SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Happy New Year!
As the final hours of 2021 here's wishing everyone a Happy New Year!
In light of the holiday, I am inviting the editorial staff to post stories on a weekend/holiday schedule. Thank you for all your hard work in 2021. Here's wishing for a better year to come! Enjoy!
We did it! [*]
([*] I think).
Current Status:
Thanks to a VERY generous subscription of nearly $1,000, we reached our fundraising goal for the second half of the year THANK YOU!: $4,132.81 on a goal of $3,500.00 (all amounts are estimates):
mysql> SELECT SUM(payment_net) AS Net, 100.0 * SUM(payment_net) / 3500.00 AS GoalPercent, MAX(ts), MAX(spid), NOW() FROM subscribe_payments WHERE ts > '2021-06-30' ;
+---------+-------------+---------------------+-----------+---------------------+
| Net | GoalPercent | MAX(ts) | MAX(spid) | NOW() |
+---------+-------------+---------------------+-----------+---------------------+
| 4132.81 | 118.0802857 | 2021-12-30 17:36:36 | 1744 | 2021-12-30 23:45:49 |
+---------+-------------+---------------------+-----------+---------------------+
1 row in set (0.00 sec)mysql>
And for those of you interested in the details:
mysql> SELECT spid, ts, payment_gross, payment_net, payment_type FROM subscribe_payments WHERE ts > '2021-12-29 22:06:03' AND payment_gross > 0 ORDER BY ts ;
+------+---------------------+---------------+-------------+--------------+
| spid | ts | payment_gross | payment_net | payment_type |
+------+---------------------+---------------+-------------+--------------+
| 1728 | 2021-12-29 23:16:21 | 20.00 | 18.81 | user |
| 1729 | 2021-12-30 00:15:05 | 100.00 | 96.80 | user |
| 1730 | 2021-12-30 01:08:02 | 20.00 | 19.12 | user |
| 1731 | 2021-12-30 01:13:58 | 30.00 | 28.01 | user |
| 1732 | 2021-12-30 01:45:50 | 50.00 | 48.25 | user |
| 1733 | 2021-12-30 02:35:54 | 40.00 | 38.54 | user |
| 1734 | 2021-12-30 03:12:48 | 20.00 | 18.81 | user |
| 1735 | 2021-12-30 04:24:07 | 924.43 | 897.32 | user |
| 1736 | 2021-12-30 07:05:37 | 20.00 | 18.51 | user |
| 1737 | 2021-12-30 07:50:05 | 20.00 | 18.51 | gift |
| 1738 | 2021-12-30 09:23:14 | 20.00 | 19.12 | gift |
| 1739 | 2021-12-30 12:22:42 | 20.00 | 18.51 | user |
| 1740 | 2021-12-30 12:24:24 | 20.00 | 18.81 | user |
| 1741 | 2021-12-30 13:59:52 | 40.00 | 38.11 | user |
| 1742 | 2021-12-30 17:33:36 | 20.00 | 19.12 | gift |
| 1743 | 2021-12-30 17:35:13 | 20.00 | 19.12 | gift |
| 1744 | 2021-12-30 17:36:36 | 20.00 | 19.12 | gift |
+------+---------------------+---------------+-------------+--------------+
17 rows in set (0.00 sec)mysql>
That's great news! So why the equivocation?
Looking Closer:
Actually, it's more of a stepping back to look at things over the course of the entire year:
mysql> SELECT SUM(payment_gross) AS Gross, SUM(payment_net) AS Net, ts, max(spid) AS SPID FROM subscribe_payments WHERE ts > '2020-12-31' ;
+---------+---------+---------------------+------+
| Gross | Net | ts | SPID |
+---------+---------+---------------------+------+
| 6916.61 | 6611.75 | 2020-12-31 21:47:25 | 1744 |
+---------+---------+---------------------+------+
1 row in set (0.00 sec)mysql>
The fundraising goal for the first half of the year was also $3,500.00. So... (2 x $3,500.00) is $7,000.00 but we have a total of... $6,916.61?
The Crash:
And then I remembered. Early this year we had a server (fluorine) crash. We had backups (yay!), but they were borken (Boo! Hiss!). We lost over a day's worth of activity, including a number of subscriptions. I *was* able to manually reconstruct people's subscriptions (time) based on information displayed on a window I just happened to have open at the time. But that was in a table separate from what is used to generate these numbers. After 3 days' effort, I'd patched things up as well as I could. Thankfully the official numbers (on which income and taxes are calculated) are kept on a completely separate server. Whew! One that I DO NOT have access. I'd concluded that we'll just have to sort things out at the end of the year. And that time has draw nigh.
tl;dr:
We're probably all set for the year, but there is also the matter that (unknown to me) we had previously been running at a deficit for a couple years. So anything additional you can contribute will go to replenish our funding base. (NCommander and Matt_ each put up $5,000.00 of their own money that to get us started.)
