I've been made aware of some discussions about the permitted use of the "Spam" moderation. This has spawned a great deal of discussion among Soylent staff.
What's The Point?
The whole purpose of comment moderation is for an (early) reader of a comment is to provide guidance to later readers. Like "breaking trail" for others when hiking through deep snow. The "Trail breaker" makes it eaier to navigate the path for those who follow. Before we dive into the Spam, it is important to note that it is encouraged to "upmod" more than one "downmods". I receive an e-mail each day that includes the number of each that were performed on the preceding day. I am happy to report that I generally see 2x to 4x more upmods than downmods! YAY!
Where to start?
Start at the at the top of the Left-Hand side of the Main page. There one can find a link to the FAQ. Click that link and scroll down to
the link about our Moderation System. Click that link. Located there is a list of items including one on the Spam Mod.
There it states:
Spam ModThe spam moderation (spam mod) is to be used only on comments that genuinely qualify as spam. Spam is unsolicited advertisement, undesired and offtopic filth, or possibly illegal in general. Spam can come in many forms, but it differs from a troll comment in that it will have absolutely no substance, is completely undesired, is detrimental to the site, or worse.The spam mod is special in that is removes 10 Karma points from the user that posted the comment. This mod is meant to combat spam and not to be used to punish commenters (when in doubt, don't use this mod). Our goal is to put a spammer in Karma Hell and for them to not be able to get out of it easily. As we do not want this used against non-spamers, we monitor all spam mods to make sure moderators are not abusing the spam mod. If we find a moderator that unfairly applied the spam mod, we remove the mod giving the poster back the Karma points, and the modder is banned from modding for one month. Further bans to the same modder add increasing amounts of ban time. If you inadvertently applied a spam mod,
mail the admin and we will remove the spam mod without banning you. Even though we have updated the interface to physically separate the spam mod from the other mods, unintentional modding may still be an unfortunate occurrence.ExamplesIf you are unsure of whether a comment is spam or not, don't use the spam mod. Here are some examples of spam:
Proper spam. Anything whose primary purpose is advertisement (unless somehow relevant to the discussion/article).HOSTS/GNAA/etc... type posts. Recurring, useless annoyances we're all familiar with.Posts so offtopic and lacking value to even be a troll that they can't be called anything else. See here, here or here for example.Repeating the same thing over and over. This includes blockquoting entire comments without adding anything substantial to them.
The spam moderation (spam mod) is to be used only on comments that genuinely qualify as spam. Spam is unsolicited advertisement, undesired and offtopic filth, or possibly illegal in general. Spam can come in many forms, but it differs from a troll comment in that it will have absolutely no substance, is completely undesired, is detrimental to the site, or worse.
The spam mod is special in that is removes 10 Karma points from the user that posted the comment. This mod is meant to combat spam and not to be used to punish commenters (when in doubt, don't use this mod). Our goal is to put a spammer in Karma Hell and for them to not be able to get out of it easily. As we do not want this used against non-spamers, we monitor all spam mods to make sure moderators are not abusing the spam mod. If we find a moderator that unfairly applied the spam mod, we remove the mod giving the poster back the Karma points, and the modder is banned from modding for one month. Further bans to the same modder add increasing amounts of ban time. If you inadvertently applied a spam mod,
mail the admin and we will remove the spam mod without banning you. Even though we have updated the interface to physically separate the spam mod from the other mods, unintentional modding may still be an unfortunate occurrence.
If you are unsure of whether a comment is spam or not, don't use the spam mod. Here are some examples of spam:
These examples cannot cover every type of Spam that you might encounter. Please exercise common sense. We expect all comments to be on-topic or following a clearly defined thread that has developed as part of the discussion. Raising personal complaints or starting completely new discussions unrelated to the main story are certainly off-topic and also possibly trolling. Remember: if in doubt do not use the Spam moderation.
"Sock Mods" and "Mod Bombs":
You may ask: "What's that?". Simply stated, when a logged-in-user, uses one (or more) account(s) to "updmod" other account(s) in unison. This is similar to using other account(s) to "Downmod" one (or more) account(s) in unison. Both practices are Forbidden. As always, when such activity is discovered, Admins notice and discuss it to confirm the observation with other admins. Actions taken can range from a ban on moderations (for increasing durations for repeat offenders) to an outright ban on use of the accounts(s). We have observed such activity happening recently and are preparing to take action. Similarly, when several accounts can be shown to have repeatedly cooperated to prevent someone from expressing their opinion or have given other accounts an unfair advantage then that can also be a form of 'bombing'. My advice is: stop right now. We do not like taking such actions, but it would be unfair to those who DO follow the rules for us to ignore such activities.
(1) simply follow Wheaton's Law:
Don't Be a Dick
(2) "Say what you mean, mean what you say, but don't say it mean."
The problem is, of course, that there was no sockpuppetry in the case in question. You may not know this, but as the accused I have intimate knowledge of this.
How do you know this if you were neither the author nor a moderator of the comment in question? Please explain.
I am the author of one spam modded comment, has my nick right on it! But I also know that the other comment so modded was not by me, it was an AC, but the other AC. This is the danger of admins throwing around unsubstantiated accusations of sockpuppetry, that those who do not know who posted what end up making erroneous assumptions.
So you got mad about admin abuse from Buzzard, understandable, then created sock puppets so you could keep posting and or moderating? Still scummy tactics.
If you are truly innocent then email the staff, maybe post a journal with all the facts so we can discuss. If you are guilty then own up to it and stop.
