www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - request for moderation

reply anonymous <anon anon.com> writes:
I am a regular on this news group from Europe.Not Janice.I say this for her
protection for more attacks from kris.Walter can identify me from my IP and
confirm.

I write because I am indignated about how kris does personal attacks and
vendetta in this group with our silent acceptance.To see how a person spends
time creating attacks and searching messages from months,is disturbing.But we
can not fight that because in a news group the one with less scrupules always
wins.kris could "win" an argument with Hawking in sci.physics.The reason my
message is anonymous is the same.kris would make impractical for me to
participate in this group.

We saw the same thing many times.kris picks somebody who criticizes tango.He
bombs the person with dirty personal attacks.He invests all time and energy in
these evil attacks.To read his posts,is like seeing a car accident in slow
movement.The person is not willing to play the same game and leaves
disgusted.We are happy it ended.

Filtering his messages out is not the response because he pushes good
contributors away.When some asked for a moderated newsgroup,Walter said he
likes the wild west style.But no adventure here.Simply a jerk with no lows or
limit says anything he wants to decent people and we must accept that in
silence,otherwise we will be next.Even if kris is valuable as a D programmer
that is not a reason to accept such comportament from him or any one.

I too do not like the delays.But now I think moderation is the right answer to
what happens in this group.
Mar 15 2008
next sibling parent BCS <ao pathlink.com> writes:
Reply to Anonymous,


 I am a regular on this news group from Europe.Not Janice.I say this
 for her protection for more attacks from kris.Walter can identify me
 from my IP and confirm.
 
 I write because I am indignated about how kris does personal attacks
 and vendetta in this group with our silent acceptance.To see how a
 person spends time creating attacks and searching messages from
 months,is disturbing.But we can not fight that because in a news group
 the one with less scrupules always wins.kris could "win" an argument
 with Hawking in sci.physics.The reason my message is anonymous is the
 same.kris would make impractical for me to participate in this group.
 
 We saw the same thing many times.kris picks somebody who criticizes
 tango.He bombs the person with dirty personal attacks.He invests all
 time and energy in these evil attacks.To read his posts,is like seeing
 a car accident in slow movement.The person is not willing to play the
 same game and leaves disgusted.We are happy it ended.
 
 Filtering his messages out is not the response because he pushes good
 contributors away.When some asked for a moderated newsgroup,Walter
 said he likes the wild west style.But no adventure here.Simply a jerk
 with no lows or limit says anything he wants to decent people and we
 must accept that in silence,otherwise we will be next.Even if kris is
 valuable as a D programmer that is not a reason to accept such
 comportament from him or any one.
 
 I too do not like the delays.But now I think moderation is the right
 answer to what happens in this group.
 


Maybe I'm a bone head (it wouldn't be the first time) and just don't see 
it, but pleases site posts.
Mar 15 2008
prev sibling next sibling parent reply John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com> writes:
Anonymous,

I don't agree with Kris' approach either and have told him so plainly; I 
believe his hypocracy-crushing crusade is spewing shrapnel at many 
innocent bystanders and thus is creating a net-loss in the community 
atmosphere.  Further, it comes across as a person who is holding a 
grudge, whether he intends that to be so or not. I believe his actions 
will do more to blight the Tango name than to cleanse the newsgroup.  I 
say this directly because I believe Kris is the kind of person that can 
take this directly.  I believe that says a lot of good about the type of 
person he is.

Yet, it also gets tiresome hearing (and seeing) examples of 
sock-puppetry, accusations of sock-puppetry, and (finally) anonymous 
complaints.  Kris has been right to some degree.  He's just carried it 
way too far.

/But/ I'm entirely surprised that you (anonymous) are asking for 
moderation based on Kris' posts alone considering the recent atmosphere 
created by another much more serious problem (partially described in the 
previous paragraph). This is such an astounding gaff on your part, that 
I'm perplexed at your purpose for posting: you seem to have your 
priorities confused, or perhaps you have completely overlooked something.

Perhaps, like I have, you have written to Walter to ask about how he can 
fix the problem here? If not, perhaps you should do so now, so that he 
can better understand the seriousness of the situation?  I agree that 
some sort of moderation is necessary for this group.... more so than 
what currently is happening: semi-moderation already exists in the form 
of "post-deleting" episodes. Unfortunately that does little to stop the 
original poster from posting more or to stop equally malicious posts 
from annoyed responders.

Further, several community members here (in good standing!) are directly 
responsible for feeding the problem by adopting a philosophy of 
"universal acceptance", aka "wishful thinking": that is, they accept the 
offender no matter what by (apparently) hoping that if they ignore the 
existence of the bad, then the good will flow through.  Honestly, this 
is not how real life works; would we accept a murderer, a rapist or a 
pedophile "just the way he is"?  Would we assume that if we ignore his 
"bad habits" and speak nicely to him, that we will all just get along?

I apologize for the extreme example, but realistically... those that are 
intent on being disreputable must be shown that what they do is 
unacceptable to the operation of this community.  There is no need to 
continually scream or rant at such personalities.  We must /first/ 
simply refuse to communicate with them so they "get the message". 
Second, a good moderating board would eject persistent cases to keep the 
seed from destroying or fracturing the group. The "lets just get along" 
mentality only works when individuals are willing to moderate themselves 
and exercise self-control and courtesy, even when they are wronged. 
That said, members who have responded tit for tat are guilty of feeding 
the problem in this newsgroup.

Next case: this community has been hit with sock-puppetry, aka "get 
even" with the "bad guy" mentality. Please.. may I ask: what in the 
world does this achieve?  Can we fix one evil by using another?  Such 
actions will only further destroy this group's morale by engendering 
distrust and doubt among members.  Apparently it isn't just the 
new-comers who are corrupt.  The corruption is right here inside. At 
least, that's what these recent episodes are showing based on the 
responses.  This test appears to be here to shake our cup to see what's 
inside it.

