Southperry.net
Spam. - Printable Version

+- Southperry.net (https://www.southperry.net)
+-- Forum: Social (https://www.southperry.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Forum: Shenanigans (https://www.southperry.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=51)
+--- Thread: Spam. (/showthread.php?tid=3067)

Pages: 1 2

Spam. - Greg22 - 2008-09-03

First off, a question to Fiel and any of the other moderators that clicked on this thread: Did you think you'd lock it? Let's say there was no preview function when scrolling your mouse over a thread title. Or maybe you didn't even bother previewing. Some of you may have clicked on this thread, and just after reading the title, "Spam", you assumed that this thread would contain either a one-liner, a bunch of emoticons, or maybe something insulting to get myself an infraction. Maybe I'm just assuming myself, but am I correct?

Alright, this is the "Funhouse" but I'll just call it the spam forum, because that's essentially all it is. Whether the topic has a misleading title, or is just a post full of emoticons, or honestly just something Fiel or the moderators dislike, it'll get locked. Why?

Spam doesn't add to your post count. It doesn't make your e-penis look any larger than those higher in the social hierchy because the majority of the threads within this forum are unfunny and in most cases, just annoying. So why lock them? If they're really as pointless as your mind makes them out to be, then wouldn't they just be posted in a couple of times, and then the thread will die down to page two? Nobody cares about page two anymore. Now, I understand that quite a few of those with topic-locking powers can foresee the future and somehow 'know' when a topic is going to turn in to a pumpernickelstorm (Oh wait, I mean shi'tstorm). In cases like these, you lock the topic simply because you feel you're right, and we're not civilized enough to cut back on the assuming and arguing on our own.

Since when does spam need to mean something? In most forums I've been on, spam doesn't need to mean anything. In Sleepywood (That's right, I'm comparing SP to SW now.), the Pooper Scooper went through a period in it's time where it was funfunfun to browse and post in. There were members that continued browsing what is now a shi'thole ONLY because they enjoyed posting in the Pooper Scooper. It didn't have to mean anything. Threads that didn't have much of a purpose in the eyes of the majority just moved down the list of threads until it was eventually bumped off the page. Or MapleTip, where people just make countless spamspamspam topics, just to spam. Why? Because they like to spam.

I've got a problem with there being 'locked topics' in a 'spam forum'. The two phrases just don't mix, but it's happening almost daily. In fact, I could bet myself an infraction (which I'll most likely get for 'questioning' the way this forum is being run) that this thread will also get locked.

Let's see how I fair. What defines spam?

Spam. - Mark - 2008-09-03

tl;dr.

Spam. - psychopat - 2008-09-03

The above response was spam :-P

Anyway, I've been a moderator on a few different forums before and I have closed topics in "spam" sections.

Usually, the main two reasons are either that the thread is degenerating into a flamewar or that the thread is an absolute waste of bandwidth ( for example, did you see that one thread where someone's whole post was hundreds of Glitter?).

Other than that, I've locked threads because they had served their purpose and any further input would either be redundant or unwanted/flamey/flamebaity. When someone asks a simple question and gets a valid answer, you don't need 20 more people chiming in "yeah, that's right".

I've also moved threads from spam to other sections of the board when they warranted it. Then again, I never saw a point to a spam section. I still don't understand why people like them. Most of the good topics can easily fall in a different section anyway.

Spam. - Tremulant - 2008-09-04

Locking spam in a spam forum seems pretty stupid. Doesn't it kinda kill the whole reason of a spam forum. Kills the fun, imo.

Spam. - Worthyness - 2008-09-04

I want the million posts thread back =(

I think we need an official spam thread... just to get some frustrations out on not people

Spam. - tzk221 - 2008-09-04

Worthyness Wrote:I want the million posts thread back =(

I think we need an official spam thread... just to get some frustrations out on not people
I second that. Give us just one place. Frown

Spam. - EngelRod - 2008-09-04

Worthyness Wrote:I want the million posts thread back =(

I think we need an official spam thread... just to get some frustrations out on not people

that's a good idea. Cool

Spam. - Magus - 2008-09-04

[YOUTUBE]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/anwy2MPT5RE&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/anwy2MPT5RE&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/YOUTUBE]

Greg Wrote:First off, a question to Fiel and any of the other moderators that clicked on this thread: Did you think you'd lock it? Let's say there was no preview function when scrolling your mouse over a thread title. Or maybe you didn't even bother previewing. Some of you may have clicked on this thread, and just after reading the title, "Spam", you assumed that this thread would contain either a one-liner, a bunch of emoticons, or maybe something insulting to get myself an infraction. Maybe I'm just assuming myself, but am I correct?

Alright, this is the "Funhouse" but I'll just call it the spam forum, because that's essentially all it is. Whether the topic has a misleading title, or is just a post full of emoticons, or honestly just something Fiel or the moderators dislike, it'll get locked. Why?