(Score: 1, Troll) by aristarchus on Sunday January 02 2022, @12:17AM (44 children)
Yes, what times of pestilence we live in! What sad times are these, when passing editors can say "ni" at will to old ladies. Even I, aristarchus, have been falsely accused of being Ari! Oh, the infamy, the deplorable degradation of decency!
On the other hand, happy new year, editors! Here's to a fresh start, and a year of less fascism.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 02 2022, @01:09AM (43 children)
Let's be honest, these posts are aristarchus talking to himself. He doesn't even make an effort to disguise what he's doing. When APK replies to himself and pretends to not be APK, we spam mod those posts. Aristarchus is doing the same nonsense APK is doing. Why should we refrain from using the spam mod on aristarchus, too?
The moderation FAQ describes spam in the following ways:
Sock puppets are forbidden and are detrimental to the site, particularly when used to dominate discussions and moderation. Instead of admitting his behavior, aristarchus continues to create new sock puppets, carries on conversations between them, and pretends that the staff of SN are being unfair to him by enforcing the rules. That should qualify as being detrimental to the site. Aristarchus replying to himself, effectively saying the same thing in both comments, is repetitive. He's done this nonsense across many articles for many weeks now.
I believe it's appropriate to use a spam mod on both comments. These comments are repetitive and lack substance. They're just aristarchus replying to himself with the same nonsense he's been spamming about for weeks.
Admins, if you feel the need to penalize me for using the spam mod, I understand. Please understand that I am doing this in good faith, based on the belief that the comments I'm modding do qualify as spam. If you disagree with my decision, I ask you to consider leniency, warning me instead of imposing a ban on moderating. If these spam mods aren't reverted within a few days, I'll proceed with the assumption that you deemed this an appropriate use of the spam mod. Thank you.
(Score: 0, Troll) by aristarchus on Sunday January 02 2022, @01:17AM (11 children)
Except, there is one tiny flaw in your plan to exile aristarchus: one of those posts was not me. I understand how it can be troubling to read posts that your ideology tells you are incorrect, but that is just part of being on the internets. Perhaps, instead of spam modding me, you ought to cease being such a snowflake?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 02 2022, @01:38AM (10 children)
Go report me to the admins. Give them the URLs of the comments and ask them to overturn the spam mods.
You and I both know that you posted both comments, and that you also posted as Frigatebird elsewhere in this thread. Drop the charade and stop insulting everyone's intelligence.
If you don't like the spam mod, take it up with the admins. Go convince them that I used the spam mod inappropriately. They can revert the spam mods and mod ban me if they deem it appropriate. Put up or shut up.
(Score: 0, Troll) by aristarchus on Sunday January 02 2022, @03:19AM (9 children)
Never thought I'd see janrinok resorting to posting AC!
The only way you could know this is if you were me, which I assume you are not, oh delightful AC, since if you were, I would know that. Who is insulting whose intelligence now? Or is that what this is, another covert aristarchus ploy for sympathy, spam modding himself much like Pisistratus of Athens did, to gain a majority vote?
http://classics.mit.edu/Herodotus/history.1.i.html [mit.edu]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday January 02 2022, @04:38PM (5 children)
(Score: 1, Troll) by aristarchus on Sunday January 02 2022, @09:49PM (4 children)
If this type of behavior stands, you are next, khallow!
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 03 2022, @05:31AM (1 child)
Just wanna say, I am not Ari, either! Don't spam mod me, Bro!!!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 03 2022, @03:00PM
samefag
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday January 03 2022, @06:36PM (1 child)
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Monday January 03 2022, @08:57PM
Nobody on SN talks to themselves more than you, khallow! Once this vigilante AC figures out you are your own sockpuppet, you will be spam modded as well!
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Monday January 03 2022, @12:04PM (1 child)
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Monday January 03 2022, @09:04PM
Sure he did't! Wink, wink, nudge, nudge, say no more! Say no more!
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday January 04 2022, @06:20PM
AC called it.
Khallow called it.
janrinok calls it.
I call it.
All of your posts, under whichever name(s) you choose to use are insults to intelligence.