I'm afraid letting things go as they are will only encourage the 
downward spiral of this whole community, especially since each member 
handles the situation as they see fit.  Please, the solution is to avoid 
back-biting, refuse response to war-mongers, and be relentlessly 
peaceful.  Even so, while I whole-heartedly endorse mercy and compassion 
as important qualities, please understand that they are little use to 
those that refuse the offering; obviously, these qualities only work on 
those that accept them.  Those that respond with rudeness and hatred 
should just be persistently ignored, until such a time that Walter (the 
only moderator here that I know of) decides to act on the issue.  Those 
that counter-post with the same manner are responsible for continuing 
the problem.

-JJR
Mar 15 2008
next sibling parent Ty Tower <tytower hotmail.com.au> writes:
John Reimer Wrote:
Further, several community members here (in good standing!) are directly
responsible for feeding the problem by adopting a philosophy of
"universal acceptance", aka "wishful thinking": that is, they accept the
offender no matter what by (apparently) hoping that if they ignore the
existence of the bad, then the good will flow through.  Honestly, this
is not how real life works; would we accept a murderer, a rapist or a
pedophile "just the way he is"?  Would we assume that if we ignore his
"bad habits" and speak nicely to him, that we will all just get along?

I apologize for the extreme example, but realistically... those that are
intent on being disreputable must be shown that what they do is
unacceptable to the operation of this community.  There is no need to
continually scream or rant at such personalities.  We must /first/
simply refuse to communicate with them so they "get the message".
Second, a good moderating board would eject persistent cases to keep the
seed from destroying or fracturing the group. The "lets just get along"
mentality only works when individuals are willing to moderate themselves
and exercise self-control and courtesy, even when they are wronged.
That said, members who have responded tit for tat are guilty of feeding
the problem in this newsgroup.


 -JJR


You tend toward idealism John 
Imposing your ideals on this "community"

The problem with this is that it becomes a narrowed forum and free speech no
longer applies. 
Don't know what they are putting in your water down there but get up and have a
go . The world did not become populated by moderation applying ,rather the
reverse.
Nobody is trying to take your "community " away from you .
You have a secure place in it but it needs to grow if "D" is to be accepted .
Sometimes these things a religion based . Hope not in your case.
Mar 15 2008
prev sibling next sibling parent Ty Tower <tytower hotmail.com.au> writes:
John Reimer Wrote:
Further, several community members here (in good standing!) are directly
responsible for feeding the problem by adopting a philosophy of
"universal acceptance", aka "wishful thinking": that is, they accept the
offender no matter what by (apparently) hoping that if they ignore the
existence of the bad, then the good will flow through.  Honestly, this
is not how real life works; would we accept a murderer, a rapist or a
pedophile "just the way he is"?  Would we assume that if we ignore his
"bad habits" and speak nicely to him, that we will all just get along?

I apologize for the extreme example, but realistically... those that are
intent on being disreputable must be shown that what they do is
unacceptable to the operation of this community.  There is no need to
continually scream or rant at such personalities.  We must /first/
simply refuse to communicate with them so they "get the message".
Second, a good moderating board would eject persistent cases to keep the
seed from destroying or fracturing the group. The "lets just get along"
mentality only works when individuals are willing to moderate themselves
and exercise self-control and courtesy, even when they are wronged.
That said, members who have responded tit for tat are guilty of feeding
the problem in this newsgroup.


 -JJR


You tend toward idealism John 
Imposing your ideals on this "community"

The problem with this is that it becomes a narrowed forum and free speech no
longer applies. 
Don't know what they are putting in your water down there but get up and have a
go . The world did not become populated by moderation applying ,rather the
reverse.
Nobody is trying to take your "community " away from you .
You have a secure place in it but it needs to grow if "D" is to be accepted .
Sometimes these things a religion based . Hope not in your case.
Mar 15 2008
prev sibling next sibling parent reply anon <anon anon.org> writes:
John Reimer Wrote: another rehash of his kris apology . funniest thing about
kretinis is his minions . posing as objective reasonable fellas ... a bit
criticizing him ... patting him on the back ... always giving justification for
his antics . john real friends dont let friends miss therapy.
Mar 15 2008
next sibling parent reply John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com> writes:
anon wrote:

 John Reimer Wrote: another rehash of his kris apology . funniest thing about
kretinis is his minions . posing as objective reasonable fellas ... a bit
criticizing him ... patting him on the back ... always giving justification for
his antics . john real friends dont let friends miss therapy.


Heh, so apparently I have a problem not being ruthless enough with 
people in public, even when they deserve it...hmmm, that's good! :). 
"Moderation" isn't the key after all, then, I suppose?

I most certainly will be careful what I say about anybody in this 
newsgroup, friend or no friend.  Thus, my critical assessment of kris 
(though, honestly, I'm surprised you thought it to be justifying him -- 
I thought I was kinda harsh on the guy; I must have succeeded in 
achieving some balance! yay! :) ).

-JJR
Mar 15 2008
parent reply anonymous <anonymous anon.com> writes:
I am glad you achieved balance,but here I do not think you are balanced.You
offer legality to kris's personal attacks.

One thing from you I disagree:"I believe his hypocracy-crushing crusade is
spewing shrapnel at many innocent bystanders and thus is creating a net-loss in
the community atmosphere."You make this sounds like his so called crusade is in
essence good,but only has a few side-effects.But it is not.It is not apropriate
on this news group to acuse people of hypocrisy.And it is not apropriate to do
personal attacks.You cause more harm because you offer kris the encouragment
that he needs to continue his comportament.Evil actions are hard to justify so
they thrive on others encouragment.

