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 discussionspam and the infowars thread (251 posts)(251 posts)
(251 posts)
Pages:
1
5
10
13
14
15
16
17
This is my favourite topic
Posted December 11, 2016
It's amazing how many people make the mistake of calling anything they disagree with "slander". You should learn what that term means and entails... As far as I can tell, that OP posts once or twice a day. He is not constantly bumping his own thread and I don't see how you can blame him for the trolls bumping it. But hey, make all of yourselves feel better by constantly downvoting him everywhere because that makes this forum such a friendly place...

Too many people on this forum want to remove others or remove threads just because they disagree with them and make up hyperbolic excuses like calling it "slanderous", "hate speech" or implying through a tenuous chain of events how it leads to such. Of course if you make that the norm let's remove every thread or person that anyone disagrees with...in other words, kick everyone out and close the forum.

I personally found the handful of links I opened to be poorly sourced and filled with unsubstantiated opinion, but I find a lot of articles like that even in so-called mainstream media. As such I see the thread, I ignore it. I don't see it hurting anyone and I don't see how someone stumbling on that thread and clicking on one of the links is going to turn them into some sort of an extremist. That is just being used as a poor excuse to close the thread by a number of busy-bodies.
Posted December 11, 2016
avatar
Breja: No one is forcing me to open spam e-mails, and yet they are still spam, even if I don't open them.
avatar
ZFR: But this analogy is wrong. He's not PMing me, thus forcing me to delete his unwanted messages. He's posting it in a public "General Discussion" forum.
Note the word "discussion". It's a public forum for discussing things. Meanwhile he is using it as his personal blog and ignores any attempts at discussion.

avatar
ZFR: Now this analogy is good. And my answer to that is: it depends. If a new user who's never been here before comes here just to advertise his bamwar site, then it's definitely spam, even if he keeps it in one thread. If on the other hand, a long term member, who makes good valuable contributions otherwise, wants to share his new business he just started (a game he's working on, a lets-play video channel, a flower shop, or a dating service), then I'd be ok if he keeps it in one thread and bumps it from time to time. If I disagree with his what he's doing, or simply I'm not interested, I just skip. If it's something illegal, I'd report it for content violation, but not for spamming.
I guess it all comes down to some of us not being ok with someone spreading lies and slander, and not being content with just going "oh, well, he might be spreading hate, fear and misinformation, but he did make a good point in Hunie Pop thread the other day, so it's ok".
Post edited December 11, 2016 by Breja
Posted December 11, 2016
low rated
avatar
ZFR: But this analogy is wrong. He's not PMing me, thus forcing me to delete his unwanted messages. He's posting it in a public "General Discussion" forum.
avatar
Breja: Note the word "discussion". It's a public forum for discussing things. Meanwhile he is using it as his personal blog and ignores any attempts at discussion.

avatar
ZFR: Now this analogy is good. And my answer to that is: it depends. If a new user who's never been here before comes here just to advertise his bamwar site, then it's definitely spam, even if he keeps it in one thread. If on the other hand, a long term member, who makes good valuable contributions otherwise, wants to share his new business he just started (a game he's working on, a lets-play video channel, a flower shop, or a dating service), then I'd be ok if he keeps it in one thread and bumps it from time to time. If I disagree with his what he's doing, or simply I'm not interested, I just skip. If it's something illegal, I'd report it for content violation, but not for spamming.
avatar
Breja: I guess it all comes down to some of us not being ok with someone spreading lies and slander, and not being content with just going "oh, well, he might be spreading hate, fear and misinformation, but he did make a good point in Hunie Pop thread the other day, so it's ok".
Does it keep you up at night? lol
Posted December 11, 2016
avatar
lazydog: It is moral, religious and political opinions, many of which are extreme and unsubstantiated, force fed on this community.
avatar
ZFR: I'm not going to argue that his opinions are extreme, unsubstantiated and all the rest. I'm also not arguing that they're just copy/pasted off some site. But "force fed"? By creating one thread that most people don't read and most who read end up laughing at?
Personally I don't feel fed by him, forcefully or otherwise, but if one thread is all that takes to force feed you, then seriously consider staying off the internet.

Just to be clear, if you think the content of his post is against GOG rules, then please report him. But then it's for the content (I don't mind either way, but it could become a slippery slope) and not for "spamming" or force-feeding. He is no more forcing you to visit Infowars than mrkgnao is forcing you to use Magog or JMich forcing you to read GOG's game acquisition statistics.
Thanks for the thoughtful response, ZFR.

I appreciate you are not prepared to argue on any of rtcvb's posts and respect that decision.