If you insist on dying on this hill, then please, hurry up and die. You are the sock master of SN, and anyone with an IQ larger than his shoe size can see it. Which pretty much means every member of SN - this isn't the place that attracts idiots. Except you, of course.
(Score: 3, Informative) by janrinok on Sunday January 02 2022, @03:34AM (30 children)
If you have moderated a comment as Spam in a genuine belief that it deserves it but we disagree, what we usually do (after much internal discussion) is simply 'Unspam' the error. We have not banned any user - nor have we any intention to do so - for making an error in judgement.
If you unfairly moderate a specific account repeatedly and, in our view, with an intent to control or direct a specific discussion or prevent somebody from expressing a genuinely held viewpoint then we would certainly contact you before taking any action. As moderations are clearly identifiable to us - you have to be logged in to make them - this usually isn't a problem. It all happens quietly and politely in private.
Some people want to simply deny it or claim that we are 'censoring' their contribution. They almost always want to discuss it publicly and repeatedly thereby creating an additional workload for the staff rather than use the alternative contact means that we suggest. Their complaints are invariably 'off-topic' in the story that they make them. I will leave it to the reader to decide what their true motivation on this site is.
We accept no responsibility for the content of discussions in journals - many of us simply do not look at them. But as the purpose of journals is to enable community members to discuss topics other than those that are on the main site then it is hardly surprising that they can be abused.
If you find that you are continually moderating a specific contributor because you simply disagree with everything and anything that they write then there are alternative ways to avoid seeing their posts. Mark them as 'Foes' and add a private moderation adjustment to such posts so that they never appear on your display. Many people choose to browse at -1 and then wonder why they keep seeing all of the rubbish. Use the tools provided intelligently. I understand why they do this as many ACs make interesting contributions to discussions - but if you go searching through a rubbish dump you might find a lot of rubbish before you find a gem that justifies your search.
(Score: 0, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 02 2022, @06:12AM (29 children)
So, janrinok, you intend to let this egreigious spam mod stand? If we needed any further evidence of right wing bias on this site, this would certainly be it. No need to "discuss it publicaly", it is what it is. You have been trying to get aristarchus to leave, ever since TMB complained about the accuracy of his analysis.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Sunday January 02 2022, @06:34AM (28 children)
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 02 2022, @06:45AM (27 children)
I am a fucking AC, janrinok! I cannot send emails to the admin, since I have no account, no existence, no return address! Are you saying that this means my complaint about unfair spam modding counts for nothing? AC's built SoylentNews, and we can bring it down, if you do not temper your Brit attitude!
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Sunday January 02 2022, @09:58AM (3 children)
Don't lose your temper, it will not help persuade me to help you when I am able to do so. If you do not have an account at all - what gives you the right to dictate to those who are members how this site should be run?
Please log in and send the email, or seek an outlet for your 'contribution' elsewhere. We cannot tell if your SPAM moderation is unfair if you do not tell us via email which moderations you are referring to, can we? If you are posting as AC how can we identify your particular comments? Anyone could claim that any AC posts are theirs. Indeed, I could be replying to your first ever post, couldn't I? Just create an email account and please do as we ask.
No actually they didn't build it, and no ACs without accounts have ever helped manage the site either. Account holders who post by name or as Anonymous Coward did, and still do, contribute considerably though. Some other ACs also contribute - but by no means all.
And you think that threatening to 'bring the site down' is going to endear you further to the majority who contribute in giving their labour, financially or in intelligent discussion? In what way would bringing the site down serve you or the greater community? What makes you think that this site is yours if you haven't got an account and that you have the right to make such decisions? We started with nothing - I don't want to start again but If we had to, I think that we could. But there would probably to be rule changes if that were to happen.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 03 2022, @05:54AM (2 children)
I have seen how users with logged in accounts are treated.
No right. No wrong, either, just pointing out that something is rotten in Denmark. I am trying to contribute, but it is obvious to everyone that SN desires no help, as it spirals down into a closed bubble of paranoia. No account != no dictating. You are at the mercy of the interwebs, janrinok!
(Score: 3, Informative) by janrinok on Monday January 03 2022, @02:09PM
We serve the community first - that is how it should be.
I didn't deny the AC assistance, but (s)he admitted having no account so will have to wait their turn. If the AC would like to report the moderation that concerns them via email as usual then we can look into it. This is not a new concept : "If you see moderation abuse [soylentnews.org] (mod bombing or spam mod), please mail the admin any comments (the cid link) showing the abuse."
