

Scrapheap wrote:
"Another suggestion that has been made in the past is to recruit some volunteer moderators who have limited ablilities to move or remove discussion topics and posts."

I assume Scrapheap likes (or at least doesn't oppose) that idea, which I think is a possibly good idea.

The problem with that, having volunteer moderators, is, (and these may not be good examples), if Scrapheap (a very dedicated contributor to the website and the discussions) want or accept scoutmaster as a volunteer moderator? Would RichWLIN want or accept TXJeans as a volunteer moderator? Would CampKohler want or accept GoGoGoodyear as a volunteer moderator. Would anyone want or accept BuzzLOL or grampi47 or maxstar or kwzh (among others) as volunteer moderators? Heaven forbid, would anyone of you accept or want me to be a volunteer moderator? Yet all of those named are active participants in the website and have an apparent feel for how the website discussions and other facets of the website and apps should be conducted.

I personally like the idea of volunteer moderators but the bottom line is (and I'm naming four members FOR EXAMPLE PURPOSES ONLY), want or accept Scarpheap, scoutmaster, CampKohler or me (Gas_Buddy), either collectively or individually, as volunteer moderators?


[Edited by: Gas_Buddy at 5/1/2013 4:02:10 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Scrapheap
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:17,171
Points:2,898,510
Joined:Sep 2006
Message Posted: May 1, 2013 2:38:39 PM

maxstar wrote > To help, perhaps "Just for Fun" should be the only category where new topics are allowed. That way only the few topics that really belong in a discussion category would need to be moved via a "Report Abuse" notification.

I think that would be worse and even more frustrating than the problem GrumpyCat is complaining about.

Giving points only for posts in JFF would be less labor intensive.

Another suggestion that has been made in the past is to recruit some volunteer moderators who have limited ablilities to move or remove discussion topics and posts.
Profile Pic
Gas_Buddy
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:29,569
Points:3,576,445
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: May 1, 2013 2:38:18 PM

Or, maxstar, rename the Just For Fun discussion category to something like:
Topics For Fun and For Points, place that category immediately under the local discussion category (in the category list), and make the type double the size of the type for other topics. Maybe what's needed is to force-feed members (though I can't believe I'm saying that).
Profile Pic
maxstar
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:21,773
Points:1,353,125
Joined:Feb 2011
Message Posted: May 1, 2013 9:48:00 AM

I do not think there is any easy way to automate the screening topics. To help, perhaps "Just for Fun" should be the only category where new topics are allowed. That way only the few topics that really belong in a discussion category would need to be moved via a "Report Abuse" notification.
Profile Pic
Zimcity
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:70,345
Points:4,194,610
Joined:Aug 2001
Message Posted: May 1, 2013 9:11:52 AM

How about if any topic ending in a "?" is moved to JFF automagically, lol.
Profile Pic
kwzh
Champion Author San Jose

Posts:23,056
Points:4,220,255
Joined:Jul 2001
Message Posted: May 1, 2013 12:01:41 AM

I make use of the Report Abuse link when it seems appropriate, both for new topics and for fluff responses to existing non-fluff topics. I would guess that the mods don't have time to check all of them, but I expect the right thing will happen if they sort them by the number of complaints received. Possibly modified by number of past abuses.
Profile Pic
Gas_Buddy
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:29,569
Points:3,576,445
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Apr 30, 2013 2:43:03 PM

"...it is part of the moderators duties to move topics as necessary. Granted, there are WAY too many of them to do it effectively, but I have started using the report abuse button and requesting these types of topics be moved to JFF. At least that should, in theory, help, but alas, it is a losing battle."

I agree moderators should move topics as necessary, but that doesn't mean (or is not the same thing as) continually monitoring the topics for topic misplacement. That's one of the things that moderators depend on members to do; monitor their own discussions, etc., and report them as necessary.

I have long been using the "report abuse" link and many topics have been moved to either Just For Fun, Off Topic, or to the appropriate local discussion for area-specific/local issues. But it does seem to be a losing battle, and that's the reason that I don't think that moderators should simply use their time reading the posts.

I agree with Scrapheap's comment "...the "do you" threads would probably reduce in frequency, or at least wouldn't live as long" and would add that many of the "okay" posts would also stop appearing.

