It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionWhat has happened to Fairfox?(218 posts) (218 posts) 
(218 posts) 
Pages:
1
5
7
8
9
10
11
15
This is my favourite topic
Posted September 28, 2018
avatar
FlockeSchnee: Which is exactly the real problem here. Especially as you present this information as something like a "badge of honor". I repeat myself even though I already know that you (and those "others") either won't be able or willing to comprehend it:
GOG has a reputation system. While it's not as thorough as reddit's, or slashdot's, etc, it's there. We should utilize it. Fairfox's reputation was properly updated and reflected: she had a HORRIBLE reputation as not positively contributing to the conversation and environment on the forums, which was entirely deserved. My down voting her disrupting the forums helped others on the forums to recognize that she was not a valuable member of the group, while also contributing to her specifically-down voted* posts being marked as "low rated" in those threads so others didn't have to spend effort to skip them; they were already done for them. Making it easier for actually productive members of the forums to get more out of them.

*: I do have to specify: I didn't down vote every post she made. Only when it was appropriate to do so (which was most of the time). Many were left untouched and skipped by me. I think even a couple that had some semblance of contribution to the discussion were up voted.

EDIT: changed "auto hidden' to "low rated"
Post edited September 28, 2018 by mqstout
Posted September 28, 2018
avatar
mqstout: ...she had a HORRIBLE reputation as not positively contributing to the conversation and environment on the forums, which was entirely deserved. My down voting her disrupting the forums helped others on the forums to recognize that she was not a valuable member of the group, while also contributing to her specifically-down voted* posts being auto-hidden in those threads so others didn't have to spend effort to skip them; they were already done for them. Making it easier for actually productive members of the forums to get more out of them.
I have to admit, I find your attitude pretty disgusting holier-than-though. It's not for you to judge who is "a productive member" here. Also - posts you downvoted are only hidden from yourself, not for other people (unless they are deleted as spam).
Posted September 28, 2018
low rated
avatar
FlockeSchnee: Which is exactly the real problem here. Especially as you present this information as something like a "badge of honor". I repeat myself even though I already know that you (and those "others") either won't be able or willing to comprehend it:
avatar
mqstout: GOG has a reputation system. While it's not as thorough as reddit's, or slashdot's, etc, it's there. We should utilize it. Fairfox's reputation was properly updated and reflected: she had a HORRIBLE reputation as not positively contributing to the conversation and environment on the forums, which was entirely deserved. My down voting her disrupting the forums helped others on the forums to recognize that she was not a valuable member of the group, while also contributing to her specifically-down voted* posts being auto-hidden in those threads so others didn't have to spend effort to skip them; they were already done for them. Making it easier for actually productive members of the forums to get more out of them.

*: I do have to specify: I didn't down vote every post she made. Only when it was appropriate to do so (which was most of the time). Many were left untouched and skipped by me. I think even a couple that had some semblance of contribution to the discussion were up voted.
You've got to be bloody kidding right now...
Posted September 28, 2018
high rated
avatar
mqstout: <snip - Rep system is working>
avatar
InkPanther: You've got to be bloody kidding right now...
A metric that supports your argument is a useful metric. One that opposes your argument is a case for reform of the metrics.
Posted September 28, 2018
avatar
FlockeSchnee: Which is exactly the real problem here. Especially as you present this information as something like a "badge of honor". I repeat myself even though I already know that you (and those "others") either won't be able or willing to comprehend it:
avatar
mqstout: GOG has a reputation system. While it's not as thorough as reddit's, or slashdot's, etc, it's there. We should utilize it. Fairfox's reputation was properly updated and reflected: she had a HORRIBLE reputation as not positively contributing to the conversation and environment on the forums, which was entirely deserved. My down voting her disrupting the forums helped others on the forums to recognize that she was not a valuable member of the group, while also contributing to her specifically-down voted* posts being auto-hidden in those threads so others didn't have to spend effort to skip them; they were already done for them. Making it easier for actually productive members of the forums to get more out of them.

*: I do have to specify: I didn't down vote every post she made. Only when it was appropriate to do so (which was most of the time). Many were left untouched and skipped by me. I think even a couple that had some semblance of contribution to the discussion were up voted.
(I have to differentiate just in case: Of course I'm not talking about insulting posts or some such. They should be reported to a mod.)

Let's recap: 1) There is a button for it, 2) so I have to use it, 3) because other people need to be protected from having to form an opinion all on their own.
So sometimes there is no steering away from the abyss, not because of a missing button, but rather because the abyss can't even be seen.

Of course it is to your credit to at least be so considerate to not simply downvote everything "just cause". That actually gives me hope, even though it is only very little (especially considering this whole "I know what is best for everyone" line of thinking you got going there).

EDIT:
avatar
toxicTom: I have to admit, I find your attitude pretty disgusting holier-than-though. It's not for you to judge who is "a productive member" here. Also - posts you downvoted are only hidden from yourself, not for other people (unless they are deleted as spam).
I don't think that is true. I have to "unhide" posts if I want to form my own opinion and I think (not sure) there were "normal" ones among them.
EDIT2: Just checked. "Normal" (non-insulting and such) posts get hidden too, at least for me. Is "toxicity" an insult? Or am I missing a rule that post nr. 104 in this thread is violating?
Post edited September 28, 2018 by FlockeSchnee
Posted September 28, 2018
high rated
avatar
toxicTom: Also - posts you downvoted are only hidden from yourself, not for other people (unless they are deleted as spam).
Thats why people downvoted her. If we had a block system then they most likely wouldnt of.

