"Spam"

[Dashell]

So... threads can be spam if they've been around for a while?

 

[CK]

what the topic is titled spam and she was making a suggestion as to how the problem could be solved. how is that not on topic?

 

[Munatik]

Tbh, the biggest problems I had with the Omegle thread was that A) the discussion--as meager as it was--wasn't very intelligent, and B) it was merely a showcase for how well members of TLS could troll random people. In that sense, perhaps it was as much of a troll thread than a spam thread, and we're mixing our definitions since they occassionally do bleed into one another.

Regardless of that confusion, would leaving a thread like that open reflect well on the site and the community? I don't think so, and therefore I agree with its closing. Quexinos even indicated in the opening post that she probably didn't expect it to stay open long, and I felt the same way. We had our fun, and so now if people want to swap lulzy Omegle convos they can easily find some other means.

But let's reexamine this definition:

*Spamming - Posting without contributing anything intelligent or relevant to the discussion at hand, or just posting to be annoying. Table-breaking, long strings of nonsense, and gratuitous use of enormous, multiple, or offensive images are examples. Obnoxiously long repetitions of characters and soliciting also falls into this category.

Do we need to also state that threads that start off without promoting intelligent discussion are prohibited as well? Now that I think about it, that seems kind of obvious, but perhaps we need to put that in. And maybe say, "With a few exceptions" to include stuff like the Listening thread? Hell I dunno.

 

[Channy]

It being funny is subjective, first of all, and I'm pointing to the fact that there's no discussion value in regards to its existence. That's where the rules clarify and speak towards. Not about it being funny or a funny post should be counted as spam.

So if its obvious, why are you comparing the "Listening" thread, to this one? It's not anywhere close, and it's not going to be allowed because its not a special circumstance like the "What are You Listening to" thread is..

How is it not close? What possible discussion value does the listening thread hold? It's been stated that for it to hold meaning, people should recommend songs or rate them, but nobody ever does anymore. It's one giant poastkunt whore thread that serves no more meaning than quoting funny posts from a conversation you have with a stranger.

And why does Listening thread hold value just because it's the 73rd thread made on the forum? Do we give it a trophy for being noticed and long lasting and send it on its way? Because it doesn't value-ize itself anymore by just.. being around a long time.

 

[Ⓐaron]

It being funny is subjective, first of all, and I'm pointing to the fact that there's no discussion value in regards to its existence. That's where the rules clarify and speak towards. Not about it being funny or a funny post should be counted as spam.

I already pointed out several ways a thread on Omegle could have discussion value. And you're just saying a thread based on funny quotes has no discussion value abritrarily. I could say a thread about pictures of your car or hell, pictures of yourself has no discussion value either, after all, it's just posting pictures, what else is there to say? "No discussion value" is a pretty goddamn arbitrary judgement, and obviously, you haven't convinced anyone off the staff that a thread for posting funny quotes has no discussion value.

So if its obvious, why are you comparing the "Listening" thread, to this one? It's not anywhere close, and it's not going to be allowed because its not a special circumstance like the "What are You Listening to" thread is.

Because "It's been here since the beginning of the board" isn't a valid reason to leave a thread open. To be honest, I've never thought that, under TLS's rules, that thread deserved to remain open in its current form. I've always held the position that it should be like ACF's listening thread was, where you had to post either a detailed description or a detailed reaction to the song you were listening to beyond "I think burzum is a pretty cool guy, eh kills euronymous and doesnt afraid of anything." As it stands right now, it's possible to have a discussion on people's current listening, but it's not nearly as likely as it should be.

 

[Max Payne]

This just sounds like the same BS brought up over and over again because things aren't the way a few people want, and now everything is a goddamn hassle.

What's ironic is I don't think staff even made a big deal about spam until people from acf/fcf came here and started bawwing about not having a spam section and making entire threads that started with one word or just saying "give me spam" and now everything is giant text after giant text. Even fucking Alex, who's probably the biggest dick here(no offense bub) next to me didn't make a big deal out of not having a spam section back then.

I can't say I have anything constructive left to say, because this is just BS made from a goddamn molehill into a fucking planet. Seriously, it's not that big a fucking deal, there's no goddamn hordes of members crying about this shit, and people aren't losing sleep over it save for staff members who are idiots like me.

This is why I wanted to quit, I'm not helping here and this shit is just pissing me off, and raising my blood pressure so I won't be able to sleep for the next 5 hours.

