Dealing with Spam

[SomeRandomDude]

Okay, so I'm not sure exactly where the line is drawn with spam here. Lurtzy's spam, quite frankly, seems to be out of control. His continuous posting of worthless one-liners that contribute nothing to serious discussion, plus often inflammatory comments seem to me like they need a tight clamp. I mean, spam all you want in the spam threads, but when people are trying to have a serious discussion, don't go spamming in there.

So, I warned him to watch his spam in the creation vs evolution thread, and Lurtzy and Gate Troll got pretty upset. I got this comment back from GT.

Behold the Gestapo. MR. Lurtzy shouldn't have to write half a paragraph to say he agrees with SoP.  And since when did mods become absolutes on peoples opinions? I think all this NBardania... ...crap has gone to Führer NBarden's head.   

So what exactly are our policies on spam? On some boards I've been in, spam in Lurtzy's quantity and uselessness would have gotten him banned already. Others would have just deleted it on the spot.

[FM]

I think there's a very fine line to be traced with spam. For instance, I think it's way better to have a one-liner "I agree with _____" thant having a HUGE quote (like I see in some other forums) and a Q4T under it, just for the sake of having a big enough post. However, I think there are those cases in which a one-liner may be out of place, and I think it's fine to just delete it (although I think that, when we delete someone's post, we should have the system send them a PM with whatever we wrote in the "Reason for Edit" box (which we'd have to fill even when deleting a post, then). I also think we should cap the number of offenses (perhaps having a 3-strikes policy, with a one week ban from a particular board or such, if it comes to that).
That being said, I'm all for a harmless spammy post every now and then when it's funny and at least remotely related to the topic (I don't want people to spam about posting jokes on random topics, of course), but that tends to derail fast, as other people will then barge in saying "SPAM" and etc. What I usually do is delete THESE posts and leave the joke, but I think it'd have to be made pretty clear, otherwise we could be accused of protecting certain members, etc.
Also, I think foul language and unnecessary rudeness should get a 1-week ban instantly, no prior notice. For all I care, GT should've been banned from the CoC for the stuff he posted when he popped in, although he's been working on improving lately, from what I've seen. However, I still think a steady hand might be needed.

[SomeRandomDude]

Yeah, that post from GT got a PM from me and an instantaneous delete.

[menace64]

I think labeling posts as 'spam' based entirely on length is ludicrous, NB. I'm not even sure why it upsets you so much when lurtzy (or anybody, really) posts a short reply when a short reply is all that is necessary.

Let him post how he wants. Unless he is flaming or breaking some CoC rule, nothing he says should bring him the negative attention you direct at him. You're a moderator of a small forum on the internet. There's absolutely no need for stringent regulation on post size.

[TheJord]

I'm leaning more towards m64's comments, Lurtzy does very little to harm the forum, in fact he keeps a lot of the topics regular and I dont find much offensive in what he says.

A shed more tolerance on everyones part would seem the best idea

[DáinIronfoot]

I agree with Menace as well. Let's keep things in perspective here. Lurtzy bugged me at first, months ago, but I now recognize that he's contributing quite a bit, even if he does spout off many one-liners. I don't see anything wrong.

[FM]

I'm particularly getting tired of him whenever he "shows up" at the MtG boards, basically because he seems to be mocking the topics, and in a very lame way while doing so.
As I said before, I'm pretty tolerant as to seeing wether posts contribute or not to certain topics, and I don't care for their size at all (I'd much rather have a one-liner than a one-worder after a 50-line quotation), but I'm leaning torwards utterly deletion of his posts in the MtG sections if he continues to, well, "be himself" around there.
For now, I'll let the section Moderator decide what to do, but I'd go for a PM and deletion, with a warning. Repeatable offense would earn him a ban from The Multiverse AND the Council of Cobra. Why the latter? Easy. Because otherwise he can just mess around the MtG section all he wants, he won't be actually "losing" anything.
On a related note, in case it's ever necessary, I think users should be banned from the CoC only when offenses took place there, but I strongly advocate for they being banned from the CoC AS WELL if they're banned from anywhere else. If they want to make their case, they have the Golden Council for that anyway.

[Thranduil]

It seems to me that the forum is small enough as it is that we don't want to be going around banning people for sometimes posting irrelevant things. Lurtzy's posts are sometimes useful anyway and he is certainly regular and is therefore someone we don't really want to lose.

I think we're too quick to think about banning people - no one round here really seems to be doing such terrible things that they need to be banned.

Thranduil

[Kralik]

Back at CC, Lurtzy was saying a few rude and irritating things to other members. He's been pretty civil here... and I wouldn't really blast all of his one-liners as spam. It's more irritating to read accusations of spam after a one-liner than the one-liner itself.

[FM]

Ditto (and yes, this one-liner WAS on purpose).

[sickofpalantirs]

lol




anyway lets to be to stringent on spam...wouldn't want to endanger me

[AgentDrake]

Does Lurtzy spam?
Yes. Quite often.

Is this a problem?
No.

Is this an annoyance?
Yes. Sometimes.

Does Lurtzy ever say anything constructive, beneficial, et cetera?
Yes.

Does Lurzy always post 1-liners?
No.

When he does, are they always spam?
No.

How can they not be?
One common occurrence is because he's simply adding his affirmation, and hence voice, vote, what have you, to a previously stated opinion. Pointing out that he also is of a previously stated opinion is not spam. It is a demonstration of affirmation, to add weight to a point. And don't throw the "Appeal to the Masses Fallacy" complaint at me. It's not always necessarily a fallacy. Neither is Ad Hominem always necessarily a fallacy. Just generally.

Are some of NB's complaints justified?
Heck, yeah.

Are they significant enough to warrant banning, or even modding, around here?
Not banning. Occasionally modding.


Lastly, HAVEN'T WE HAD THIS CONVERSATION BEFORE?!?!?!?
Yes. We have. And nothing's really changed since then. Lurtzy is still Lurtzy, he still posts annoying one-liners, he still spams quite often, but in minimal ways, and he's still got relevant things to say at times.

[DáinIronfoot]

Hear, hear. Can we please drop this now?