Your comments here, or on the vote itself, regarding posting issues would be appreciated. I'd enjoy the opportunity to discuss this issue openly and in civil manner so please refrain from posting derogatory remarks.
Re:New item to vote on in regard to posting on the CoV BBS
« Reply #1 on: 2004-09-13 17:52:32 »
This link - http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=60;action=display;threadid=30863;start=0 is just one of many links on the BBS that highlights the problem that is currently at hand. This is not redeemable behavior; this is behavior that does not uphold the Virion virtues. If I am mistaken please show me the error of my ways. In the meanwhile, I maintain that this behavior is detrimental to the CoV regardless of the individual poster.
I invite you all to discuss methods of resolving the spamming of this list with copied articles.
Re:New item to vote on in regard to posting on the CoV BBS
« Reply #3 on: 2004-09-13 22:30:13 »
Zach,
Meridion is one tool of the CoV. It's purpose is to assign a reputation score based on the input of our fellow Virions. Our reputations are determined by several factors; how we uphold the Virion virtues and strive not to commit Virion sins, specifically, and as a result our overall behavior, in general.
From what I understand all list members of the CoV can post to the BBS without even having registered to Meridion. They are assigned a neutral score of "5" from the possible scores beginning with 0 and ending at 10. However, those members whose reputation falls below the threshold of 4 can not post to the email list - this much has been established in a previous poll.
I maintain that individuals who do not contribute through rational discourse, but would rather spam the BBS with copied articles are not adhering to the employment of rational discourse as is described from the Church of Virus "About" webpage - http://virus.lucifer.com/about.html. Furthermore, Joe Dees (along with a few other individuals in the past) has on countless occasions spammed the list with one copied article after another without providing discussion, nor reasoning to the topic at hand. He has continued to do so even after the BBS owner asked that he not, see:
Scan down to read the list moderator's (Lucifer) request to Joe asking him to refrain from flooding the BBS, then look at the next 2 responses from Joe Dees.
I'd rather that those of us who do participate on the CoV BBS do so without this type of belligerence, so I created this poll to determine what, if any, level of reputation would be a sufficient score in order to post on the BBS.
Also, I appreciate your question and hope this topic will create discussion in regards to creating a BBS that is free of spamming, flooding, and other types of behavior that has at times plagued the CoV BBS. I look forward to reading those responses that might have other questions and alternatives that can be addressed.
RE: virus: New item to vote on in regard to posting on the CoV BBS
« Reply #4 on: 2004-09-14 17:58:23 »
> [Original Message] > From: Z Moser <roachgod69@hotmail.com> > To: <virus@lucifer.com> > Date: 09/13/2004 4:27:03 PM > Subject: RE: virus: New item to vote on in regard to posting on the CoV BBS > > Casey: > > <<<What should be the minimum reputation required to post to the Church of > Virus BBS?>>> > > Zach: > > What exactly is the purpose of having a minimum reputation to post?
To keep disruptive people from dominating your forums and destroying your purpose. Its the same as in real life.
-Jake
> > I can't put my finger on it exactly, but something seems off about doint > that. > > comments anyone? > > zach > > _________________________________________________________________ > Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! > hthttp://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ > > --- > To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
<<<To keep disruptive people from dominating your forums and destroying your purpose. Its the same as in real life.>>>
Zach:
How is one supposed to tell the difference between disruptive & unpopular/unconventional.
It seems to me the best way to deal with those who's sole purpose is to disrupt is to ignore, by doing this the purpose of disruption is nullified, and if they had no other purpose, they will become bored and move on. It is the same way I deal with bullies.
Putting in a place a formal system that excludes certain people on the basis of what other people within that system think seems risk becoming dogmatic & halting healthy dissention.
RE: virus: New item to vote on in regard to posting on the CoV BBS
« Reply #6 on: 2004-09-15 04:23:45 »
> [Original Message] > From: Z Moser <roachgod69@hotmail.com> > To: <virus@lucifer.com> > Date: 09/14/2004 2:55:19 PM > Subject: RE: virus: New item to vote on in regard to posting on the CoV BBS > > Jake: > > <<<To keep disruptive people from dominating your forums and destroying your > purpose. Its the same as in real life.>>> > > Zach: > > How is one supposed to tell the difference between disruptive & > unpopular/unconventional. > > It seems to me the best way to deal with those who's sole purpose is to > disrupt is to ignore, by doing this the purpose of disruption is nullified, > and if they had no other purpose, they will become bored and move on. It is > the same way I deal with bullies.