 

[Sheva Alomar]

It being funny is subjective, first of all, and I'm pointing to the fact that there's no discussion value in regards to its existence. That's where the rules clarify and speak towards. Not about it being funny or a funny post should be counted as spam.

So if its obvious, why are you comparing the "Listening" thread, to this one? It's not anywhere close, and it's not going to be allowed because its not a special circumstance like the "What are You Listening to" thread is.

@Integra

They were answered that way because it was discussed to death. I explained that to you but apparently you missed that.

http://thelifestream.net/forums/showpost.php?p=111090&postcount=22

If you look around and see the past discussion for it, you'll see for yourself. A spam section isn't even the topic of this thread, and I cba to copy-paste every post that was made on the issue. Now stay on topic please.

Stop asking me to stay on topic when what I suggested is completely relevant. Even though spam is permitted quite a lot, I'm sure there are still some people who would like a complete release from having to post in threads that require you at least stay vaguely on topic. A spam section would be such a release. A number of people on this thread would like to have such a section but you seem to be too uptight to even consider it. And no, I'm not saying that just to flame you, I've noticed your behavior from a number of threads over the short time I've been here and it's been constant. Maybe if you at least gave a small spam section a trial run, we could all see how well or terrible it would work out. Take a vote. SOMETHING to let people be heard and truly decide if we should have something of a spam section. Afterall, it's ultimately up to the members of a forum.

 

[Channy]

Just for the record, I'm not asking for Spam.

I just think there should be more consistency in regards to moderating what's spam and what isn't, and just because a thread has been around since the dawn of the forum doesn't exactly veto it from being spam.

 

[Dashell]

What if it's not really a spam section but... but just like a section where people have topics like "Post what you're listening to" and "post funny IM convos" but it's mod queued and every time someone makes a topic a mod has to approve it?

 

[Makoeyes987]

So are you saying we should close all those threads? No.

The point of them being open is because we can be lenient and tolerant of some spam, but the fact is, we don't allow all spam to exist and its up to our moderator discretion and rule enforcement to close what is clearly spam and serves no discussion value.

This isn't a thread to discuss having a spam section. As X pointed out in this post

http://thelifestream.net/forums/showthread.php?p=63037#post63037

The issue has been discussed and its done. Move on from it, please.

 

[Alex]

A) the discussion--as meager as it was--wasn't very intelligent,

It was still infinitely more intelligent than that LTTroll crap

 

[CK]

Stop asking me to stay on topic when what I suggested is completely relevant. Even though spam is permitted quite a lot, I'm sure there are still some people who would like a complete release from having to post in threads that require you at least stay vaguely on topic. A spam section would be such a release. A number of people on this thread would like to have such a section but you seem to be too uptight to even consider it. And no, I'm not saying that just to flame you, I've noticed your behavior from a number of threads over the short time I've been here and it's been constant. Maybe if you at least gave a small spam section a trial run, we could all see how well or terrible it would work out. Take a vote. SOMETHING to let people be heard and truly decide if we should have something of a spam section. Afterall, it's ultimately up to the members of a forum.

They've been through this. Too many think it'll cause omgz drama. When the fact is not having one at all is causing more. Btw I don't care if there's a spam section either but its pretty fucking obvious its causing more harm not even considering it.

 

[Ⓐaron]

There already was a thread asking for member opinions on a spam section and a lot of people didn't want it due to being afraid it would turn into ACF's spam section. But at the same time I think not giving it a trial run just because people are afraid of the past is kind of silly, but I'm also huegely outnumbered, and I don't really care about a spam section anyway, I just think staff need to be moar lenient about what is considered spam. "Funny IM quotes" is a staple of most boards I've been to, maybe it shouldn't be just contained to Omegle quotes but it should still be allowed imo.

 

[Dashell]

It was still infinitely more intelligent than that LTTroll crap

Did you see that topic where they said Aerith looked like someone from FFXII? Isn't that retarded?... no really WTF was that?

There already was a thread asking for member opinions on a spam section and a lot of people didn't want it due to being afraid it would turn into ACF's spam section. But at the same time I think not giving it a trial run just because people are afraid of the past is kind of silly.

I think my suggestion could work, *shrugs*

 

[Alex]

People just need to stop taking things that really dont matter to the forum so seriously, its ghey and unnecessary and makes more drama than its worth. In the end it's not like Mako closed the Chit Chat thread, where we're allowed to go spam and shit.

