|
Poster:
|
ridetheory |
Date:
|
August 01, 2004 11:39:02pm |
|
Forum:
|
movie_of_the_week
|
Subject:
|
Re: antics |
I don't understand this statement. "Spam" is junk email.
|
Poster:
|
glenn |
Date:
|
August 02, 2004 11:30:29am |
|
Forum:
|
movie_of_the_week
|
Subject:
|
spam: alternate meanings ...(was Re: antics) |
In addition to the common menaing of spam as junk email, there is currently another sister meaning to the term 'spam' which would be something along the lines of posting many many posts on the same subject, in different threads (cross-posting spam)
as well as posting numerous short posts to the same forum with nothing cogent to say (spamming the forum), posting non sequitur replies, that have nothing to do with the putative topic being discussed (off-topic spam).
and also, there are the related terms 'troll' and 'trolling', which combine the noun and verb form in their meaning, hence 'one who lurks on a forum fishing for controversy'. Trolls are generally despised by those who recognise their trolling behaviour patterns, yet are rarely 'called on it', as conventional wisdom holds that to 'feed the trolls' is to encourage them.
I think though, that what is meant in this case by 'spam' is "burying the main subject of a thread in a flurry of irrelevant replies.
And an on topic post which is relevant to the discussion and is not intended to arouse ire can be considered spam if it deflects the topic sufficiently this post is a possible example of spam.
Of course spam is in the eye of the beholder, and one man's meat is another man's metaphor. ;-)
|
Poster:
|
cashel |
Date:
|
August 02, 2004 12:59:41pm |
|
Forum:
|
movie_of_the_week
|
Subject:
|
Thank you TO GLENN |
GLEN thank your excellent post. It was most welcome as I am now engaged in the tiresome task of fending of "replies" which NEVER answer any of the points raised in my original post, but try to deflect its validity by giving unrelated opinions. ( revision spelling and heading)
This post was modified by cashel on 2004-08-02 19:00:34
This post was modified by cashel on 2004-08-02 19:59:41
|
Poster:
|
ridetheory |
Date:
|
August 02, 2004 04:12:25pm |
|
Forum:
|
movie_of_the_week
|
Subject:
|
Now this post, I must admit, is a bit malicious |
Okay, I can accept another definition of "spam", and admit I was ignorant of it.
And, in spite of what he claims, I have directly and to the best of my ability addressed Cashel's concern about access to these films by children. I do not think it is important to restrict access of these films to children. I have no desire or authority to make any of his proposals into reality. He doesn't agree with my opinion and that's fine.
Meanwhile...
Cashel, you keep spinning words around and then you accuse OTHERS of putting words in YOUR mouth? (At least half of what you accuse others of saying they simply DID NOT SAY! You read something into it that WASN'T THERE!) You accuse OTHERS of filling the forum with useless posts? You throw hissy fits, and then accuse OTHERS of being childish?
The irony of this is just staggering!
This forum degenerates into a whirlpool of noise constantly, and YOU are the center of it every time. Do you think that maybe YOU might be the cause of it? You are, after all, the common denominator EVERY SINGLE TIME IT HAPPENS...
This post was modified by ridetheory on 2004-08-02 23:12:25
|
Poster:
|
glenn |
Date:
|
August 02, 2004 09:39:53pm |
|
Forum:
|
movie_of_the_week
|
Subject:
|
Re: Now this post, I must admit, is a bit malicious |
I'm sorry.
to be fair, the very nature of the 'thread' system used on these boards can bea bit confusing, and sometimes it might be the case that replies can be made at 'inappropriate' levels of the thread hierarchy...
thank you,
... this kind of thing is easy to happen.. here's some suggestions to prevent friction and promote lubrication on this type of forum.
1) discuss concepts, not people on the forum, even mentioning another person can be misconstrued as an attack
2)if you are specifically addressing an individual, usage such as "(@ glenn)you still believe in the tooth fairy?really?" can serve to explicitly disambiguate who your addressee is...
3)if it seems as if someone is making some sort of personal attack on you, they likely aren't... ignore it
4)if someone makes it plain they are attacking you, ignore it even more, nothing is servedby giving an attacker the only thing they could possibly want from you,a response.
5)be cordial to even the biggest jerk, if this doesn't work be amazingly cordial. Nobody who is spoiling for a fight can lastlong int he face of implacable calm.
6)periodically, start a random post with the words thank you, or I'm sorry. These words have a positive effect even when used at random moments.
I really appreciate your help. Thanks a lot!
|
Poster:
|
cashel |
Date:
|
August 02, 2004 10:06:44pm |
|
Forum:
|
movie_of_the_week
|
Subject:
|
GLENN I will follow your guidlines THANKS |
and I hope that the other forum members will also do so.
|
Poster:
|
ridetheory |
Date:
|
August 02, 2004 11:53:11pm |
|
Forum:
|
movie_of_the_week
|
Subject:
|
Re: Now this post, I must admit, is a bit malicious |
Glenn,
Very sane suggestions. Bear in mind that certain users of this forum will agree to them, but that they have amusingly short memories. The slightest disagreement will begin the whole cycle again.
Mark my words.
|
Poster:
|
glenn |
Date:
|
August 04, 2004 12:01:38pm |
|
Forum:
|
movie_of_the_week
|
Subject:
|
shrug (was Re: Now this post, I must admit, is a bit malicious) |
shrug
TVNews
OpenLibrary