The creation of the "one" thread however that you refer to is a point of principal. It could easily spiral to many. The term force fed my be strong, but nevertheless the thread is being bumped regularly with zero control on accuracy. When shall it amount to two or three threads? And with respect I seriously disagree with your solution that if I can't deal with it, then I stay off the internet, quite frankly that is a prehistoric argument.

Back to the thread in question. I have in the past reported rtcvb's posts in the infowars thread as spam. And that is absolutely because of the content. I amongst others have pointed this out before- rtcvb is not interested in discussion. I have also reported this to GOG, personally, and currently await a response.

The bottom line for me is this and I always argued from content not individuality.

rtcvb insists on bumping this thread with unsubstantiated hyperlinks. He is rabid in this respect.

I will not tolerate, nor should anyone else tolerate, being subjected to continuous updates posted under the guise of "news" from some sort of random poster (rtcvb) claiming it to be truthful news and to boot "updated" on a regular basis, with absolutely no discussion other than links. In light of some of the "news" being posted, seriously do you think it appropriate?

It is simply not true, rtcvb is simply not an accurate source of news nor ever will be. He does more damage than good.
Posted December 11, 2016
low rated
avatar
lazydog: It is simply not true, rtcvb is simply not an accurate source of news nor ever will be. He does more damage than good.
Anyone who assumes that *any* source is necessarily accurate is an idiot.
Posted December 11, 2016
avatar
lazydog: It is simply not true, rtcvb is simply not an accurate source of news nor ever will be. He does more damage than good.
avatar
richlind33: Anyone who assumes that *any* source is necessarily accurate is an idiot.
wtf is necessarily accurate when its at home?
Posted December 11, 2016
low rated
avatar
richlind33: Anyone who assumes that *any* source is necessarily accurate is an idiot.
avatar
lazydog: wtf is necessarily accurate when its at home?
WTF is necessarily accurate *anywhere*?
Posted December 11, 2016
low rated
avatar
lazydog: I will not tolerate, nor should anyone else tolerate, being subjected to continuous updates posted under the guise of "news" from some sort of random poster (rtcvb) claiming it to be truthful news and to boot "updated" on a regular basis, with absolutely no discussion other than links. In light of some of the "news" being posted, seriously do you think it appropriate?

It is simply not true, rtcvb is simply not an accurate source of news nor ever will be. He does more damage than good.
So if a guy is standing in a public square with a sign saying that the Moon landing was faked, you'd imprison him or force him to leave or make him take down his sign?

How are you able to tolerate churches?

And could you please point to a specific instance of rtcvb doing damage? I want to hear from a person who read rtcvb's thread, believed what he read and acted upon that belief, which resulted in causing harm to himself or others.

As to your slippery slope fallacy, it's just that — a fallacy. How do we know that if allowed one thread rtcvb wont post two, then three, then ten? We don't. We also don't know that if allowed to silence him, you won't then also murder him and the rest of us.
Post edited December 11, 2016 by Alaric.us
Posted December 11, 2016
avatar
USERNAME:lazydog#Q&_^Q&Q#GROUP:4#Q&_^Q&Q#LINK:229#Q&_^Q&Q#I will not tolerate, nor should anyone else tolerate, being subjected to continuous updates posted under the guise of "news" from some sort of random poster (rtcvb) claiming it to be truthful news and to boot "updated" on a regular basis, with absolutely no discussion other than links. In light of some of the "news" being posted, seriously do you think it appropriate?

It is simply not true, rtcvb is simply not an accurate source of news nor ever will be. He does more damage than good.#Q&_^Q&Q#LINK:229#Q&_^Q&Q#
avatar
I don't want to get into the middle of this but without a permit......yes.

If I go stand in the town square with a sign that says "I don't like avocados" and I do it without a permit, I am forced to leave and or go to jail and pay a hefty fine.

Nice to know a pretentious braniac like yourself is so up on the law. :P

Of course, you have me on JerkMter which means you can't see this post but then, ignoring fact in order to support your own bloated ego and twisted view of reality has always been something you have excelled at. XD
Post edited December 11, 2016 by tinyE
Posted December 11, 2016
avatar
tinyE: I do it without a permit, I am forced to leave and or go to jail and pay a hefty fine.
In this case, RT has a permit.

The mods and owner of this site allows the thread, there's your permit right there.
Posted December 11, 2016
low rated
avatar
If no one buys those boner pills from their email, then it's not spam?

It's simple. His thread isn't meant for discussion, he doesn't put forth ideas in it, it's just a link dump. A link dump to advertise his favorite show no less. One that he bumps twice a day. It's spam.
Posted December 11, 2016
low rated
avatar
USERNAME:lazydog#Q&_^Q&Q#GROUP:4#Q&_^Q&Q#LINK:229#Q&_^Q&Q#I will not tolerate, nor should anyone else tolerate, being subjected to continuous updates posted under the guise of "news" from some sort of random poster (rtcvb) claiming it to be truthful news and to boot "updated" on a regular basis, with absolutely no discussion other than links. In light of some of the "news" being posted, seriously do you think it appropriate?