But at the same time I think not giving it a trial run just because people are afraid of the past is kind of silly.

But yeah, whilst I never really cared about a spam section either way, I have to admit that this is really daft attitude.

 

[Joker]

Personally, I could care less about spam section. It would be nice, but I'm not gonna stop posting or anything if there's not one. But I do agree with ausjew - it's rather ironic that the lack of a spam section is what's causing drama.

I just think there should be more consistency in regards to moderating what's spam and what isn't, and just because a thread has been around since the dawn of the forum doesn't exactly veto it from being spam.

I'm quoting this in agreement, and on more than just the one level. Tbh, I'd like more consistancy PERIOD. I find it completely asinine that Mako/whoever can jump into Chit Chat or wherever and have a bitchfit because people are posting spoilers about something or what have you (Bex was tempbanned for HP spoilers or somesuch, I think?), whereas BLATANT unmarked spoilers are posted in other threads that came AFTERWARD, and nobody says a fucking thing. Examples include the three pages of non-tagged spoils on Bleach, the bitchfight we got into with Dacon over DMC, etc.

Just pick a position and stick with it, ffs.

 

[Max Payne]

I never gave a shit about spoilers. It was Aaron who thought it was a big ass deal.

 

[Ⓐaron]

Yeah to be fair I never saw those Bleach spoilers, otherwise I probably would've reported them, since I do kind of want to watch that at some point.

 

[Makoeyes987]

It's causing drama because apparently people are not keeping to the rule and discussion thread we made about it being dropped and no longer being brought up again. If this turns into another discussion for a spam section, I'm just going to link back to X-SOLDIER's original post and close this thread. It's been discussed already and I don't understand why this is being dregged up again when this is the same song and dance as before. It's people complaining about not getting what they want.

And its in the rules, and not ever moderator can be expected to see every single post that exists on this forum. That's ridiculous. If there are unmarked spoilers or something and you don't like it. Report it. The spoilers in chit chat were only seen because they were reported.

 

[Dashell]

I find it completely asinine that Mako/whoever can jump into Chit Chat or wherever and have a bitchfit because people are posting spoilers about something or what have you (Bex was tempbanned for HP spoilers or somesuch, I think?), whereas BLATANT unmarked spoilers are posted in other threads that came AFTERWARD, and nobody says a fucking thing.

I find it funny that Mako never did this
And again, that's not the mods being inconsistent that's them not being everywhere at once. It happens on a big forum. We probably should be reporting posts that are problematic.

And Mako beat me to it

 

[Joker]

I never gave a shit about spoilers. It was Aaron who thought it was a big ass deal.

I don't really care much about them either. Someone saying something like "Aerith dies", for example. It doesn't tell me how, why, who does it, etc. Just "she dies". Big deal.

But I made a mention of the Bleach ones in a post. I'll go find it for an example and edit it. I'm just looking through the thread and WTF MASSIVE SPOILERS are all over the place, with Mako posting like nothing's wrong with that, and I'm just kinda sitting there like "wtf?"

 

[Max Payne]

Tbh the DMC shit was my fault, since I really didn't give a damn at the time.

No one gave a damn either until I think it was A said something about spoilers, but admitted she just wanted everyone to shut up about the shit.

 

[Channy]

Mako I don't think anybody's really asking for a Spam section, just more consistency in regards to marking/modding/treating what is spam and what isn't

 

[Sheva Alomar]

Channy, I was asking for a spam section. Solved via new thread, though.

 

[Joker]

And its in the rules, and not ever moderator can be expected to see every single post that exists on this forum. That's ridiculous. If there are unmarked spoilers or something and you don't like it. Report it. The spoilers in chit chat were only seen because they were reported.

Bullshit, Mako.

So I'm guessing you're posting in your sleep or something, and that's how you didn't see it? Including your own posts.

Like I said, I don't care about spam section or spoilers - just be more consistent with enforcement, whether it's lax or harsh.


Ed:

Tbh the DMC shit was my fault, since I really didn't give a damn at the time.

No one gave a damn either until I think it was A said something about spoilers, but admitted she just wanted everyone to shut up about the shit.

Exactly my point. She said she didn't even care about DMC, which is fine, just wanted us to shut up. Perfectly understandable. But all that shit happened knowing the rules on spoilers, and nothing happened to any of the four-five of us doing it =/