Uhhhhhm, no, sorry AC. The time line being presented here is all wrong. Aristarchus' puppets date back years. Aristarchus' other misconduct dates back years. Aristarchus was abusive of Buzzard years ago, and Buzzard never retaliated. Aristarchus' entire problem is that he doesn't think any rules should apply to him. He is above the law, he is ungovernable.
If Buzzard were unfairly abusing Aristarchus, it would have been overturned by current staff by now. Unfortunately for Ari, he CONTINUED to break the rules, and to defy administrators long after Buzzard left. In fact, he added to his stable of sock puppets after Buzzard left.
I've been on Late Night IRC when Aristarchus logs in, under one name or another, and spouts his lies, defying admin, daring admin to do anything about his blatant lies.
You can't believe anything that aristarchus says. He spins, distorts, exaggerates, outright lies, and expects you to take his word, just because he impersonates a philosopher.
Don't buy his story.
And why pray tell should anyone listen to you oh purveyor of lies and promoter of terrorism? It wasn't pretty what they used to do with traitors, but lucky for you society has become more civilized and you can spout your manifestos all day long and not worry about the stazi coming for you.
Except about the moderation ban. He repeatedly claimed to being modbanned, specifically by TMB. That was repeatedly rebuffed by admins and TMB in specific. Then Buzzard leaves. Later, the admins post a story about how they banned a bunch of suspected socks. Next, admins admit that not only was he currently modbanned for a nonstandard period of time but none of them know who did it or when and that they were overruling it. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to put together who banned whom or that there is some truth to the story.
Wellllll, noowwwwww, Mr. Rocket Scientist - is aristarchus STILL mod banned? If, indeed, it is accurate to say that current staff reversed Buzzard's ban, then why is ari still mod banned? Could it be that my explanation above is essentially correct? A simple yes or no will suffice.
Yes, poor aristarchus is still mod banned. Look to be that way for near a half a year, at which point there will probably be another on equally suspect grounds. None of the admin could remember what the grounds were for the prior. Gotta love competence in the administration of Justice!
Let me say this again: stop shitting all over the house! THAT is why you are mod-banned.
And why you are too, you pure and simple right-wing asshole. Been nice knowing you, Runaway, but it seems you have fallen into the trap.
lol - you really don't have a clue, do you?
Let us go through the sock puppet war, once again. I was being mod bombed for awhile, so I created a sock. The mod bombing seemed to stop, I didn't use the sock. I was being mod bombed again, I created ANOTHER sock, and the mod bombing seemed to stop. Mod bombing resumed, so I created yet another sock, and started using them. At that point in time, you had reduced my karma to about 27, despite numerous up mods from other soylentils. I hammered on you for several days in a row, when a certain female member made some comments that irritated me. Now, you and I both had made comments on IRC about being mod bombed, and it seemed that we were largely ignored. Because that female had irritated me, I included her in the mod bombing. SHE cried on IRC, and immediately, massive attention was brought to bear on both of us.
Did you notice that something isn't quite right, or quite fair, or quite "equitable" in all of that? Oh well, it is what it is, men pay attention when women whine.
Anyway - you got all the same notices, warnings, scoldings that I got. But, the difference is, YOU DENIED EVERYTHING. YOU CONTINUED WITH YOUR SOCK PUPPETRY! You have defied every civilized attempt to reign in your bad behaviour. You just shit all over the house, no matter how many times you are scolded. The more people shout "BAD DOG" at you the more you shit in the house.
You poor, mistaken, misguided, misbehaving pooch - I'm not mod banned. Here, have a redundant mod, for being stupid, and for old time's sake. And, if you EVER stop shitting in the house, maybe you can have mod points again? I don't see much hope for you. Hardly a week passes that you don't whine, cry, and beg for attention, all based on your claims not to be a sock master.
You empty headed buffoon. People without admin powers were calling you out on sock puppetry. People whom you hadn't even victimized were calling you out. The female mentioned above has called you out. You try from time to time to cozy up to her, because her politics are more-or-less in line with your own - but she calls you out for being a pathetic loser.
Grow the fuck up dude. Almost no one believes you, and those who do, do so blindly because they like your lib/left/progressive politics.
STOP SHITTING IN THE HOUSE THAT WE ALL LIVE IN!!!!
The witness has rights. ("A Few Good Men", of which supply clerk Runaway1956 is not one. )
And, why is not this violator of the "rules" at least mod-banned? SN justice is just so hard to grok!
You have no concept of justice. I am "reformed". You are just a shit eating dog. How many times does it have to be spelled out for you?
Hmm, prison time, eh? Thought as much! Thank you for your service!
Nope. No prison time here, unless you refer to mod banning. My mod ban expired quite a long time ago. My conduct wasn't nearly as bad as yours, so my punishment wasn't as harsh. Nor have I gone on IRC, or into my journal, to publicly insult and debase the admin staff. But, you do whatever it is you've got to do. I suppose some people like to hear the bad dog whining.
Well, at least runsaway finally got trucked into admitting he sock puppets. That makes you a shitty liar, but we already knew that.
Fine, you spin it however you like. Now work on getting ari to come clean. He has never admitted to his shit conduct - his conduct which triggered the entire sock puppet war. If someone kicks you repeatedly, do you just allow him to continue kicking?
Unless you give us his real address I don't see how we can force him to admit anything. Plenty of people here saying they agree with his politics while condemning his sock puppetry. I get this is a foreign concept for you, criticizing your tribe, but your whingey crying is beyond the pale. Hiw about you put up or shut up? Post a journal apologizing and naming your sock puppets, then you will have the high ground against aristarchus, and generally improve your tattered reputation.
He was mod banned. His ban has now lapsed.
No. It isn't "essentially correct."
The comment that I found in the discussion was authored by Frigatebird, not yourself. If I found the incorrect comment then I apologize.