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"

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).

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.

(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:
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?

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.

She should of typed carefullier.

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.

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.

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, 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.

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).

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.

"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).

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?