It seems many people are infected with this lazy-fair meme. I suppose it sounds nice to the ear. Just ignore them and they will move on. More likely I think it usually stands as a justification for apathy. In some or perhaps even many cases this does the trick. Frequently a bully just doesn't have the energy to invest at the moment. However when they persist the problem with just ignoring them is that bullies will generally interpret your silence as consent, and so you are in effect giving them the green light. Joe Dees for example clearly holds this position. In fact he has stated it publicly that he believes that silence=agreement which he uses as a justification for himself flooding mailboxes and bbs discussions with voluminous cut and pastes that nobody wants to read. This is the ethic of a bully. If we identify and remove it, then perhaps something constructive can happen. Ignore it and hope the bullies go away, in time we find ourselves dealing with nothing but bullies and nothing gets accomplished.
> > Putting in a place a formal system that excludes certain people on the basis > of what other people within that system think seems risk becoming dogmatic & > halting healthy dissention.
The problem isn't dissention. The problem is behavior. Even when Joe has agreed with us, (for example the case of Arron Agassi) his behavior was extremely disruptive and exacerbated the problem far beyond everyone else's patience. Joe of course is simply the local example, but the phenomenon is universal. Whether they agree with you or not, bullies are all about halting healthy dissention. Sticking your head in the sand is never a long term solution.
RE: virus: New item to vote on in regard to posting on the CoV BBS
« Reply #7 on: 2004-09-15 03:10:58 »
Z Moser Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 11:36 PM
How is one supposed to tell the difference between disruptive & unpopular/unconventional.
It seems to me the best way to deal with those who's sole purpose is to disrupt is to ignore, by doing this the purpose of disruption is nullified, and if they had no other purpose, they will become bored and move on. It is the same way I deal with bullies.
Putting in a place a formal system that excludes certain people on the basis of what other people within that system think seems risk becoming dogmatic & halting healthy dissention.
[Blunderov] In principle I share your reservations but experience has shown that some mechanism is necessary to prevent the list or BBS being in effect hijacked by flooding with cut-and-paste postings. Filibustering is not conducive to rational discourse.
This forum must be one of the most tolerant of dissent and eccentricity that exists on the web. But the sine qua non is 'rational discourse'; those who subvert this principle must be subject to some form of control otherwise the purpose of the forum will be negated.
Yes, Jake the Deaniac, silence DOES indicate assent - which is why you, and Casey, and Mermaid, are trying to silence everyone who disagrees with you. Do you see Bill Roh around here any more? What about Jonathan Davis? I guess they finally decided that the stench of the continuing torrent of your hateful and irrational bullshit was too offensive to their cognitive nostrils for them to further linger. It does not matter to you whether or not you are right on the issues - just that you win, like the silverback-wannabe that you are and will perpetually be. And to achieve such a goal, you will use any means at your command - licit or il-, to drive all other competitors away and establish a harem of compliance. You, however, cannot even be a big fish in this small pond, because anyone online can check the facts and see how much of a tinfoil-hatted space cadet you really are. And in the larger, non-insular world that exists, despite your fondest wishes, outside this list, your bizarre and nonsensical causes will crumble and fall - mark my words come this November.
RE: virus: New item to vote on in regard to posting on the CoV BBS
« Reply #9 on: 2004-09-15 03:30:58 »
Z Moser Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 11:36 PM
How is one supposed to tell the difference between disruptive & unpopular/unconventional.
It seems to me the best way to deal with those who's sole purpose is to disrupt is to ignore, by doing this the purpose of disruption is nullified, and if they had no other purpose, they will become bored and move on. It is the same way I deal with bullies.
Putting in a place a formal system that excludes certain people on the basis of what other people within that system think seems risk becoming dogmatic & halting healthy dissention.
[Blunderov] Sorry to reply twice to one post but I have only now discovered where the archives are to be found.
As with all the (sadly inactive) Hermit's posts, this is well worth reading.
It seems many people are infected with this lazy-fair meme. I suppose it sounds nice to the ear. Just ignore them and they will move on.
Zach:
It has more to do with my personal experience than what "sounds nice to the ear". Though, I don't ignore at first. First, I straightforwardly confront, letting them know what I think they are doing & give them a chance to clear up misunderstandings. If they continue the action afterwards I ignore and continue on with my business giving them no more credit than the flicker of a shadow across the outside limits of my peripheral vision. One can only have power over another if it is granted. (well mentally anyways) I will usually periodically glance over new posts to see if they have grown up, or if I have. If it becomes so bad that flooding becomes a problem then I send them directly to my delete folder. I have not had to do this as of yet.
Jake:
<<<If we identify and remove it, then perhaps something constructive can happen. Ignore it and hope the bullies go away, in time we find ourselves dealing with nothing but bullies and nothing gets accomplished.>>>
Zach:
I know nothing of Joe Dees. I am new here. He sounds like a hell-raiser.