It seems that a very small number of our community think that coming up in the middle of a discussion to complain about moderation (which is ALWAYS off-topic) is the best way to intimidate the admin staff into reacting immediately. It isn't - being so sparsely manned means that we have to manage our contributions to the site to fit staff availability.
Just follow the rules [soylentnews.org] please.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday January 03 2022, @06:44PM
Sigh, so have I. This is a non-story.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Sunday January 02 2022, @10:48AM (22 children)
You cannot have the same discussion with me on #soylent
... and expect me to believe that you are Aristarchus on #soylent but an AC with no account in these comments:
Spam mods are illegal - who knew?
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Sunday January 02 2022, @09:54PM (21 children)
Is it too much to expect you to notice there are multiple spam mods, janrinok? One of them against me, another against some poor AC who the spam-modder evidently thinks is me, which it is not. You are not helping with your wild speculations about who might be a sockpuppet. Perhaps some decorum, and professional ethics?
(Score: 3, Informative) by janrinok on Sunday January 02 2022, @11:57PM (8 children)
Perhaps it is also too much to expect you to send an email as requested?
Professional ethics, decorum? Go back and look at which one of us lost his temper. Who resorted to vulgarities? You cannot even remember which of your characters you are pretending to be, or who is supposedly using which VPN. If Frigatebird gets blocked why would Aristarchus be complaining?
Email or shut up.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Monday January 03 2022, @02:34AM (7 children)
I was only pointing out that I was spam modded. I know nothing of Frigatebird's situation, since (s)he is a different user. Your AC persona is waxing rather verbose, janrinok. Perhaps you should reign it in, until this blows over. I also am not the AC who was illegitimately spam modded, but everybody knows who AC really is.
(Score: 3, Touché) by janrinok on Monday January 03 2022, @12:01PM (6 children)
From IRC: [aristarchus] And, to report on the "landing place" of SN, there has been illicit, illegal, and illegitimate spam mods lodged against me. This injustice must not stand, man!
Oh, have you only just realised that you are making contradictory claims and statements, and forgetting who you are supposed to be at any one time? Yet you are not prepared to tell us which comments you are referring to and which belong to an AC that you know nothing about other than you state that they were illegitimately moderated . What is 'illegal' or 'illicit' about a Spam moderation?
I am sure that it is just a coincidence that Aristarchus and Frigatebird try to use the same banned IPs from a VPN in the Philippines - banned because of the associated criminal activity not because you are using it - and that nobody else ever has used that VPN to connect to this site. But coincidences can happen I suppose.
Your attempts at using alternative accounts are blatantly obvious to many in this community. It has nothing to do with anything that you imagine I am doing. Just play by the rules or leave. I don't suppose many of us care any more which option you choose.
If you wish to continue this discussion contact us on admin@[the usual address]. This thread is now closed.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday January 03 2022, @06:39PM
I have to say, that's pretty exotic cloak and dagger just to rant on SN.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 04 2022, @12:24AM (4 children)
You seem to be taking this entirely too seriously, janrinok. Entertaining, if you were not an editor.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 04 2022, @02:18AM (3 children)
I imagine it doesn't seem so to janrinok.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 04 2022, @07:13AM (2 children)
The problem, exactly.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 04 2022, @08:33AM
(Score: 3, Informative) by janrinok on Tuesday January 04 2022, @09:45AM
Many in our community are complaining about the number of spurious off-topic comments that appear in threads and are asking why we do nothing about it. The stories are there to generate a discussion and some are more successful than others. However, trying to change the subject under discussion by hijacking the comments and raising one's own personal objections and complaints about spurious matters is one of the things that quickly drives people away from a thread. Repeated occurrences could result in a temporary comment or moderation ban.
Raising complaints about moderation is ALWAYS off topic and there are procedures detailed elsewhere on the site [soylentnews.org] explaining how to alert staff when you think that specific types of moderation abuse have occurred. The sending of an email is by far the most efficient method to use as there is no guarantee that comments on IRC will be seen immediately. You MUST include the comment identity number (CID) in ALL complaints.
A lot of work might have gone into the preparation of a story - from the moment somebody decides to make a submission to it appearing on the front page. Spoiling a discussion is disrespectful to other community members and a cause of some annoyance to all of those involved, and particularly to those who wish to hold a sensible discussion about the topic in hand.
There are plenty of alternative ways to raise personal complaints and we do not object to anyone raising genuine concerns and issues. But some use thread hijacking as a means of keeping their own visibility and personal issues in everybody's face. This is unacceptable and we will do our best to prevent it where possible. If in doubt, an email to admin@[the usual address] will get the most timely response from staff. It is important that a complaint provides sufficient information for us to identify and act on the issue in a timely manner.