Profile Pic
Zimcity
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:70,345
Points:4,194,610
Joined:Aug 2001
Message Posted: Apr 30, 2013 8:55:34 AM

"Here's the problem. Like it or not, and I know some here will disagree, moderators should NOT have to be reviewing message posts to see that members "follow the guidelines" and then move mis-categorized posts to other categories."

You are wrong, it is part of the moderators duties to move topics as necessary. Granted, there are WAY too many of them to do it effectively, but I have started using the report abuse button and requesting these types of topics be moved to JFF. At least that should, in theory, help, but alas, it is a losing battle.
Profile Pic
Scrapheap
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:17,171
Points:2,898,510
Joined:Sep 2006
Message Posted: Apr 30, 2013 7:55:39 AM

If people stop responding because they don't get any points, the "do you" threads would probably reduce in frequency, or at least wouldn't live as long.
Profile Pic
maxstar
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:21,773
Points:1,353,125
Joined:Feb 2011
Message Posted: Apr 29, 2013 11:46:57 PM

"Maybe a solution, as suggested in other threads, is to not give points for participation in the "substantive discussion categories"".

I would be all for that suggestion if it would work. And it might work for those that reply to topics, but I do not think it is the answer for those that create topics of the JFF variety in non JFF categories. For those I would have them moved to the appropriate category and send a private message to the member that created the topic explaining why it was moved. For repeat offenders warnings and eventually suspending the ability to create topics might be considered.
Profile Pic
Gas_Buddy
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:29,569
Points:3,576,445
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Apr 29, 2013 8:06:36 PM

"Zimcity hit the nail on the head. Just enforce the rules already described in the guidelines."

Here's the problem. Like it or not, and I know some here will disagree, moderators should NOT have to be reviewing message posts to see that members "follow the guidelines" and then move mis-categorized posts to other categories. Members should pay attention to what and where they're posting, and not, as one member recently told me "If the thread is in the wrong place, then it will die"; no, those threads seem to not die, because other members inevitably respond, adding their own comment as if the thread had legitimacy. And, yes, I know that some members don't pay attention (and perpetuate such topics), that others don't care what or where they post, and that many just post for points, paying no attention to the original post and simply respond to an very poorly written topic title.

I hope moderators have better things to do (and yes, I know the word moderator refers to "moderating"; but moderators on Gas Buddy aren't moderating discussions and setting the direction of conversation/discussion by taking an active role in the discussions; instead they're responding to requests, etc.

Maybe a solution, as suggested in other threads, is to not give points for participation in the "substantive discussion categories", but rather give points only for participation in the non-substantive categories; give points only for Just For Fun or for Off Topic and it's likely that the inane posts in General Gas Talk, the News discussions, etc., will drop significantly.
Profile Pic
maxstar
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:21,773
Points:1,353,125
Joined:Feb 2011
Message Posted: Apr 29, 2013 4:23:52 PM

Zimcity hit the nail on the head. Just enforce the rules already described in the guidelines.
Profile Pic
Zimcity
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:70,345
Points:4,194,610
Joined:Aug 2001
Message Posted: Apr 29, 2013 2:25:10 PM

Perhaps if moderators would move these types of topics to the JFF category where they belong, it wouldn't be such a prevalent issue.
Profile Pic
kwzh
Champion Author San Jose

Posts:23,056
Points:4,220,255
Joined:Jul 2001
Message Posted: Apr 26, 2013 12:13:18 AM

The "2+3=?" variant will stop working as soon as the crackers invest some time into identifying them. They currently "work" because they're not part of the majority mechanism, I think.
Profile Pic
GoGoGoodyear
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:4,298
Points:789,535
Joined:Mar 2010
Message Posted: Apr 25, 2013 5:37:02 PM


Zimcity, the difficulty of a CAPTCHA is entirely under the control of the website. I've seen some that are so distorted they are almost impossible to read and others that are as simple as asking 2+3 = ?

The original purpose that CAPTCHA was invented for was to prevent anyone from using a computer program to attack a website by automatically creating thousands of new login accounts per minute or posting thousands of comments per minute to forums. Since computers can't solve the CAPTCHA question it mostly put a stop to that kind of abuse. However as a result there are now rogue sites where people sit in front of their computers and answer the CAPTCHAs by the hundreds for others.