I think that weather or not constructive things get accomplished is based solely on the passion & will of the constructors. I think distractions are distractions, and to blame them for things not getting done is a position of a victim. (This, btw, is not meant to be an attack)
Jake:
<<<Joe of course is simply the local example, but the phenomenon is universal.>>>
Zach:
I've never had to deal with these things in my life. When people in my life get in the way of my purpose I have always tried my best to walked around them, not giving them the satisfaction of seeing me falter. So far I have been successful.
RE: virus: New item to vote on in regard to posting on the CoV BBS
« Reply #11 on: 2004-09-15 06:01:00 »
from my experience, i would rather agree with jake that some "bullies" might be especially stubborn and even get some kind of twisted reinforcement by being ignored. how much of a problem this actually is i know not (due to not attending the list for about 2 years...), so i don't know if treating each case for itself might be appropriate, too.
my guess is that a general solution along jake's lines depends on how "merit" is earned or forfeited. the system must be valid and - in my opinion - capable of giving warnings, of putting disruptives on trial after some time has passed, or even - eventually - of "pardoning" people. technically, this is all quite possible.
regarding the merit system in general: is it not true that this dimension confounds different aspects of quality? e.g. if i find a particular post entertaining, i will "praise" it - but i might praise it for astuteness, for drawing attention towards an important but overlooked issue, or for various other reasons, up to unconscious sympathy towards a person.
the same is the case with "smiting". this amounts to zach's "How is one supposed to tell the difference between disruptive & unpopular/unconventional." whoever decides - though i guess a general vote does not necessarily yield the best results - should probably keep these issues in mind.
beware the hell-kite
<<If ever a God was greater than great it was THOTH. In one translation his name is prefixed with the word 'great' no less than eight times. Thith may have helped to reduce the embarrathment cauthed by having a name that lookth like a lithp.>>
p.s. sorry if this post appears twice...
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: owner-virus@lucifer.com [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com]Im Auftrag von Jake Sapiens Gesendet: Mittwoch, 15. September 2004 10:24 An: virus@lucifer.com Betreff: RE: virus: New item to vote on in regard to posting on the CoV BBS
> [Original Message] > From: Z Moser <roachgod69@hotmail.com> > To: <virus@lucifer.com> > Date: 09/14/2004 2:55:19 PM > Subject: RE: virus: New item to vote on in regard to posting on the CoV BBS > > Jake: > > <<<To keep disruptive people from dominating your forums and destroying your > purpose. Its the same as in real life.>>> > > Zach: > > How is one supposed to tell the difference between disruptive & > unpopular/unconventional. > > It seems to me the best way to deal with those who's sole purpose is to > disrupt is to ignore, by doing this the purpose of disruption is nullified, > and if they had no other purpose, they will become bored and move on. It is > the same way I deal with bullies.
It seems many people are infected with this lazy-fair meme. I suppose it sounds nice to the ear. Just ignore them and they will move on. More likely I think it usually stands as a justification for apathy. In some or perhaps even many cases this does the trick. Frequently a bully just doesn't have the energy to invest at the moment. However when they persist the problem with just ignoring them is that bullies will generally interpret your silence as consent, and so you are in effect giving them the green light. Joe Dees for example clearly holds this position. In fact he has stated it publicly that he believes that silence=agreement which he uses as a justification for himself flooding mailboxes and bbs discussions with voluminous cut and pastes that nobody wants to read. This is the ethic of a bully. If we identify and remove it, then perhaps something constructive can happen. Ignore it and hope the bullies go away, in time we find ourselves dealing with nothing but bullies and nothing gets accomplished.
> > Putting in a place a formal system that excludes certain people on the basis > of what other people within that system think seems risk becoming dogmatic & > halting healthy dissention.
The problem isn't dissention. The problem is behavior. Even when Joe has agreed with us, (for example the case of Arron Agassi) his behavior was extremely disruptive and exacerbated the problem far beyond everyone else's patience. Joe of course is simply the local example, but the phenomenon is universal. Whether they agree with you or not, bullies are all about halting healthy dissention. Sticking your head in the sand is never a long term solution.
RE: virus: New item to vote on in regard to posting on the CoV BBS
« Reply #12 on: 2004-09-15 13:33:14 »
Zach,
I think you confuse an individual solution with a group solution. Perhaps you should gaze through the archives to see what we are talking about before we waste lots of breath on a situation that you seem to have little or no knowledge of, as you yourself admit. Carrying on without knowing the facts is counterproductive.
