Author |
Message |
|
|
|
Advert
|
Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
- No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
- Times and dates in your local timezone.
- Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
- Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
- Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now. |
|
|
2018/06/07 05:19:32
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Douglas Bader
|
This is something that has been annoying me for a while, posters who have little or no interest in participating in discussions on dakka and see the site solely as a place to advertise and drive clicks to their own sites. Occasionally they'll dump an excerpt of a post or picture of a new model or whatever with a link to their site, but there's rarely any sign that they care about what happens here once they post it. And on the rare occasion that they do post in their own threads it's usually just another encouragement to visit their site or similar piece of self-promotional material. It's zero-content spam, there's no point in posting in these threads because the OP is never coming back and there's little to talk about besides "LOOK AT MY BLOG". And honestly, who likes being treated as nothing but a source of blog clicks to farm rather than a legitimate community?
As an example, look at Teena Hancock's posting history. Literally every post they make is a blog excerpt and link to an article, they have made zero contribution other than advertising spam. You could replace them with a script set to automatically post a preview of every blog post they make and nobody would notice a difference (in fact, I wouldn't be surprised if that's exactly what this account is). Why is this kind of thing considered acceptable? And can we do something about it?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/06/07 05:20:14
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. |
|
|
|
2018/06/07 05:47:27
Subject: Re:Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan
|
It's annoying for reals, but how is it any different from a thread anyone else selling something wargaming related?
IE, the Kromlech guys (for example, use any bits vendor) don't contribute to the community in terms of discussions on dakka or wargaming or that kind of thing. They post their models, post updates, and drive traffic to their sites to sell their products. I don't think many people have a problem with that.
So what is the distinction between a physical product seller, and someone selling... lets call it commentary?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/06/07 05:47:52
lord_blackfang wrote:Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote:The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock |
|
|
|
2018/06/07 05:47:56
Subject: Re:Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Fireknife Shas'el
|
I'm inclined to allow this kind of posting, so long as it's relevant to dakkadakka, not some random ad-spam. It's not that different from a creator posting their KS launch or new miniatures release, though those posters tend to be more interactive.
Perhaps those sort of posts should be required to stay in one subject (warzone40k.com's blog thread) they can update as they update their blog. Could be worth a sub-forum for wargaming blogs.
|
|
|
|
|
2018/06/07 06:20:42
Subject: Re:Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Douglas Bader
|
Ouze wrote:So what is the distinction between a physical product seller, and someone selling... lets call it commentary?
I don't really see much of a distinction. I don't think the various "LOOK AT MY BITS STORE" threads add much to the site, if there isn't enough genuine community interest to motivate a discussion thread without the store owner making drive-by posts with every new release. I'd be 100% fine with getting rid of those threads and telling the people involved to buy ad space if they want to advertise without participating as legitimate community members.
Though I guess the one distinction, as weak as it is, that I could draw is that drive-by sellers at least have a product that can't be duplicated on dakka while drive-by blog spam is about taking discussion that could happen on dakka and putting it on the spammer's blog (where it produces advertising revenue).
|
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. |
|
|
|
2018/06/07 06:34:46
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
[MOD]
Solahma
|
We already talked about this a bit behind the scenes. My feeling is, as long as some actual content is posted that could lead to on-topic discussion (and sure enough the specifc content in question has) it is okay to try to get some clicks by posting threads on Dakka Dakka. Obviously this is not true of off-topic stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
2018/06/07 11:40:41
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Grizzled Space Wolves Great Wolf
|
I find it annoying when posts aren't self contained. So when people post a couple of words then a link to some crappy YouTube video they made of their blog or whatever that you need to follow to actually figure out if they have anything worthwhile.
Blog posts for the most part I dump in to a separate type of annoyance, I don't come to forums to read blogs and dislike wasting 30 seconds clicking on a thread and glancing through it before figuring out it's just blog post junk.
|
|
|
|
2018/06/07 11:46:06
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
AllSeeingSkink wrote:I find it annoying when posts aren't self contained. So when people post a couple of words then a link to some crappy YouTube video they made of their blog or whatever that you need to follow to actually figure out if they have anything worthwhile.