Spam doesn't add to your post count. It doesn't make your e-penis look any larger than those higher in the social hierchy because the majority of the threads within this forum are unfunny and in most cases, just annoying. So why lock them? If they're really as pointless as your mind makes them out to be, then wouldn't they just be posted in a couple of times, and then the thread will die down to page two? Nobody cares about page two anymore. Now, I understand that quite a few of those with topic-locking powers can foresee the future and somehow 'know' when a topic is going to turn in to a pumpernickelstorm (Oh wait, I mean shi'tstorm). In cases like these, you lock the topic simply because you feel you're right, and we're not civilized enough to cut back on the assuming and arguing on our own.

Since when does spam need to mean something? In most forums I've been on, spam doesn't need to mean anything. In Sleepywood (That's right, I'm comparing SP to SW now.), the Pooper Scooper went through a period in it's time where it was funfunfun to browse and post in. There were members that continued browsing what is now a shi'thole ONLY because they enjoyed posting in the Pooper Scooper. It didn't have to mean anything. Threads that didn't have much of a purpose in the eyes of the majority just moved down the list of threads until it was eventually bumped off the page. Or MapleTip, where people just make countless spamspamspam topics, just to spam. Why? Because they like to spam.

I've got a problem with there being 'locked topics' in a 'spam forum'. The two phrases just don't mix, but it's happening almost daily. In fact, I could bet myself an infraction (which I'll most likely get for 'questioning' the way this forum is being run) that this thread will also get locked.

Let's see how I fair. What defines spam?
There are not that many locked topics on this board, and the ones that are where closed for good reason.
Also, could you please stop the "oppressed rebel" mind set? We're not all out to get you. We're here to keep order.
EngelRod Wrote:that's a good idea. Cool
No, it is not. That topic degenerated into you lot posting inane comments like "LOL" or "122adfgwAWQAGqwfgSGSDfg" just to reach 1 million posts.

Spam. - Kranzorbaken - 2008-09-04

so?
was there anything wrong with us wanting to hit 1m posts.
honestly?
cmon

Spam. - IsaacGS - 2008-09-04

Kranzorbaken Wrote:so?
was there anything wrong with us wanting to hit 1m posts.
honestly?
cmon
is there some sort of satisfaction or achievement to be had from posting "Etgrerg3444" 1 million times?

Spam. - randompeep - 2008-09-04

^
Our's was not even bad compared to MT's, where people put a blank post to get there. (And they're at, what, 22k posts in 3 years? Such a thread will eat bandwidth for years. )

Spam. - Pikachu - 2008-09-05

Wow. You actually wrote a rant about how pathetic closing a spam topic in a spam forum section is...

Spam. - Greg22 - 2008-09-05

Well, if you can waste hundreds of dollars annoying the f'uck out of Scania, then I can waste five minutes to expess my opinion.

Oh and I did, surprisingly, recieve an infraction for this.

Spam. - Russt - 2008-09-05

Doesn't look like you did, unless you can only see your own red cards.

Spam. - Mark - 2008-09-05

Greg Wrote:Well, if you can waste hundreds of dollars annoying the f'uck out of Scania, then I can waste five minutes to expess my opinion.

Oh and I did, surprisingly, recieve an infraction for this.

osnap served.

Spam. - Blankout - 2008-09-05

Russt Wrote:Doesn't look like you did, unless you can only see your own red cards.

Yeah, infractions are all private now. You can't see if someone really got an infraction, unless maybe if you send them the infraction PM.

Spam. - Greg22 - 2008-09-05

Quote:The reason I am warning you is because I wish to crush the resistance before it starts.
Do not question how this forum is run! We, the overlords that are the staff, must silence all opinions that we don't agree on!
This place will slowly degrade in to a SW.net.
Watch.

Spam. - Fiel - 2008-09-05

lol, that's not what the reason sent to you said. haha. Tongue

Also, he sent you a warning and not an infraction. Two totally different things.

1. When did I ever close a topic I disliked?

2. There's a difference between "spam" and "pumpernickel spam". Spamming a thread with "LOL" is fine, but something like "dhauopre-q83yr8-yhausiohvcx" is just stupid and wasteful. There's spam and there's garbage.

Spam. - Afrobean - 2008-09-05

Your original post was pretty worthless in purpose, but...
Greg Wrote:Oh and I did, surprisingly, recieve an infraction for this.
That still sucks. Things should be taken lightly in this forum, even things with a perceived serious nature of talking back to a moderation decision.

Spam. - Fiel - 2008-09-05

Afrobean Wrote:Your original post was pretty worthless in purpose, but...
That still sucks. Things should be taken lightly in this forum, even things with a perceived serious nature of talking back to a moderation decision.

I just reversed the warning.