Twiglet has a point....">

Random Access Memories

by jc1000000

user profile | dashboard | imagewall

« older newer »

[j:c)] I'm a romantic antiquarian; My first cameraphone was the best i ever had.





Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License

Search this moblog

Recent visitors

The Spam of God

(viewed 1390 times)
Bookmark and Share
Ok i'm willing to concede that Twiglet has a point....
21st Sep 2009, 18:24  

paintist says:

Yesssss!!! spam it is !!

21st Sep 2009, 18:25

Caine says:

How about *I had a point on the mods group*? I said this was bad and it would get worse. All too often, I seem to be the only one who gives a shit about how the latest page looks.

21st Sep 2009, 18:35

jc1000000 says:

Caine - consider your point taken!

But it's not just about the latest page - it's a moderation policy rather than a site design issue....

21st Sep 2009, 18:39

mat says:

It's not spam. sorry. Spam is widely accepted as meaning the unsolicited advertising commercial products or services.

it's just annoying. that's not the same thing.

21st Sep 2009, 18:41

jc1000000 says:

Honestly tho - i think cos this hits teh site when most people in the UK are commuting we just missed it here.

This kinda of uproar is great tho - because now we can see obvious due diligence that needs to be taken over certain accounts/types of content.

21st Sep 2009, 18:41

Twiglet says:

Thank you for noticing Caine and trying to get rid of it. My lovely niece's good news post just vanished under all this stuff which is why I'm so bloody annoyed.

JC; That's 8 out of 12 which is what I said it was..

21st Sep 2009, 18:41

jc1000000 says:

Yeah - just to clarify - i;m not sayign it's spam.

But it's affecting user experience which shoudl amounts to the same thing. Whether we solve it by design or a policy or a special block button still needs to worked out.

21st Sep 2009, 18:46

jc1000000 says:

Although - i did entitle my post with the word spam... but that was really just cos i thought it would be funny.

21st Sep 2009, 18:47

bronxelf says:

*gives JC that look*

21st Sep 2009, 19:07

Wendle says:

So, i say this is spam. Spam is not limited to someone trying to sell something. Spam can be loads of random meaningless comments posted on a blog. Spam can be links to someone's noncommercial website. Spam can be large amounts of adverts for something that invloves no money.
This guy is spamming to promote God. And i think we should tell him to go to hell.

21st Sep 2009, 19:13

ookiine says:

It's fucking spam! PLEASE get rid of it.

21st Sep 2009, 23:28

cariadus says:

I agree with Wendle - spam in my book too.

It's not so much the content that is the problem, it's the sheer volume. The longer it goes on the more likely that some genuine long-standing mobloggers are going to leave.

He's got to be stopped sooner or later so why not make it sooner? As in RIGHT NOW.

22nd Sep 2009, 00:08

mat says:

Right. It's not spam. Not by the definition in our terms and conditions. And that's the only definition that matter here.

I have hidden his account. Nobody has to look at his posts again. I *really* didn't like doing that without giving him a chance to do it himself, but hey. That OK with everyone?

22nd Sep 2009, 00:22

jc1000000 says:

Nice one Mat.

I think a wave of reiief just passed through the site... like a million tiny voices shouting


22nd Sep 2009, 00:28

cariadus says:

Thanks Mat. I still think that whether it's spam or not, if someone posts with such frequency, whatever the content, they should barred. And if that's not in the Ts & Cs then it ought to be.

Otherwise what's to stop someone setting up a webcam that posts every two minutes?

22nd Sep 2009, 00:28

SLG says:

I think someone did set up a webcam a while back Cariadus

22nd Sep 2009, 00:30

Rich says:

Someone did that once, it wasn't super annoying and as long as they were having fun then at the end of the day, there we go. This guy was obnoxious though, so there's a continuum of annoyance.

This makes me slightly nostalgic for the time Hudson posted a million pictures of his new boat for the insurance. That guy was awesome, he should come back :(

22nd Sep 2009, 00:32

Spiderbaby says:

Ah. That's much better. Thank you :) Feels like a weight has been lifted.

22nd Sep 2009, 00:34

Factotum says:


22nd Sep 2009, 00:35

cariadus says:

So if it's happened before why haven't the Terms and Conditions been changed to prevent it happening again? And more to the point, will they be now?

22nd Sep 2009, 00:35

Rich says:

Well, it doesn't happen very often and the kind of person who does stuff like this isn't likely to pay too much attention to the terms and conditions. Much better to deal on an ad hoc basis.

22nd Sep 2009, 00:36

mat says:

Cariadus - the flipside to that is what if someone is having a (say) Moblog Meetup, and sets up a moblog for it. That could mean tens of posts in just half an hour, easily. It's not like that hasn't already happened several times, with zero complaints.

This problem has occured once (possibly twice, but no-one ever complained about mattblogger and his motion-sensing webcam) in almost six years. I think making new rules (bear in mind the existing rules have served us perfectly well all that time) on the basis of one guy might be something of an over-reaction.

I miss Hudson too. I bet he's in space or something now.

22nd Sep 2009, 00:37

540air says:

Totally agree with Rich and mat here, deal with each rare case as it happens.

22nd Sep 2009, 00:39

cariadus says:

Yes, but there seemed to be a reluctance to deal with it because he hadn't broken any rules so it went on for a long time and pissed off a lot of people in the process. If it had been against the rules then a mod could have chopped it early on and saved people a lot of grief.

22nd Sep 2009, 00:41

mat says:

he the man. he writes supercomputer operating systems and designs UAVs for a living.

damn right he's got a massive yacht.

22nd Sep 2009, 00:42

mat says:

cariadus - yes, that would have happened. but the point I'm trying to make is that, if posting a lot were against the rules, a lot of other, cool (or at least not annoying) things would also have been against the rules too.

Then we get into having one rule for some people and another rule for someone else. I'm sure we can all agree that's not a good thing.

22nd Sep 2009, 00:51

paintist says:

I went to bed very angry last night......this morning a weight has been lifted.....thank you mat

22nd Sep 2009, 06:50

jc1000000 says:

Incidentally it doesn't seem to just be us that have issues defining spam or having Ts&cs; in place that define how to deal with it. Just got this from Google re: Youtube spam

"Spam is massively distributed, repetitive, untargeted content or communication of little or no interest. It has practically no value and by its presence it makes it more difficult to locate material that is actually of interest. Though at times you may see spam on our site, it is not allowed. We are working on tools to allow us to communicate specific removal reasons and allow users to appeal these decisions directly through the site."

22nd Sep 2009, 12:15