Blog posts for the most part I dump in to a separate type of annoyance, I don't come to forums to read blogs and dislike wasting 30 seconds clicking on a thread and glancing through it before figuring out it's just blog post junk.
In the past, I've hit the yellow triangle on those.
"Do you like 40k and hot cosplayers? Look at my post at www.randomcrap/sometimes40k !"
That gak adds nothing to the community.
Pix or GTFO.
|
DA:70S+G+M+B++I++Pw40k08+D++A++/fWD-R+T(M)DM+
|
|
|
|
2018/06/07 12:02:22
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
[DCM]
Moustache-twirling Princeps
Gone-to-ground in the craters of Coventry
|
kronk wrote:AllSeeingSkink wrote:I find it annoying when posts aren't self contained. So when people post a couple of words then a link to some crappy YouTube video they made of their blog or whatever that you need to follow to actually figure out if they have anything worthwhile.
Blog posts for the most part I dump in to a separate type of annoyance, I don't come to forums to read blogs and dislike wasting 30 seconds clicking on a thread and glancing through it before figuring out it's just blog post junk.
In the past, I've hit the yellow triangle on those.
"Do you like 40k and hot cosplayers? Look at my post at www.randomcrap/sometimes40k !"
That gak adds nothing to the community.
Pix or GTFO.
I get deploy my annoying personality on posts like those, asking for more info in the thread. Some go away, and sometimes, people do post a bit more.
But yeah, post if dribs and drabs, and I'll pull to get more.
Posts mentioned in the OP are more annoying though, as you can ask questions or discuss, but never get a reply.
One of Teena's monologues starts with "We have already discussed the problems of....". There doesn't seem to have been any discussion.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/06/07 12:05:13
|
|
|
|
2018/06/07 12:32:21
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Ollanius Pius - Savior of the Emperor
Gathering the Informations.
|
Manchu wrote:We already talked about this a bit behind the scenes. My feeling is, as long as some actual content is posted that could lead to on-topic discussion (and sure enough the specifc content in question has) it is okay to try to get some clicks by posting threads on Dakka Dakka. Obviously this is not true of off-topic stuff.
And what about when the posts don't even line up with basic reality?
Several of Teena's "posts" were just full of incorrect information. The post that bot made for the Idoneth in the AoS section for example.
|
|
|
|
2018/06/08 17:07:34
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Xeno-Hating Inquisitorial Excruciator
London
|
Totally agree with Kronk on this (though I wouldn't dream of hitting the triangle with my lowly post count).
I mean, if the OP returns and participates in their own thread, all's cool. But in the cases mentioned, they don't. Click bait, basically.
|
|
|
|
2018/06/08 18:32:17
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer
Somewhere in south-central England.
|
The current moderation rule is that if the post is related to wargames we let it stand.
We've got no real problem with people advertising their blog or YouTube or whatever.
If the content is good, it's a plus for the Dakka community to be made aware of an additional resource. If the content is bad, people just won't go there again.
DakkaDakka is not responsible for the content of external sites, of course.
|
|
|
|
|
2018/06/09 00:55:17
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Highlord with a Blackstone Fortress
Adrift within the vortex of my imagination.
|
If a Dakka member has a project wargaming related or not why not tell people about it. Write a book of flower arranging (chosen something pretty much the antethesis of the gaming hobby), why not open up a thread in Off Topic and place handy links. You might get a conversation, you might get an argument, you might get critique, you might get sales, who knows. Plenty of Dakka members have come to the forums with their ideas, either for advice or to plug them, and not all are gaming related. Buy and large the community is willing to help with advice or commentary on just about anything. And its rare to meet a topic without a number of people who can articulate an opinion on it, there is a very wide skillset in the forum membership. More so than most sites of this size.
That being said if a new account pops up and spams some links, just kill the whole account. Most Dakkites will be happy to provide some form of encouragement for the ventures of another member, and there is an easy delimiter between that and a spammer
Then again, people do turn up and create new accounts to plug a game. While technically that is a spam account, if someone is a game developer and posts links to a game on Kickstarter and has a very low post count . As thats gaming they not only get a pass, they get encouragement. I and others have talked to several games designer 'spam' account members who came here purely to plug the new game they are doing on Kickstarter.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/06/09 01:02:18
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. |
|
|
|
2018/06/09 03:25:59
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Douglas Bader
|
Orlanth wrote:If a Dakka member has a project wargaming related or not why not tell people about it.