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 03 2022, @12:03AM (11 children)
That quote was posted by you [soylentnews.org] on September 5, 2020.
I could lob your own words back at you as insults, but I don't think that's helpful. Instead, I hope you see that you've become exactly what you despise. Along the way, you've driven away many people who agree with your views but not your tactics.
You've been given clear instructions about how to properly lodge a complaint about the spam mods. Continuing to complain about it here without going through proper channels is disingenuous. You might as well post a journal about this, which is another common tactic of yours, just to draw more attention to yourself. If you were serious about lodging a complaint about the spam mod, you'd send an email to the admins and wait on a response before publicly fussing about this more. Instead, it looks like you're doing this just because you want to draw more attention to yourself.
(Score: 0, Troll) by aristarchus on Monday January 03 2022, @07:03AM (10 children)
No, you cannot. You are not competent to do so. And, driven away who? Hemo? You make me laugh, you pathetic excuse for a Soylentil! You did not even explain,
Until you master that, you have no standing. And you suck at spotting sockpuppets.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 03 2022, @11:02AM (9 children)
Your continued denials of running sock puppets and AC trolling is as asinine as the alt-right insisting that Trump lost the 2020 election because of massive fraud or that the insurrection on January 6 was done by Antifa. The evidence is abundant and clear, but you continue to lie and fabricate this fictional narrative that you're being persecuted. I suppose you believe that if only you could run as many sock puppets as you want, you'd be able to Make Soylent Great Again.
Nemo est supra legem. The English translation is that nobody is above the law. That includes you, aristarchus. The rules clearly state that sock puppets are forbidden. Just as the alt-right's efforts to overturn the 2020 election are an affront to the rule of law, so is your continued use of sock puppets. It seems that you think you're special and that the rules about sock puppets shouldn't apply to you. Aristotle would be very disappointed in you.
You also posted as an AC and threatened to bring SN down if you didn't get your way. Is that your version of January 6, that if you don't get to break the rules and run sock puppets, you're going to destroy the site?
My point is simple: you're a hypocrite, but you're too arrogant to realize it.
(Score: 0, Troll) by aristarchus on Tuesday January 04 2022, @07:20AM (8 children)
You poor, poor AC! Refugee from the world of real, are we? You expect people on line to be who they say they are? You think that the White supremacists behind janrinok and Runaway are on the level? Do you know what it is you are carrying? Your protests are as farts in the wind, mere hemo objections, a conservative screen with no substance, a paper tiger, if you will. You do not understand me, if you think I am the hypocrite. But then, I have come to expect such stupidity from my opponents on SN. You would rather I just go away, instead of persistently pointing out the bankruptcy of your worldview. I pity you. Spam away, AC!
(Oh wait, ACs cannot mod, so you are an actual user, too cowardly to Spam mod the Mighty Aristarchus to his face? Thought as much. Coward.)
(Score: 3, Informative) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday January 04 2022, @07:41AM (7 children)
This is fucking dumb. You make some big threats, so let's see you follow through with them. I personally have no problem with you taking SN down if you're actually capable of that, but I doubt you are. And I'm getting really, really tired of your stupidity. Put up or shut up.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by aristarchus on Tuesday January 04 2022, @07:44AM (6 children)
Shirley, 'Zumi, you of all soylentils realize it has already happened, Just check the comment count. Dead, really dead. And an attempt to discuss actual issues ends up with Runaway comments. Dead.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday January 04 2022, @07:49AM (5 children)
Nope. You said you can take SN down. Go ahead and do it.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1, Troll) by aristarchus on Tuesday January 04 2022, @07:53AM (4 children)
Missing my point, my dear Hazuki; it already is down, just doesn't know it yet.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday January 04 2022, @07:54AM (2 children)
Do it, or forever quit threatening to do it. I am so sick of your bullshit. Go on, drop the dox and bring down the hammer of the law. I dare you. I dare you to follow through on your threats.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1, Troll) by aristarchus on Tuesday January 04 2022, @08:53AM (1 child)
Perhaps you missed the real drama that attended to the departure of the Buzzard? One who could threatened to pull the plug. Wasn't me. I am just a pawn, or lowly philosopher, in the game of SN.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday January 04 2022, @05:17PM
Then stop making threats. Don't write checks your ass (which people are saying is prehensile now...?) can't cash.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 04 2022, @06:34PM
If you had a point, you could have made it years ago. Give it up, fool, your existence is pointless.