Innocent Until Proven Guilty

Urban Hat€monger ? · 10-04-2012, 02:43 PM

It has been suggested to the mod team that anyone who is here to promote things should be treated as innocent until proven guilty.

With that in mind the mod team has come to the decision that from now on all posts will be left up for a period of 3 months to ascertain whether they are here for legitimate reasons or in fact just to spam. We feel that 3 months is an adequate time period to see if they come back or not after their initial post.

So in future if you do see any spam please don't report it until it is 3 months old.
Remember we're doing this in the interests of fairness & betterment of the community.

Thank you.

Burning Down · 10-04-2012, 03:24 PM

I don't think it's fair for members to have to stare at and sift through spammy **** just to read legitimate threads.

**Scarlett O'Hara** · 10-04-2012, 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burning Down

I don't think it's fair for members to have to stare at and sift through spammy **** just to read legitimate threads.

That cracked me up, I thought straight away of the legitimate rape thing, how horrible is that?

Trollheart · 10-04-2012, 07:06 PM

Just a suggestion: could you make an overall thread for these "on probation" posts or even a subforum, so people don't, as BD says, have to keep wading through them? Chances are, a large percentage of them ARE going to turn out to be spam.

Urban Hat€monger ? · 10-04-2012, 07:20 PM

We can't do that, that's apartheid.

You saw what happened in South Africa, would you want to be responsible for that happening here?

Burning Down · 10-04-2012, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trollheart

Just a suggestion: could you make an overall thread for these "on probation" posts or even a subforum, so people don't, as BD says, have to keep wading through them? Chances are, a large percentage of them ARE going to turn out to be spam.

But the problem is that if a subforum is created (which won't happen because they've already done away with it), then those spammy posts will still show up in the "'New Posts" feed, so members who use the New Posts page will still have to sift through the crap.

If a dedicated thread is made, well then we'd have to move each and every thread and post there and that's just annoying. It's easier to delete and ban right off the bat.

Trollheart · 10-05-2012, 04:57 AM

Well I certainly don't want to be the next PW Botha!

Carry on then, carry on. Back to your desks, people: what do you think I'm paying you for?? What do you mean, I'm not paying...?

The Batlord · 10-05-2012, 09:55 AM

Am I the only one who sees this as a joke thread? I mean, Urban totally sounds like he's "taking the piss".

Freebase Dali · 10-05-2012, 07:05 PM

I've come up with a better solution. Instead of using judgment in figuring out which posts are spam and which are not, (indeed, humans are flawed and we can't use judgement as some objective basis for action) I will simply tally up the average of how many confirmed spam posts we get per-day, and once a day, I will close my eyes and randomly select that amount from the day's new posts.
Once those posts are selected, I will delete them, as to be as objectively impartial and fair to all users whose posts may or may not be spam.

Since this method will require the least amount of judgment and will not rely on any biases, we can then be satisfied that all moderator actions are, to the best of our no-peeking ability, free of human-error.

Let me know if this sounds like a good idea.

**Scarlett O'Hara** · 10-05-2012, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freebase Dali

I've come up with a better solution. Instead of using judgment in figuring out which posts are spam and which are not, (indeed, humans are flawed and we can't use judgement as some objective basis for action) I will simply tally up the average of how many confirmed spam posts we get per-day, and once a day, I will close my eyes and randomly select that amount from the day's new posts.
Once those posts are selected, I will delete them, as to be as objectively impartial and fair to all users whose posts may or may not be spam.

Since this method will require the least amount of judgment and will not rely on any biases, we can then be satisfied that all moderator actions are, to the best of our no-peeking ability, free of human-error.

Let me know if this sounds like a good idea.

I think it's fantastic. I might delete every 10th thread just to be consistent.

10-04-2012, 02:43 PM	#1 (permalink)
Urban Hat€monger ? The Sexual Intellectual Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Somewhere cooler than you Posts: 18,605	Innocent Until Proven Guilty It has been suggested to the mod team that anyone who is here to promote things should be treated as innocent until proven guilty. With that in mind the mod team has come to the decision that from now on all posts will be left up for a period of 3 months to ascertain whether they are here for legitimate reasons or in fact just to spam. We feel that 3 months is an adequate time period to see if they come back or not after their initial post. So in future if you do see any spam please don't report it until it is 3 months old. Remember we're doing this in the interests of fairness & betterment of the community. Thank you. __________________ Urb's RYM Stuff Most people sell their soul to the devil, but the devil sells his soul to Nick Cave.

10-04-2012, 07:06 PM	#4 (permalink)
Trollheart Born to be mild Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: 404 Not Found Posts: 26,970	Just a suggestion: could you make an overall thread for these "on probation" posts or even a subforum, so people don't, as BD says, have to keep wading through them? Chances are, a large percentage of them ARE going to turn out to be spam. __________________ Trollheart: Signature-free since April 2018

10-04-2012, 07:20 PM	#5 (permalink)
Urban Hat€monger ? The Sexual Intellectual Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Somewhere cooler than you Posts: 18,605	We can't do that, that's apartheid. You saw what happened in South Africa, would you want to be responsible for that happening here? __________________ Urb's RYM Stuff Most people sell their soul to the devil, but the devil sells his soul to Nick Cave.

10-05-2012, 04:57 AM	#7 (permalink)
Trollheart Born to be mild Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: 404 Not Found Posts: 26,970	Well I certainly don't want to be the next PW Botha! Carry on then, carry on. Back to your desks, people: what do you think I'm paying you for?? What do you mean, I'm not paying...? __________________ Trollheart: Signature-free since April 2018

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

10-04-2012, 03:24 PM	#2 (permalink)
Burning Down The Music Guru. Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Beyond the Wall Posts: 4,858	I don't think it's fair for members to have to stare at and sift through spammy **** just to read legitimate threads.

10-05-2012, 07:05 PM	#9 (permalink)
Freebase Dali Partying on the inside Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,584	I've come up with a better solution. Instead of using judgment in figuring out which posts are spam and which are not, (indeed, humans are flawed and we can't use judgement as some objective basis for action) I will simply tally up the average of how many confirmed spam posts we get per-day, and once a day, I will close my eyes and randomly select that amount from the day's new posts. Once those posts are selected, I will delete them, as to be as objectively impartial and fair to all users whose posts may or may not be spam. Since this method will require the least amount of judgment and will not rely on any biases, we can then be satisfied that all moderator actions are, to the best of our no-peeking ability, free of human-error. Let me know if this sounds like a good idea.