John Reimer Wrote:


 anon wrote:

 John Reimer Wrote: another rehash of his kris apology . funniest thing about
kretinis is his minions . posing as objective reasonable fellas ... a bit
criticizing him ... patting him on the back ... always giving justification for
his antics . john real friends dont let friends miss therapy.


 
 Heh, so apparently I have a problem not being ruthless enough with 
 people in public, even when they deserve it...hmmm, that's good! :). 
 "Moderation" isn't the key after all, then, I suppose?
 
 I most certainly will be careful what I say about anybody in this 
 newsgroup, friend or no friend.  Thus, my critical assessment of kris 
 (though, honestly, I'm surprised you thought it to be justifying him -- 
 I thought I was kinda harsh on the guy; I must have succeeded in 
 achieving some balance! yay! :) ).
 
 -JJR
Mar 16 2008
parent reply John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com> writes:
anonymous wrote:

 I am glad you achieved balance,but here I do not think you are balanced.You
offer legality to kris's personal attacks.
 
 One thing from you I disagree:"I believe his hypocracy-crushing crusade is
spewing shrapnel at many innocent bystanders and thus is creating a net-loss in
the community atmosphere."You make this sounds like his so called crusade is in
essence good,but only has a few side-effects.But it is not.It is not apropriate
on this news group to acuse people of hypocrisy.And it is not apropriate to do
personal attacks.You cause more harm because you offer kris the encouragment
that he needs to continue his comportament.Evil actions are hard to justify so
they thrive on others encouragment.
 



Okay, I'm going to discontinue this conversation after this post. It's 
hard enough (and unfair) to have to converse with a faceless entity.

I offered no legality to his attacks.  I plainly disapproved of them in 
my post, and I certainly offered complete /discouragement/ of such 
activity throughout my post.  "Crusade" was never meant to imply 
approval -- it was meant to emphasize the severity and focus (in a very 
disapproving sense) of the activity.

You are doing one of three things here: (1) you are intentionally 
misunderstanding what I explained clearly in my post or (2) you are 
trying to instigate more discord here (as an anonymous poster), or (3) 
you honestly misunderstood my use of English.  For your own sake, I'll 
assume number 3 even though evidence doesn't appear to be pointing in 
that direction.

But, I think your contributions are becoming part of the problem, 
anonymous, and my responses to you are carrying it further.  So with 
that, I will shut up lest I end up becoming the hypocrite too. :)

-JJR
Mar 16 2008
next sibling parent reply anonymous <anonymous anon.com> writes:
I honestly misunderstood your English.(My English is not very good.)I guessed
what you mean by reading some bizarre good things you had to say about kris's
personality.Everything he writes is contrary to that.I am sure you are
right,because you know him personally.But what we see is what he
writes.Defending such deeply disturbed writing,is very hard.To repeat myself,I
am not against kris,only against non civil comportament.

John Reimer Wrote:


 anonymous wrote:

 I am glad you achieved balance,but here I do not think you are balanced.You
offer legality to kris's personal attacks.
 
 One thing from you I disagree:"I believe his hypocracy-crushing crusade is
spewing shrapnel at many innocent bystanders and thus is creating a net-loss in
the community atmosphere."You make this sounds like his so called crusade is in
essence good,but only has a few side-effects.But it is not.It is not apropriate
on this news group to acuse people of hypocrisy.And it is not apropriate to do
personal attacks.You cause more harm because you offer kris the encouragment
that he needs to continue his comportament.Evil actions are hard to justify so
they thrive on others encouragment.
 


 
 
 Okay, I'm going to discontinue this conversation after this post. It's 
 hard enough (and unfair) to have to converse with a faceless entity.
 
 I offered no legality to his attacks.  I plainly disapproved of them in 
 my post, and I certainly offered complete /discouragement/ of such 
 activity throughout my post.  "Crusade" was never meant to imply 
 approval -- it was meant to emphasize the severity and focus (in a very 
 disapproving sense) of the activity.
 
 You are doing one of three things here: (1) you are intentionally 
 misunderstanding what I explained clearly in my post or (2) you are 
 trying to instigate more discord here (as an anonymous poster), or (3) 
 you honestly misunderstood my use of English.  For your own sake, I'll 
 assume number 3 even though evidence doesn't appear to be pointing in 
 that direction.
 
 But, I think your contributions are becoming part of the problem, 
 anonymous, and my responses to you are carrying it further.  So with 
 that, I will shut up lest I end up becoming the hypocrite too. :)
 
 -JJR
Mar 16 2008
parent reply "Kris" <foo bar.com> writes:
"anonymous" <anonymous anon.com> wrote

Defending such deeply disturbed writing,is very hard.


Nice :)

You've been (anonymously) gabbing on about Janice and "personal attacks", so 
this is likely to be the "such deeply disturbed writing" referred to:

=============================================

"Janice Caron" <caron800 googlemail.com> wrote

 if there is anything specific you want me /not/
 to say, please tell me that too, and I'll not say it.