Sure, why not? But the key point there is dakka member. I have no problem with people who are legitimate members of the community posting links to their work, in addition to their other contributions here. And if it's not related to wargaming? Fine, maybe someone will be interested in it in the off-topic section. It's probably going to be more interesting than yet another iteration of the same old mass shooting thread. The issue is people whose sole purpose is to spam links to their off-dakka stuff without ever engaging with the community, people who could be replaced by a spam bot without anyone ever noticing a difference in their posting.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
The issue is that when the content is bad (or the poster has zero interest in participating here) it just clutters up the forum and wastes our time. When I read something here it's because I want to see the discussion. I don't want to have to keep track of which threads are posted by spambots and therefore unlikely to produce any useful content. And people not going there isn't going to stop them from posting their spam.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/06/09 03:27:54
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. |
|
|
|
2018/06/09 05:16:46
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Junior Officer with Laspistol
|
Your time is so valuable you want to ban things you don't like so you don't waste moments of your life clicking the back arrow on your browser?
Metacriticism: This thread is a waste of time, in my opinion. Be it never so humble.
Could we expand the banning to anyone posting waste of time posts, based solely on my arbitrary opinion? Cause that would be awesome!
|
|
|
|
2018/06/09 14:00:24
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan
|
greatbigtree wrote:Your time is so valuable you want to ban things you don't like so you don't waste moments of your life clicking the back arrow on your browser?
Well, even though I disagree with the conclusion, I think the premise was pretty solid: those bot-like posters who copypasta some flavor text and shart out a link to a blog or a youtube video really are kind of annoying, even if they do (inadvertently, and rarely) spark some discussion.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/06/09 14:00:45
lord_blackfang wrote:Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote:The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock |
|
|
|
2018/06/09 14:05:38
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Decrepit Dakkanaut
UK
|
War Drone wrote:Totally agree with Kronk on this (though I wouldn't dream of hitting the triangle with my lowly post count).
Speaking as someone with moderator experience on other sites, and as this post appears to have been overlooked I'd like to encourage you to change your viewpoint. Reports are essential for moderators to get, be they from brand new members or those who have been around for years. Post count doesn't matter, the report tool is your means to highlight problems or issue on the site for mods to review.
Mods are people too and they don't see everything, plus they might well not interpret a post or thread in the same way as you have. So even where you see a problem or an inappropriate comment a passing mod might not. Sharing your views through reporting (and commenting in the report) is a means to enlighten the mod team to your interpretation (which might be a view many share).
Effective reporting is a critical part of effective moderating of a site.
|
|
|
|
|
2018/06/09 14:54:53
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Willing Inquisitorial Excruciator
|
Definitely - especially on a large site like this, with few actual active Moderators!
|
Insidious Intriguer |
|
|
|
2018/06/09 14:56:56
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Junior Officer with Laspistol
|
I can think of plenty of annoying posts here that have nothing to do with link-posts. Those at least lead to some kind of content.
Good bad or indifferent, a link to hobby related material is more valuable as a resource than some "community building" posts.
Not everyone comes to Dakka for lively name calling and passive aggressive sniping. I mean, I do, but hypothetically other people come here as a convenient connection to all parts of the community.
Let's be honest, any look what I painted post isn't generating much discussion / genital measuring but it can be inspiring to others and provide some warm fuzzies for the painter.
The point is, this site is technically more than a complaint factory for Guard, Eldar, SM needing an upgrade to the Bolter, Riptides being the spawn of Satan, and Blood Angels being the worst thing evah.
It can, technically, be more than that.
|
|
|
|
2018/06/09 22:36:53
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Douglas Bader
|
greatbigtree wrote:Let's be honest, any look what I painted post isn't generating much discussion / genital measuring but it can be inspiring to others and provide some warm fuzzies for the painter.