Yes they are a pain and an annoyance, but we can thank hackers for the existence of CAPTCHA. Without the need to protect websites from those kind of attacks this technology might have just remained a curiosity dreamed up in a university computer lab.
Profile Pic
GoGoGoodyear
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:4,298
Points:789,535
Joined:Mar 2010
Message Posted: Apr 25, 2013 5:21:56 PM


As kwzh stated, "one way to change the path of least resistance is to add more resistance (an "Are You Sure" step, a CAPTCHA, or even just a timed delay) to the path that we'd like to discourage..."

So adding the extra step of a CAPTCHA before posting to a news article discussion, but not for posting to JFF, along with a link to JFF next to the Post A Reply in each news article discussion, is that extra resistance which would (hopefully) get those posting-for-points to post to JFF instead.
Profile Pic
scoutmaster
Champion Author Pittsburgh

Posts:96,018
Points:3,795,090
Joined:Mar 2003
Message Posted: Apr 25, 2013 11:04:30 AM

How will a CAPTCHA help?
Profile Pic
Zimcity
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:70,345
Points:4,194,610
Joined:Aug 2001
Message Posted: Apr 25, 2013 10:48:09 AM

"What is so bad about CAPTCHA other than the extra step on a website?"

1. having to do it every time you enter something on a ticket buy or something.
2. Many times the picture is really hard to decipher.
3. They are just a general pain in the arse.
Profile Pic
kwzh
Champion Author San Jose

Posts:23,056
Points:4,220,255
Joined:Jul 2001
Message Posted: Apr 25, 2013 3:21:23 AM

"ReCAPTCHA" is the specific thing that is being used for book deciphering; many sites are using it these days, but some have other CAPTCHAs.

I've occasionally come across some that ask me to guess whether a circle was intended to be the letter O or the digit 0. That's rather annoying. Similarly, I've seen some glyphs that could have been 2 or z, others 9 or g. I suppose when I get those, I should ask for a new test instead of making a guess on the first one.
Profile Pic
GoGoGoodyear
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:4,298
Points:789,535
Joined:Mar 2010
Message Posted: Apr 24, 2013 8:58:09 PM


Zimcity: "CAPTCHA is the devil! How in the heck
did they ever get internet companies to accept
their evil doings."

LOL why? What is so bad about CAPTCHA other than the extra step on a website?

Most people don't realize it but when typing in those two words on the CAPTCHA screen they are helping decipher the text of old books, the pages of which are being scanned so the text can be made available for free online.
Profile Pic
MARIOWERX
Champion Author Vancouver

Posts:18,434
Points:2,181,115
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Apr 24, 2013 6:22:14 PM

Dew ewe think it would help?
Profile Pic
Zimcity
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:70,345
Points:4,194,610
Joined:Aug 2001
Message Posted: Apr 24, 2013 11:50:33 AM

"Make another category of points for quick answers ie 10points"

That's what JFF is for.
Profile Pic
giwan
Champion Author Michigan

Posts:1,586
Points:211,820
Joined:Aug 2009
Message Posted: Apr 24, 2013 10:42:19 AM

Make another category of points for quick answers ie 10points
Profile Pic
Zimcity
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:70,345
Points:4,194,610
Joined:Aug 2001
Message Posted: Apr 24, 2013 10:38:33 AM

"I dislike the idea of a CAPTCHA (for each news item post) even more."

CAPTCHA is the devil! How in the heck did they ever get internet companies to accept their evil doings.
Profile Pic
kwzh
Champion Author San Jose

Posts:23,056
Points:4,220,255
Joined:Jul 2001
Message Posted: Apr 23, 2013 11:38:27 PM

I'm glad to hear that the suggestion was partly in jest.

Yes, one way to change the path of least resistance is to add more resistance (an "Are You Sure" step, a CAPTCHA, or even just a timed delay) to the path that we'd like to discourage. Alas, any such idea would face the aforementioned entanglement problem -- it seems quite likely that the code for "display forum thread" is too incestuous to allow for different behavior for the news section.
Profile Pic
Gas_Buddy
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:29,569
Points:3,576,445
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Apr 23, 2013 7:42:58 PM

"If that isn't enough, maybe add a CAPTCHA* or some variation of it to post to a news item, but not for JFF forum."