I'd intended to forego further posts on this topic, but you are asking for a
response. Pardon the delay, and I'll try to be appropriately objective:

It's a question of double-standards, Janice. Not specifically what you, I,
or anyone else says per se. While you sometimes appear to be adept at
dishing out innuendo and/or the occasional scathing remark, you invariably
cry wolf when some of that comes back to you. For the sake of illustration,
I will stick purely to the content related to this exchange. Please do not
read any more into it than merely an illustration. In that vein, I'm going
to use the same 'opinion' of yours as before and attempt to paint an
alternate viewpoint for you. Here it is:

------
Module names in mixed case!? Did the Tango folk not read the D style
guide where it says "Module and package names are all lower case, and
only contain the characters [a..z][0..9][_]", or did they just
purposefully decide to avoid it? If the former, that was amateurish;
if the latter, it was petty.
------


You can argue the following observations all you like. However, you've
effectively asked me what you might do, or not do, in order to avoid opening
yourself up to criticism - here's how things look from one perspective:

1) Your message is making strong assertions about the intent and
capabilities of the targeted individuals. Think, for a moment, about how
you'd react if the tables were turned? Going by past behaviour, you'd call
out "Ad Hominum!" or otherwise convey some righteous indignation. Yet you
seem quite comfortable with the delivery yourself. Let us save the
semantic-splitting for the lingusitic gymnasts ... in your post, you are
directly discussing several people who can correctly identify intent.


2) Those assertions are based entirely upon your personal opinion of what a
'style-guide' represents. See that gaping chasm between the reality of what
you claim to be a problem, and how you shape it (replete with exclamation
and accompanying rhetoric) ... it is tricky to define this gap in any kind
of glowing terms.

This current exchange began via a simple BS callout. Along the way, you've
characterized that act as "malicious", as a "vendetta", a "strawman", and an
"attack". Just what do you call your above "amatuerish" message? It was
apparently unprovoked, so therefore is an attack? Is it perhaps a strawman
also? Does seems that way. Are you really so terribly precocious as to think
any decision made therein, without your consent, warranted quite such
disdain and drama from you? If not, then your post was also perhaps
malicious? Maybe even with shades of a vendetta? The specific point here is
not that you made these unwarranted and uninformed claims, but that you
subsequently wave the terms "attack", "vendetta", "malicious" and so on like
theAd Hominum club when you have opened yourself up to some criticism.


3) There was an occasion related to the above post where, if I recall
correctly, you took offence and demanded an apology. I don't remember seeing
you offering an apology to the various people you likely offended
(potentially in a malicious manner) via the intended implications of your
message? Of course, nobody asked for a subsequent apology (and nobody is


4) I recall that you once claimed to be a writer of fiction? Then you must
clearly comprehend the distinction between "quoting" and abstract
paraphrasing. That hasn't stopped you from using the
spit-on-me-but-dont-you-dare-misquote-me responses echoed in this exchange.
That is, you fully understand that is not applicable, but use it for effect


5) I've witnessed you make two calls for forum moderation. Most recently, I
believe the call was with regard to Ty Tower? You do realize, I hope, that
moderation takes many forms, and that perhaps some of your posts warrant
moderation also? Certainly, the death-threats and Nazi-style propoganda
eminating from Mr Tower is of a rather different nature, yet moderation is


The take-away message is that, whether you like it or not, the level of
hypocrisy can sometimes become overbearing from a different perspective. And
that's related to just a single post, Janice. Even if you claim some of it
to be a stretch, it does leave a lot of question-marks hanging. This is why
I called you out on the somewhat grandiose and (IMO) badly misleading claim
you made earlier.

Nobody else does this kind of thing on the NG ... you are really out there
by yourself, and thus make yourself a target for subsequent criticism.




 If you want me
 to leave this newsgroup forever, I'll even do that.



Sadly, this is a martyr card. The one that usually screams "It's all your
fault, and I'm entirely innocent!".  I have no personal desire for you to do
anything, Janice, other than to perhaps drop the double-standards.

Perhaps some folk will view this post as a personal attack, or some such. It
is not, or rather, it certainly not intended to be. Instead, it is merely
complying with your request. Take it for what it is and no more.

Lastly - a general mea-culpa from me to everyone, since I've obviously
played my part in reducing the signal-to-noise-ratio via this exchange. I
offer you my apologies for doing so.

=============================================
Mar 16 2008
parent reply anon <anon anon.org> writes:
Kris Wrote:


 "anonymous" <anonymous anon.com> wrote

Defending such deeply disturbed writing,is very hard.


 
 Nice :)
 
 You've been (anonymously) gabbing on about Janice and "personal attacks", so 
 this is likely to be the "such deeply disturbed writing" referred to:


& how exactly is repeating ur drivel making it any less deranged. u must be
proud of it really. first issue of mental patients : they don't admit to have a
problem. go get ur medication & nap kretinis u git.
Mar 16 2008
parent reply Paul Findlay <r.lph50+d gmail.com> writes:
 & how exactly is repeating ur drivel making it any less deranged. u must
 be proud of it really. first issue of mental patients : they don't admit
 to have a problem. go get ur medication & nap kretinis u git.


This is an utterly disgusting insinuation and should not have any place in
human communication. You are turning genuine illnesses into a cynical
rhetorical flourish.

 - Paul
Mar 16 2008
parent anon <anon anon.org> writes:
Paul Findlay Wrote:


 & how exactly is repeating ur drivel making it any less deranged. u must
 be proud of it really. first issue of mental patients : they don't admit
 to have a problem. go get ur medication & nap kretinis u git.


 This is an utterly disgusting insinuation and should not have any place in
 human communication. You are turning genuine illnesses into a cynical
 rhetorical flourish.


kretinis has said worse & 2 ppl less deserving.
Mar 16 2008
prev sibling parent Christopher Wright <dhasenan gmail.com> writes:
John Reimer wrote:

 Okay, I'm going to discontinue this conversation after this post. It's 
 hard enough (and unfair) to have to converse with a faceless entity.