There's a difference between getting lots of discussion and having the potential to get lots of discussion. A "look what I painted" post by a legitimate member of the community may not get many replies for whatever reason, but if, for example, you see something you like and want to ask the OP how they did a particular technique you're probably going to get a reply. It's at least possible to interact with the person making the post, they aren't a mindless spam bot. But if it's a drive-by "LOOK AT MY COMMISSION SERVICE HERE IS MY LINK TO BUY" spam post by someone who never looks at dakka except to put up another advertising post that interaction doesn't happen. You're just wasting your time talking to the wall. Automatically Appended Next Post: greatbigtree wrote:Your time is so valuable you want to ban things you don't like so you don't waste moments of your life clicking the back arrow on your browser?
Yep. When the point of a site is discussion and drive-by spam bots are just spamming their links without ever intending to participate in discussion of them or acknowledge that the rest of the site exists as anything but a source of clicks I want that gone. I simply propose that the rules which already apply to CHEAP KITCHENS NOW spam be applied to spam bots that are posting equally worthless links to their hobby-related content. Dakka has a perfectly useful advertising service where they can purchase space to market their product, with the added bonus of the site getting more funding.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/06/09 22:40:04
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. |
|
|
|
2018/06/09 23:23:46
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Junior Officer with Laspistol
|
You presume the point of the site is discussion, and because you presume that you filter everything through a single viewpoint.
I'll counter with the purpose of this site is to collect and make readily available any and all information regarding the hobby, and that if discussion materializes that's a bonus.
I check out hobby news here. There's not much meaningful discussion when someone reports that the newest box set contains Faction A and Faction B. It's just factual information sometimes.
Quite frankly, if I was interested in hiring a commission painting service, I wouldn't know where else to look other than cruising this board. To be further honest, I've never actively looked for such a service... I only know they exist because I've seen them advertised (look! I has an airbrush! Me pro painter nowz!) and while some of it makes me want to cut their fingers off and yell bad painter at them, some people must like it.
So I assert the purpose of this site is not only discussion, but a resource to gather all hobby related information.
I expect a person can tell when a post is self promotional. If they click it and decide it isn't what they're interested in, click back. I don't see any reason to ban something that could be interesting or useful.
|
|
|
|
2018/06/09 23:37:08
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Douglas Bader
|
I do, because that's what a forum is for. The whole reason to have the ability to comment and reply to comments is to have discussion. If discussion wasn't the purpose then there would be no ability to post replies to a thread, only a list of all content that has been posted.
|
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. |
|
|
|
2018/06/09 23:43:48
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Lieutenant General
|
Manchu wrote:... as long as some actual content is posted that could lead to on-topic discussion... it is okay to try to get some clicks by posting threads on Dakka Dakka...
The point of the site is clearly discussion as the above quote shows.
|
'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'
- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim |
|
|
|
2018/06/10 01:08:05
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Junior Officer with Laspistol
|
The point of the site is to hopefully generate interesting content.
Facebook lets you comment and post replies. Doesn't make it good at generating discussion.
MOST threads here don't generate discussion. Even threads that generate some degree of back and forth aren't really discussions. Most of the time it's just a few barbaric yawps being hurled back and forth from the spires of different towers.
The rules forum doesn't usually create discussion. It usually either resolves quickly with a clear conclusion or devolves into warring tribes unable to agree on a fundamental premise.
News and rumours gets you the exact same I hope they will / hope they won't responses. That's not discussion.
So I guess we can agree to disagree about the fundamental premise of the purpose of this site, which will lead to us disagreeing on whether or not only posts that generate "discussion" should be allowed. And we'll try to box the other into a corner, and once it looks like the other is getting the upper hand one of us will try to move the goal posts of what qualifies as discussion, which will lead to further disagreement of premise, and EVENTUALLY we'll devolve into arguing semantics.
So I'll again point out that many people come here for content that doesn't generate discussion, meaningful or otherwise. I'll state that this site would be lessened for that content's removal.
I'll put forth that all "genuine" posts are leaps of faith that someone would be interested enough in a topic to reply, and that the initial poster may have posted with the intention of generating a discussion that never materialized.
I'm trying to see this as a bigger picture. More than one perspective. The very existence of the gallery section shows that this site isn't exclusively about discussion.