It is simply not true, rtcvb is simply not an accurate source of news nor ever will be. He does more damage than good.#Q&_^Q&Q#LINK:229#Q&_^Q&Q#
avatar
Not going to entertain you on analogy. Especially that one.

My opinion on churches? Non of your business.

Specific instance of rtcvb doing damage? Hmmn. Might be a bit subjective here. Fuck it :http://www.infowars.com/

Slippery slope? Don't believe that was my quote, regardless murdering everyone else certainly wasn't.
Posted December 11, 2016
avatar
avatar
lazydog: Not going to entertain you on analogy. Especially that one.

My opinion on churches? Non of your business.

Specific instance of rtcvb doing damage? Hmmn. Might be a bit subjective here. Fuck it :http://www.infowars.com/

Slippery slope? Don't believe that was my quote, regardless murdering everyone else certainly wasn't.
Sorry, you don't get to pick and choose which crazy ideas are ok to voice and which aren't. If it's fine to have an organization with buildings, billboards, tv stations, etc, that believes and promotes a belief in god, then so it it equally fine to run a site like infowars. I don't see the value in either so I don't go to church and don't browse the site. And nobody is forcing me.

As to slippery slope, here is your quote, "It could easily spiral to many. The term force fed my be strong, but nevertheless the thread is being bumped regularly with zero control on accuracy. When shall it amount to two or three threads?" This is called a slippery slope argument. you can read about it here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope
Posted December 11, 2016
low rated
avatar
USERNAME:lazydog#Q&_^Q&Q#GROUP:4#Q&_^Q&Q#LINK:237#Q&_^Q&Q#Not going to entertain you on analogy. Especially that one.

My opinion on churches? Non of your business.

Specific instance of rtcvb doing damage? Hmmn. Might be a bit subjective here. Fuck it :http://www.infowars.com/

Slippery slope? Don't believe that was my quote, regardless murdering everyone else certainly wasn't.#Q&_^Q&Q#LINK:237#Q&_^Q&Q#
avatar
I tell you what Al, you're right I wont argue with you.

Just looking for a little action on the OP.

Edit:spelling
Post edited December 11, 2016 by lazydog
Posted December 11, 2016
As much as I never thought I'd find myself saying this...Kleetus has the best point.
avatar
Kleetus: The mods and owner of this site allows the thread, there's your permit right there.
That's it. That's the whole issue. Everything else is a moot point.
We'll always have endless trolls and morons and scammers and flamewars and rep wars and spam wars and spam-deletion wars. We've had them from the beginning, and it's only gotten worse, and it'll only ever GET worse. Nothing's ever going to change and anything that isn't a news page will become the equivalent of a 4chan topic.
The only thing that could possibly ever stop it is moderation, even the lightest of moderation. But we haven't had that for 8 years and by this point, we probably never will. People like Kleetus can troll to their hearts' desire. Bradley can post all the porn and piracy he wants. rctvb32 can spam the forum all day and night. Tauto is free to stalk and annoy whoever he likes. ciomalau can make rape threats to every vaguely-female-seeming person on the website.
Then we can take that a step further and look at what our resident tech wizards have done. Adaliabooks, Barefoot_Monkey, and many others have shown how easily exploitable this website is. Just some hobby-level coding (I mean this not as an insult, but more pointing out that these two did it as a fun project rather than getting paid for it) and suddenly the place is altered greatly if the script is downloaded.
But if things can be altered for one person, doesn't that mean it can be altered for everybody? toxicTom and Alaric have proven that. Anybody with a decent head on their shoulders and a fair amount of coding knowledge can completely alter the place. And anything that can be altered can be wrecked. What's to prevent somebody from making an auto-deletion script? A script preventing users from posting? A script which blocks posts with certain words in them?
All of these arguments about free speech, spam, trolls, and what is and isn't acceptable are worthless. We can prattle on about them all we want, but nothing will ever change unless GOG finally steps in for once. This is what the lurkers and people who left long ago realized, and this is exactly why they stopped being active, because they decided that such a small and wreckable website wasn't worth it.
Don't get me wrong, the people in here, the actual, true community are some of the nicest people I've ever met in my life. But sadly, we're all on a place that is being increasingly exploited as more and more people come and realize what can be done with it.
Pages:
1
5
10
13
14
15
16
17
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionspam and the infowars thread (251 posts)(251 posts)
(251 posts)