Anonymous is legion.
Anonymous never forgives. Anonymous never forgets.
Anonymous is not your friend.
Anonymous is not your personal army.
Anonymous is in control at all times.
Anonymous does not wear fanny packs.
Mar 16 2008
prev sibling parent John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com> writes:
anon wrote:

 John Reimer Wrote: another rehash of his kris apology . funniest thing about
kretinis is his minions . posing as objective reasonable fellas ... a bit
criticizing him ... patting him on the back ... always giving justification for
his antics . john real friends dont let friends miss therapy.



hmm David B. Held?
Mar 15 2008
prev sibling parent Regan Heath <regan netmail.co.nz> writes:
John Reimer wrote:
<many sensible things>

I just wanted to indicate my support for John's thoughts and hope more 
people listen to his words and even take some sort action.

Someone recently posted about going back and re-reading old posts they 
themselves made and how it gave them some perspective on themselves as a 
person.  I would recommend this to anyone with a spare moment or two.

Regan
Mar 17 2008
prev sibling next sibling parent "Saaa" <empty needmail.com> writes:
The irony, anon asking for moderation /b

What exactly is the problem with personal attacks?
(Except that they aren't related to programming)

I have no problem with personal attacks, as it challenges my ideas.

If the personal attacks are solemnly at parts that I can't change (skin 
colour etc.) then I'd just ignore them.
The same goes for dumb name calling.

Almost always a post like 'ignore X, he/she is always like that' suffices to 
make the attacked aware of the status of the attacker and for those times it 
really goes too far the posts can be deleted.
Mar 15 2008
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Robert Fraser <fraserofthenight gmail.com> writes:
My two cents: I'm down with moderating out the trolling/flaming that's going
on, but I think that until off-topic posting becomes a real problem, it should
be allowed. "Me too" posts are also useful for gaugeing interest, so I'd rather
have any moderation system filter out posts that are actually negative to the
community atmosphere, and not posts that are of questionable value.

anonymous Wrote:


 I am a regular on this news group from Europe.Not Janice.I say this for her
protection for more attacks from kris.Walter can identify me from my IP and
confirm.
 
 I write because I am indignated about how kris does personal attacks and
vendetta in this group with our silent acceptance.To see how a person spends
time creating attacks and searching messages from months,is disturbing.But we
can not fight that because in a news group the one with less scrupules always
wins.kris could "win" an argument with Hawking in sci.physics.The reason my
message is anonymous is the same.kris would make impractical for me to
participate in this group.
 
 We saw the same thing many times.kris picks somebody who criticizes tango.He
bombs the person with dirty personal attacks.He invests all time and energy in
these evil attacks.To read his posts,is like seeing a car accident in slow
movement.The person is not willing to play the same game and leaves
disgusted.We are happy it ended.
 
 Filtering his messages out is not the response because he pushes good
contributors away.When some asked for a moderated newsgroup,Walter said he
likes the wild west style.But no adventure here.Simply a jerk with no lows or
limit says anything he wants to decent people and we must accept that in
silence,otherwise we will be next.Even if kris is valuable as a D programmer
that is not a reason to accept such comportament from him or any one.
 
 I too do not like the delays.But now I think moderation is the right answer to
what happens in this group.
Mar 15 2008
parent John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com> writes:
Robert Fraser wrote:

 My two cents: I'm down with moderating out the trolling/flaming that's going
on, but I think that until off-topic posting becomes a real problem, it should
be allowed. "Me too" posts are also useful for gaugeing interest, so I'd rather
have any moderation system filter out posts that are actually negative to the
community atmosphere, and not posts that are of questionable value.
 


I agree about your assessment that off-topic and "me too" are usually 
not an issue.

-JJR
Mar 15 2008
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Christopher Wright <dhasenan gmail.com> writes:
anonymous wrote:

 We saw the same thing many times.kris picks somebody who criticizes tango.He
bombs the person with dirty personal attacks.He invests all time and energy in
these evil attacks.


I've only seen this with Janice; they annoyed each other long in the 
past and have a habit of getting on each others' nerves, and being on a 
text-only forum doesn't help.

But this doesn't happen often, and it's pretty easy to ignore, unless 
you're directly involved.



 Filtering his messages out is not the response because he pushes good
contributors away.


But works quite well with Ty Tower. And that's why you're mentioning 
Kris rather than Ty.

I don't think this is a significant problem. If you do, well, that's 
your problem, not Walter's.
Mar 15 2008
parent reply John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com> writes:
Christopher Wright wrote:

 anonymous wrote:

 We saw the same thing many times.kris picks somebody who criticizes 
 tango.He bombs the person with dirty personal attacks.He invests all 
 time and energy in these evil attacks.


 
 I've only seen this with Janice; they annoyed each other long in the 
 past and have a habit of getting on each others' nerves, and being on a 
 text-only forum doesn't help.
 
 But this doesn't happen often, and it's pretty easy to ignore, unless 
 you're directly involved.
 



Is it easy to ignore?  A number of people have been responding to these 
posts requesting that they stop... so I actually disagree.  Either I'm 
vastly over-estimating the problem or you are vastly ignoring it.



 

 Filtering his messages out is not the response because he pushes good 
 contributors away.


 
 But works quite well with Ty Tower. And that's why you're mentioning 
 Kris rather than Ty.



This is possible, but not the only reason.  I'm surprised that you are 
confident that this poster has been using filtering.



 
 I don't think this is a significant problem. If you do, well, that's 
 your problem, not Walter's.



Actually, it is a problem because filtering will not work if others 
respond and quote the messages of the individual.  I suppose that calls 
for another layer of filtering? :)

-JJR
Mar 15 2008
parent reply Christopher Wright <dhasenan gmail.com> writes:
John Reimer wrote:

 Is it easy to ignore?  A number of people have been responding to these 
 posts requesting that they stop... so I actually disagree.  Either I'm 
 vastly over-estimating the problem or you are vastly ignoring it.


Yes, I am, with almost no effort!


 This is possible, but not the only reason.  I'm surprised that you are 
 confident that this poster has been using filtering.