If you're going to do that, why not just close the news items from any postings, and the news items just become items to read, and nothing more? If people want to start a discussion thread in a "news item discussion forum", so be it. But, as much as I may disagree with the okay's and the one word posts, I dislike the idea of a CAPTCHA (for each news item post) even more.
Profile Pic
GoGoGoodyear
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:4,298
Points:789,535
Joined:Mar 2010
Message Posted: Apr 23, 2013 6:14:01 PM


After reading what kwzh posted: "...just make it easier to post to JFF than to post to the news thread from the news article." I would expand on my previous idea which was to make it as easy as possible to post in JFF forum by putting links to JFF pretty much everywhere:

+ Add a second step when posting a reply to a news item such that a reminder screen comes up asking something like 'Is your comment appropriate for this forum or would you prefer to post to the Just For Fun forum?' with 3 buttons (1) Post to JFF (2) Post Here (3) Cancel

If that isn't enough, maybe add a CAPTCHA* or some variation of it to post to a news item, but not for JFF forum.

.
* CAPTCHA: A distorted image of letters and numbers displayed on screen which the user must read and type back in correctly. Used primarily to prevent automated attacks upon websites.
Profile Pic
GrumpyCat
Champion Author Alabama

Posts:5,197
Points:1,220,570
Joined:Jun 2009
Message Posted: Apr 23, 2013 11:19:26 AM

The "do you" topics might be best served with a voting survey.

My suggestion to ban "do you" was partially in jest and partially due to a deranged mindset having just come from a forum flooded with "do you". It made sense then.

A year or so ago in another fit of insanity I posted a new thread titled something like "Do you find 'do you' threads ..."
Profile Pic
kwzh
Champion Author San Jose

Posts:23,056
Points:4,220,255
Joined:Jul 2001
Message Posted: Apr 22, 2013 12:17:53 AM

I already stated that the naive approach to "forcing" people to do the right thing won't work -- but GoGoGoodyear has raised a point that I skipped over. The way to get lazy people to do the right thing is to make the right thing be the laziest possible action, i.e., the path of least resistance.

Regarding the other forum pollution problem -- people posting fluff to the news threads (now partially addressed with the "Ignore Short Messages" option) -- I think this could be done; just make it easier to post to JFF than to post to the news thread from the news article. Unfortunately, it's quite possible that the forum-posting code is entangled to the point where it would be extremely difficult to make a special case. (And for the same reason, the OP's suggestion probably couldn't be easily implemented, even if we did think that it could work.)

Is it possible to get people to stop posting new fluff *topics* to non-fluff categories? Perhaps not. If these people are posting for points, there's already a simple way to do that with *existing* topics (in JFF); why create a new one? I assume that, besides the points, they also get an ego boost from having created a topic that other people will respond to.
Profile Pic
GoGoGoodyear
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:4,298
Points:789,535
Joined:Mar 2010
Message Posted: Apr 20, 2013 11:14:56 PM


Maybe GB should make it as easy as possible to post in JFF forum by putting a link to JFF with a reminder at the top of every forum thread and the top of every news article.
Profile Pic
kwzh
Champion Author San Jose

Posts:23,056
Points:4,220,255
Joined:Jul 2001
Message Posted: Apr 20, 2013 5:51:45 AM

Interesting idea. But, let's remember that we can't force anybody to think. In particular, recall that the oft-proposed minimum input length does *not* force anybody to contribute meaningful conversation instead of fluff; nor does it achieve the next-best goal, of stopping the fluffers from posting at all, but rather, it just causes them to switch from short fluff to long fluff.

So, by analogy, what should we expect to happen if "do you" were to become a forbidden phrase? It's pretty clear that we won't get insightful questions in place of the dumb ones. The next best outcome would be that they start posting them in JFF instead, but I think that's too optimistic. My prediction is that they would simply switch to an alternate wording -- perhaps with leading punctuation like ">Do you", or that retard smartphone dialect "Do u". Whatever variants we think of to ban, they'd seek out one that hasn't been covered yet.
Profile Pic
GoGoGoodyear
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:4,298
Points:789,535
Joined:Mar 2010
Message Posted: Apr 20, 2013 2:41:22 AM


"Make posters think before starting a topic."

Good luck with that...
Profile Pic
MARIOWERX
Champion Author Vancouver

Posts:18,434
Points:2,181,115
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Apr 19, 2013 6:48:48 PM

That would change a lot of the opinion polls.
Post a reply Back to Topics