Jake
> [Original Message] > From: Z Moser <roachgod69@hotmail.com> > To: <virus@lucifer.com> > Date: 09/15/2004 1:18:08 AM > Subject: RE: virus: New item to vote on in regard to posting on the CoV BBS > > Jake: > > It seems many people are infected with this lazy-fair meme. I suppose it > sounds nice to the ear. Just ignore them and they will move on. > > Zach: > > It has more to do with my personal experience than what "sounds nice to the > ear". Though, I don't ignore at first. First, I straightforwardly confront, > letting them know what I think they are doing & give them a chance to clear > up misunderstandings. If they continue the action afterwards I ignore and > continue on with my business giving them no more credit than the flicker of > a shadow across the outside limits of my peripheral vision. One can only > have power over another if it is granted. (well mentally anyways) I will > usually periodically glance over new posts to see if they have grown up, or > if I have. If it becomes so bad that flooding becomes a problem then I send > them directly to my delete folder. I have not had to do this as of yet. > > Jake: > > <<<If we identify and remove it, then perhaps something constructive can > happen. Ignore it and hope the bullies go away, in time we find ourselves > dealing with nothing but bullies and nothing gets > accomplished.>>> > > Zach: > > I know nothing of Joe Dees. I am new here. He sounds like a hell-raiser. > > I think that weather or not constructive things get accomplished is based > solely on the passion & will of the constructors. I think distractions are > distractions, and to blame them for things not getting done is a position of > a victim. (This, btw, is not meant to be an attack) > > Jake: > > <<<Joe of course is simply the local example, but the phenomenon is > universal.>>> > > Zach: > > I've never had to deal with these things in my life. When people in my life > get in the way of my purpose I have always tried my best to walked around > them, not giving them the satisfaction of seeing me falter. So far I have > been successful. > > zach > > _________________________________________________________________ > Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! > http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ > > --- > To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
<<<I think you confuse an individual solution with a group solution. Perhaps you should gaze through the archives to see what we are talking about before we waste lots of breath on a situation that you seem to have little or no knowledge of, as you yourself admit. Carrying on without knowing the facts is counterproductive.>>>
Zach:
I've dealt with group situations before. I'm fairly certain my opinion would stay the same weather or not I looked at the archives. I've decided that it doesn't matter though. I agree with Blunderlove, and was going to point it out in the last post, but I forgot. I disagree in principle, because I very rarely trust systems that suppress voices based on popularity. There is always that lingering possibility that sometime in the near or far future that that human corruption will intentionally or unintentionally use the power for less than fair interest. But, as long as there are grace periods & ways to redeem oneself then the system become a bit less dangerous. Plus, the fact that if the system was ever to corrupt itself beyond recognition new groups could always be started by the outcast. So I concede.
Yes, Jake the Deaniac, silence DOES indicate assent - which is why you, and Casey, and Mermaid, are trying to silence everyone who disagrees with you. Do you see Bill Roh around here any more? What about Jonathan Davis? I guess they finally decided that the stench of the continuing torrent of your hateful and irrational bullshit was too offensive to their cognitive nostrils for them to further linger. It does not matter to you whether or not you are right on the issues - just that you win, like the silverback-wannabe that you are and will perpetually be. And to achieve such a goal, you will use any means at your command - licit or il-, to drive all other competitors away and establish a harem of compliance. You, however, cannot even be a big fish in this small pond, because anyone online can check the facts and see how much of a tinfoil-hatted space cadet you really are. And in the larger, non-insular world that exists, despite your fondest wishes, outside this list, your bizarre and nonsensical causes will crumble and fall - mark my words come this November.
Joe, answer me this - who else have I attempted to "silence"? Please point out one individual with whom I've attempted to do this with before making yet another unsubstantiated claim. Again, this is just another one of your feeble attempts to incite, accuse, and inflame. Time and time again you've made one accusation after another regarding myself and those who stand up to your bullying and list flooding. But, you can never back up your accusations with regard to me. First and foremost, I'm the last person to attempt to silence anyone here. I applaud free speech and what it has to offer. However, I will denounce list flooding in any form it takes because of one reason and one reason alone - it does not produce rational discussion. It drowns out any discourse that is attempted as is shown time and time again by your list flooding.
As for Bill Roh and Jonathan Davis - they both continue to post to the CoV. They may not post as often as you. But, who in their right mind would post as much as you? Especially when you consider that all you do is to post one copied article after another, flooding the Serious Business portion of the BBS, as well as the email list (before you were disallowed from posting because of your low reputation score). However, with that said, what does it matter who posts to the list? Why do you feel the need to qualify your attacks by bringing Jonathan Davis and Bill Roh into the fray. Both of them have MUCH better reputations according to the Meridion reputation system we have in place. Your reputation, on the other hand, has fallen into a crevasse that even the most skilled climber could not extract himself from.
And, finally, the latter portion of your post above shows how far you've regressed. It is just one more vitriolic attack on the character of a person who adheres to the Virion virtues of rationality, empathy and vision. There's nothing more to say regarding your fallacious, irrational personal attacks.
Do us all a favor, discontinue flooding the BBS and this won't be an issue. You've been asked time and time again to desist, yet you've continued; even doing so against the wishes of the CoV's website owner and founder.
Author
Logged