If you want to ignore all of one person's posts and you're not using 
filtering, it's your own fault that you have to see their posts. 
Thunderbird is free, it runs on about four major operating systems 
(sorry, BeOS users), and it supports filtering.

Even if you refuse to use a news client that lets you filter out 
people's messages, you can just skip any message from a known and 
habitual troll. They don't walk into your living room, tape your eyes 
open, and display their messages to you; you have to expend effort to 
read their messages. And with a single keypress, you can skip on to the 
next message.

Now, if two people you respect are flaming each other, that might upset 
you, and reasonably so. If you know them well enough, you should contact 
them in private and ask them to stop. And if they continue, well, that's 
their right. You should then ignore them.


 Actually, it is a problem because filtering will not work if others 
 respond and quote the messages of the individual.  I suppose that calls 
 for another layer of filtering? :)


Again, spacebar sends you to the next message. Or you could filter 
messages that contain the term "Ty Tower wrote:" and get 90% of replies 
to his posts, though that includes indirect ones.


 -JJR
Mar 16 2008
parent John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com> writes:
Christopher Wright wrote:

 John Reimer wrote:

 Is it easy to ignore?  A number of people have been responding to 
 these posts requesting that they stop... so I actually disagree.  
 Either I'm vastly over-estimating the problem or you are vastly 
 ignoring it.


 
 Yes, I am, with almost no effort!
 

 This is possible, but not the only reason.  I'm surprised that you are 
 confident that this poster has been using filtering.


 
 If you want to ignore all of one person's posts and you're not using 
 filtering, it's your own fault that you have to see their posts. 
 Thunderbird is free, it runs on about four major operating systems 
 (sorry, BeOS users), and it supports filtering.
 
 Even if you refuse to use a news client that lets you filter out 
 people's messages, you can just skip any message from a known and 
 habitual troll. They don't walk into your living room, tape your eyes 
 open, and display their messages to you; you have to expend effort to 
 read their messages. And with a single keypress, you can skip on to the 
 next message.
 
 Now, if two people you respect are flaming each other, that might upset 
 you, and reasonably so. If you know them well enough, you should contact 
 them in private and ask them to stop. And if they continue, well, that's 
 their right. You should then ignore them.
 

 Actually, it is a problem because filtering will not work if others 
 respond and quote the messages of the individual.  I suppose that 
 calls for another layer of filtering? :)


 
 Again, spacebar sends you to the next message. Or you could filter 
 messages that contain the term "Ty Tower wrote:" and get 90% of replies 
 to his posts, though that includes indirect ones.
 



Good to know that that works for you, though I don't think you are 
seeing the problem, or we have different ideas about how this community 
should work. I'm guessing it's more the latter (many here see it as a 
personal right to say whatever they want, devoid of responsibility). 
I'm guessing also that I'm looking at this on the large scale, not the 
individual one, as you are.

For one, a problem not dealt with gets worse and spreads and eventually 
inflames a community overall such that filtering barriers are eventually 
going to be "overrun."  For two, filtering won't initially work for the 
many new D users that come to the community to see what the language is 
about; these see the in-fighting and trolling that goes on and get a bad 
impression of the language community (perhaps this is inevitable).  The 
problem has much more significance than the personal "I don't like this 
post" scale.  That's what I'm trying to address.

For those of us already here, we can certainly put your suggestion to 
use (which would be a good start), but eventually find ourselves trying 
to skip and avoid many topics and applying just as much effort in not 
reading the abrasive posts as finding the useful ones.  This may not be 
the case yet, but as the problem gets ignored this way, it grows.

Nonetheless, your advice is sound for the time being, since there is no 
other solution for those that remain here... and quite possibly will 
never be.

For the rest of us who can't hack it, I suppose the best solution will 
be to do what many others have done and leave the D newsgroup completely 
(not the D language, necessarily :) ).  That's likely the better one for 
those of us who are becoming weary of hearing the "free speech" mantra 
claiming that everyone can just do what they want ("just don't look when 
Joe shoots Jim... nobody is taping your eyes open", even when these 
things tend to pop up spontaneously).  In actual fact, I believe that is 
the philosophy of this group, and I'm afraid it's taken me awhile to 
figure that out; if that's the way it will stay, I think it's time I 
honestly evaluate why I read or write any posts here.

Anyway, thank you for your suggestion.

-JJR
Mar 16 2008
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "dominik" <aha aha.com> writes:
"anonymous" <anon anon.com> wrote in message 
news:frh97i$7ko$1 digitalmars.com...

I am a regular on this news group from Europe.Not Janice.I say this for her 
protection for more attacks from kris.Walter can identify me from my IP and 
confirm.


Drama queen.
Seriously, sod off anon. What's up with whining lately? Grow a pair, or grow 
up. Leave this haven of ours alone and stop trolling.
Mar 15 2008
parent reply anonymous <anonymous anon.com> writes:
Your post is also anonymous.So I am not impressed by your gonads.

dominik Wrote:


 
 "anonymous" <anon anon.com> wrote in message 
 news:frh97i$7ko$1 digitalmars.com...

I am a regular on this news group from Europe.Not Janice.I say this for her 
protection for more attacks from kris.Walter can identify me from my IP and 
confirm.


 
 Drama queen.
 Seriously, sod off anon. What's up with whining lately? Grow a pair, or grow 
 up. Leave this haven of ours alone and stop trolling.
Mar 16 2008
parent "Kris" <foo bar.com> writes:
Unlike some, his post is not anonymous at all ... there's are a variety of 
posts from dominik, replete with ip address and so on.


"anonymous" <anonymous anon.com> wrote in message 
news:frjon8$1152$1 digitalmars.com...