Also I'll add that I didn't downvote her at all, but the whole 'I'm going to half it as it reminds me of a friend F you to you all that don't like that.' Did annoy me tbh, as this is a public forum. She wouldn't of gone outside and spoken like that.
Posted September 28, 2018
low rated
avatar
Pond86: She wouldn't of gone outside and spoken like that.
She should of typed carefullier.
Posted September 28, 2018
avatar
richlind33: I can only say that your perspective is delusional. She fed into the toxicity, which you blatantly misattribute -- in a Disneyesque fashion -- exclusively to her detractors.
avatar
toxicTom: Examples? While I didn't agree with many of her views (from the time before Fairfoxish and a hundred "gamies" threads) she never came to my mind when I thought about "toxic" people here on the forums.
I wouldn't characterize her as toxic, but she did contribute to the hostility and vitriol on occasion, the worst example of which would be in the thread about the shooting rampage at the e-sport event a month or so ago.

avatar
richlind33: What's really alarming here is the disdain people have for objectivity. There is black and white, and nothing else, leaving a disconnect so profound that problem solving is nigh impossible, because they are always someone else's fault.
avatar
toxicTom: The problem with objectivity that many people have is that they mistake their subjective opinions and feelings for objective facts. And from this point on a discussion is pretty much pointless (except to maybe convince "third party" readers) because it's religious.
That's only a problem for people who have little or no experience of the world as it really is, where ill-considered assumptions can dramatically shorten your lifespan.

Garbage in = garbage out, as they say.
Post edited September 28, 2018 by richlind33
Posted September 28, 2018
avatar
FlockeSchnee: I don't think that is true. I have to "unhide" post to form my own opinion and I think (not sure) there were "normal" ones among them.
Do you use some userscript like "jerkmuter"? I only use the Essentials and Fundamentals and I see all downvoted posts, unless I downvoted them myself.
Posted September 28, 2018
avatar
toxicTom: It's not for you to judge who is "a productive member" here.
No, but it takes a lot of people clicking the minus to get posts marked as low rated. It wasn't just me; it was a lot of people. And, with the way the reputation went, consistently over a long period of time. It's a juried process.

Anyway, I'm going to grace out of this; it's resembling too much a personal, detailed, discussion of Fairfox herself (which I am sorry I contributed the broad topic) to going there with some are speaking of details and digging up old posts. But I will continue to + a post when it contributes well to a discussion, and - when a post isn't benefiting the discussion.
Post edited September 28, 2018 by mqstout
Posted September 28, 2018
avatar
richlind33: I wouldn't characterize her as toxic, but she did contribute to the hostility and vitriol on occasion, the worst example of which would be in the thread about the shooting rampage at the e-sport event a month or so ago.
avatar
richlind33: That's only a problem for people who have little or no experience of the world as it really is, where ill-considered assumptions can dramatically shorten your lifespan.

Garbage in = garbage out, as they say.
No, it's a really widespread problem nowadays, when so many people are just used to be confirmed in their opinions by their social network echo chambers that they accept them as fact - while they're still opinions. And that's something that is not special to any one group or spectrum of groups. Be it left or right (whatever that means nowadays...), feminist or MGTOW, law and order or anarchist.
People kind of unlearned to actually discuss - it's some kind of anti-enlightenment. Instead of listening and putting their own convictions to the test every day they simply "choose to believe" and their belief is rock-hard.

Actually the people who are still open enough and listening to all sides are forming their opinion are often children. And I'm very glad that my kids are like that and question everything - even me in my conviction. And if I don't have a good explanation for something they point it out to me (although they will still accept my point of view since they trust me of course).
Posted September 28, 2018
avatar
FlockeSchnee: I don't think that is true. I have to "unhide" post to form my own opinion and I think (not sure) there were "normal" ones among them.
avatar
toxicTom: Do you use some userscript like "jerkmuter"? I only use the Essentials and Fundamentals and I see all downvoted posts, unless I downvoted them myself.
No. No "extra" scripts in any way. So you can see them without "unhiding"? Weird.
EDIT: Unless I don't have to install them myself (e.g. they activate on registration and I have to specifically turn them off), but as far as I know, that shouldn't be the case.

avatar
toxicTom: It's not for you to judge who is "a productive member" here.
avatar
mqstout: No, but it takes a lot of people clicking the minus to get posts marked as low rated. It wasn't just me; it was a lot of people. And, with the way the reputation went, consistently over a long period of time. It's a juried process.
"Everyone"/"All"/"The majority"/whatever is not a reason. It's a smokescreen to try and not have to take responsibility for ones own actions (even if it is just in ones own eyes).
Post edited September 28, 2018 by FlockeSchnee
Posted September 28, 2018
high rated
avatar
FlockeSchnee: "Everyone"/"All"/"The majority"/whatever is not a reason. It's a smokescreen to try and not have to take responsibility for ones own actions.
And Fairfox must take responsibility for her own actions of consistently slamming on the keyboard randomly and clicking post.
Posted September 28, 2018
low rated
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6GYiGN5Cbo
Posted September 28, 2018
avatar
FlockeSchnee: "Everyone"/"All"/"The majority"/whatever is not a reason. It's a smokescreen to try and not have to take responsibility for ones own actions.
avatar
mqstout: And Fairfox must take responsibility for her own actions of consistently slamming on the keyboard randomly and clicking post.
Yeah, but don't you think some good old-fashioned ignoring would have been a perfectly measured response?
Pages:
1
5
7
8
9
10
11
15
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionWhat has happened to Fairfox?(218 posts) (218 posts) 
(218 posts)