My perspective does not propose that attempting discussion is a bad thing. I like discussing and arguing simply for the giggles of it. I propose that attempting to limit the site's content to discussion generating threads would diminish its overall value.
|
|
|
|
2018/06/10 02:18:53
Subject: Re:Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Douglas Bader
|
Your definition of "discussion" is not the one found in the dictionary. Automatically Appended Next Post: greatbigtree wrote:The very existence of the gallery section shows that this site isn't exclusively about discussion.
Note that the gallery is separate from the forum, and has greatly reduced commenting options with a clear emphasis on non-interactive rating of images rather than talking about them. Drive-by gallery posting is not a problem because interaction is not expected. But the gallery is not what I'm talking about.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/06/10 02:20:29
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. |
|
|
|
2018/06/10 04:05:57
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Junior Officer with Laspistol
|
Tee-hee-hee!
Did you see exactly what happened there? You argued semantics, then moved the goalposts from "site" to the forum sub section! Exactly as predicted once painted into a corner! I'm not going to quote you, I find that unnecessary, but you refer to the "site" in your first handful of posts.
I think we've done this before!
Would you like to start the game of indirect insults, pushing the envelope ever closer to the edge, without going over, or should I? I'm almost positive that's what we're supposed to do next.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/06/10 04:09:14
|
|
|
|
2018/06/10 04:29:15
Subject: Re:Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Douglas Bader
|
Sigh. And I also refer to "threads" in the OP, which is specifically a forum thing. But thanks for confirming that you aren't discussing this in good faith and just want to nitpick your way to a "victory".
|
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. |
|
|
|
2018/06/10 04:43:54
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Junior Officer with Laspistol
|
Accusation of "not discussing in good faith" is a solid opening gambit. It dismisses the points made by me while forcing me to legitimize my position through appeal to authority (yourself being the judge of a good faith argument).
Hmmm, how do I avoid this trap?
I know!
I don't need to "win a victory". Your dismissal hinges on my pursuit of this as a validation of my opinion. But that is unnecessary for me, as all Mod opinion thus far has indicated a lack of desire to implement your request. This was in place before I entered the conversation. Therefore, I have nothing to gain. I can't change anyone's mind that would impact the outcome of your request.
I can, however, champion a more open and inclusive SITE in all its glory. Warts and all. I can do that in good faith, without resorting to... predictably... unsavoury methods of argument.
Thank you, Dakka, and good night! B)
|
|
|
|
2018/06/10 22:24:13
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Highlord with a Blackstone Fortress
Adrift within the vortex of my imagination.
|
Peregrine wrote: Orlanth wrote:If a Dakka member has a project wargaming related or not why not tell people about it.
Sure, why not? But the key point there is dakka member. I have no problem with people who are legitimate members of the community posting links to their work, in addition to their other contributions here. And if it's not related to wargaming? Fine, maybe someone will be interested in it in the off-topic section. It's probably going to be more interesting than yet another iteration of the same old mass shooting thread. The issue is people whose sole purpose is to spam links to their off-dakka stuff without ever engaging with the community, people who could be replaced by a spam bot without anyone ever noticing a difference in their posting.
We are not in any disagreement, if an established Dakka member wants to post links to an external project we should cut them a lot of slack and let them do what they do. There will probably be exceptions of content, but I dont think we have to list them.
If someone who is not an established member wants to pop links it ought to be about miniatures gaming or an adjacent field.
|
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. |
|
|
|
2018/06/10 22:36:22
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Willing Inquisitorial Excruciator
|
What's the threshold that has to be passed to become an Established member of Dakka Dakka?
|
Insidious Intriguer |
|
|
|
2018/06/10 22:44:43
Subject: Can we ban drive-by posting?
|
|
Decrepit Dakkanaut
UK
|
Mysterio wrote:What's the threshold that has to be passed to become an Established member of Dakka Dakka?
In my experience such "titles" as they are are mostly done on the instincts of moderators and whilst there are clear indicators, they are often not limited to specific criteria as do to such would get very complicated very fast. It's a bit like how most forum rules are very general with mods then applying specifics.
Forums typically don't have the resources nor structure to really have lots of very specific very detailed rules and regulations; and even in the "real world" we still have lawyers and judges to weigh law into reality.
|
|
|
|
|
|