 Your post is also anonymous.So I am not impressed by your gonads.

 dominik Wrote:


 "anonymous" <anon anon.com> wrote in message
 news:frh97i$7ko$1 digitalmars.com...

I am a regular on this news group from Europe.Not Janice.I say this for 
her
protection for more attacks from kris.Walter can identify me from my IP 
and
confirm.


 Drama queen.
 Seriously, sod off anon. What's up with whining lately? Grow a pair, or 
 grow
 up. Leave this haven of ours alone and stop trolling.
Mar 16 2008
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Kris" <foo bar.com> writes:
"anonymous" <anon anon.com> wrote

I am a regular on this news group from Europe.Not Janice.

 The reason my message is anonymous is the same.kris would make impractical
 for me to participate in this group.



Fair enough, anonymous.

You say you are a regular here, but that you're afraid to identify yourself 
solely
because of something awful that might happen. Hrm.

You appear to wish I were gone, so I'll make you a deal, ok? I give you my
word that I will refrain from further participation on this ng if what you
fear transpires, and you are whom you claim to be. That seems to be quite
reasonable?

If you are indeed a "regular" "from Europe", then nothing to worry about.
Mar 16 2008
parent reply anonymous <anonymous anon.com> writes:
I do not want you to leave.I wish civility in this group.I am sure you are able
to keep a discussion technical.Nothing awful happens if I say who I am,just
that you will remember and start personal attacks even after months.To deal
with that, is only not practical.

Kris Wrote:

 "anonymous" <anon anon.com> wrote

I am a regular on this news group from Europe.Not Janice.

 The reason my message is anonymous is the same.kris would make impractical
 for me to participate in this group.


 
 
 Fair enough, anonymous.
 
 You say you are a regular here, but that you're afraid to identify yourself 
 solely
 because of something awful that might happen. Hrm.
 
 You appear to wish I were gone, so I'll make you a deal, ok? I give you my
 word that I will refrain from further participation on this ng if what you
 fear transpires, and you are whom you claim to be. That seems to be quite
 reasonable?
 
 If you are indeed a "regular" "from Europe", then nothing to worry about.
Mar 16 2008
parent reply "Kris" <foo bar.com> writes:
Then we should assert your posts originate from one of the two ng trolls. 
What you claim is merely an excuse to hide behind the curtain, since my 
offer to you was without an expiration date.

Have a nice day.


"anonymous" <anonymous anon.com> wrote in message 
news:frjoim$10t2$1 digitalmars.com...

I do not want you to leave.I wish civility in this group.I am sure you are 
able to keep a discussion technical.Nothing awful happens if I say who I 
am,just that you will remember and start personal attacks even after 
months.To deal with that, is only not practical.

 Kris Wrote:

 "anonymous" <anon anon.com> wrote

I am a regular on this news group from Europe.Not Janice.

 The reason my message is anonymous is the same.kris would make 
 impractical
 for me to participate in this group.



 Fair enough, anonymous.

 You say you are a regular here, but that you're afraid to identify 
 yourself
 solely
 because of something awful that might happen. Hrm.

 You appear to wish I were gone, so I'll make you a deal, ok? I give you 
 my
 word that I will refrain from further participation on this ng if what 
 you
 fear transpires, and you are whom you claim to be. That seems to be quite
 reasonable?

 If you are indeed a "regular" "from Europe", then nothing to worry about.
Mar 16 2008
next sibling parent reply anonymous <anonymous anon.com> writes:
I do not know the trolls.I have not posted anonymously or in the name of
somebody before.Walter can see my IP on his website and confirm that I am a
usual participant.Your poisonous offer was good for nothing,anyway.

Kris Wrote:


 Then we should assert your posts originate from one of the two ng trolls. 
 What you claim is merely an excuse to hide behind the curtain, since my 
 offer to you was without an expiration date.
 
 Have a nice day.
 
 
 "anonymous" <anonymous anon.com> wrote in message 
 news:frjoim$10t2$1 digitalmars.com...

I do not want you to leave.I wish civility in this group.I am sure you are 
able to keep a discussion technical.Nothing awful happens if I say who I 
am,just that you will remember and start personal attacks even after 
months.To deal with that, is only not practical.

 Kris Wrote:

 "anonymous" <anon anon.com> wrote

I am a regular on this news group from Europe.Not Janice.

 The reason my message is anonymous is the same.kris would make 
 impractical
 for me to participate in this group.



 Fair enough, anonymous.

 You say you are a regular here, but that you're afraid to identify 
 yourself
 solely
 because of something awful that might happen. Hrm.

 You appear to wish I were gone, so I'll make you a deal, ok? I give you 
 my
 word that I will refrain from further participation on this ng if what 
 you
 fear transpires, and you are whom you claim to be. That seems to be quite
 reasonable?

 If you are indeed a "regular" "from Europe", then nothing to worry about.
Mar 16 2008
parent reply "Kris" <foo bar.com> writes:
"anonymous" <anonymous anon.com> wrote

I do not know the trolls.I have not posted anonymously or in the name of 
somebody before.Walter can see my IP on his website and confirm that I am a 
usual participant.Your poisonous offer was good for nothing,anyway.



How can you expect anyone to buy that? You are posting anonymously now, 
apparently without reason. You also know that Walter has no history of 
confirming or denying the validity of anyone's identity (it would likely be 
highly questionable of him to do so. In Europe that would be illegal, as you 
ought to know, if you live there). So this hand-waving sure seems like just 
another convenient curtain to hide behind.

Trying to give your posts some credibility by claiming to be a "regular" yet 
refusing to back that up, when your claimed reason for not doing so is 
removed, does not lend credence to your cause. There's not a whole lot more 
to say here, other than the tactics you've shown thus far are those of one 
intent on generating collateral damage rather than your subject title. In 
other words, it seems like your intent is to generate one of those "evil" 
and "personal" attacks yourself, and little else. Please, be my guest.

IMO, you ought to drop the charade, if you want to be taken seriously. In 
this context, crying "evil" and "poison" from the rooftops are the type of 
things miserable trolls do. Not rational Europeans ;-)

Bonne Chance;




 Kris Wrote:


 Then we should assert your posts originate from one of the two ng trolls.
 What you claim is merely an excuse to hide behind the curtain, since my
 offer to you was without an expiration date.

 Have a nice day.


 "anonymous" <anonymous anon.com> wrote in message
 news:frjoim$10t2$1 digitalmars.com...

I do not want you to leave.I wish civility in this group.I am sure you 
are
able to keep a discussion technical.Nothing awful happens if I say who I
am,just that you will remember and start personal attacks even after
months.To deal with that, is only not practical.

 Kris Wrote:

 "anonymous" <anon anon.com> wrote

I am a regular on this news group from Europe.Not Janice.

 The reason my message is anonymous is the same.kris would make
 impractical
 for me to participate in this group.



 Fair enough, anonymous.

 You say you are a regular here, but that you're afraid to identify
 yourself
 solely
 because of something awful that might happen. Hrm.

 You appear to wish I were gone, so I'll make you a deal, ok? I give 
 you
 my
 word that I will refrain from further participation on this ng if what
 you
 fear transpires, and you are whom you claim to be. That seems to be 
 quite
 reasonable?

 If you are indeed a "regular" "from Europe", then nothing to worry 
 about.
Mar 16 2008
parent Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> writes:
Kris wrote:

 You also know that Walter has no history of 
 confirming or denying the validity of anyone's identity (it would likely be 
 highly questionable of him to do so. In Europe that would be illegal, as you 
 ought to know, if you live there).


 From time to time, people have requested me to "out" others. I refuse 
to, on the following grounds:

1) If people post anonymously, they have a reason to. I respect that.

2) Sometimes people wish to "out" someone else in order to score some 
points. I don't respect that.

3) It's none of my business.

4) I didn't know it was illegal in Europe, but that's just another 
reason not to do it.


Sometimes, people will ask for XXX's email address so they can contact 
them privately. I won't do that, but what I will do is offer to forward 
to XXX their request for contact, and leave it up to XXX to choose to 
reciprocate or not. This seems to work out well.
Mar 16 2008
prev sibling parent boyd <gaboonviper gmx.net> writes:
I've been watching this argument in the hopes that it might get solved  
somehow. Unfortunately there seems to be no indication that it will.

I'd like to request those of you who are arguing(and everyone else) to NOT  
post your message on the newsgroup if it contains anything negative about  
a fellow poster. If you feel the need to discuss the personal qualities of  
someone in this group, feel free to mail him privately unless he requests  
that you don't.

I believe everyone here is capable of determining whether his post is  
offensive to someone or not. And if we all try to refrain from posting  
those kind of messages, this newsgroup will be a more pleasant place.

Thanks in advance.

Cheers,
Boyd.
Mar 16 2008
prev sibling next sibling parent reply anonymous <anonymous anon.com> writes:
I use filtering.If it is perfect still I notice Andrei Alex stop posting.Soon
Janice stop posting,maybe.Then who is next.

The quote I disagree with: <<I've only seen this with Janice; they annoyed each
other long in the past and have a habit of getting on each others' nerves,>> I
think it is wrong to put simmetry between what Janice did and what Kris
did.Janice made a mistake 6 months early.Kris is creating a personal attack,
long and evil.

John Reimer Wrote:


 Christopher Wright wrote:

 anonymous wrote:

 We saw the same thing many times.kris picks somebody who criticizes 
 tango.He bombs the person with dirty personal attacks.He invests all 
 time and energy in these evil attacks.


 
 I've only seen this with Janice; they annoyed each other long in the 
 past and have a habit of getting on each others' nerves, and being on a 
 text-only forum doesn't help.
 
 But this doesn't happen often, and it's pretty easy to ignore, unless 
 you're directly involved.
 


 
 
 Is it easy to ignore?  A number of people have been responding to these 
 posts requesting that they stop... so I actually disagree.  Either I'm 
 vastly over-estimating the problem or you are vastly ignoring it.
 
 

 

 Filtering his messages out is not the response because he pushes good 
 contributors away.


 
 But works quite well with Ty Tower. And that's why you're mentioning 
 Kris rather than Ty.


 
 
 This is possible, but not the only reason.  I'm surprised that you are 
 confident that this poster has been using filtering.
 
 

 
 I don't think this is a significant problem. If you do, well, that's 
 your problem, not Walter's.


 
 
 Actually, it is a problem because filtering will not work if others 
 respond and quote the messages of the individual.  I suppose that calls 
 for another layer of filtering? :)
 
 -JJR
Mar 16 2008
parent reply John Reimer <terminal.node gmail.com> writes:
anonymous wrote:

 I use filtering.If it is perfect still I notice Andrei Alex stop posting.Soon
Janice stop posting,maybe.Then who is next.
 
 The quote I disagree with: <<I've only seen this with Janice; they annoyed
each other long in the past and have a habit of getting on each others'
nerves,>> I think it is wrong to put simmetry between what Janice did and what
Kris did.Janice made a mistake 6 months early.Kris is creating a personal
attack, long and evil.
 



I was putting no symmetry (or asymmetry) between the two persons nor 
weighing out who was wronged the other more.  That was not my object at 
all (and really wouldn't achieve much either). Unfortunately, that must 
not have been clear in my post?

I was bringing up what I considered a more serious situation in this 
newsgroup in general.  The particular instance you mention plays a small 
part in the whole drama... that's all.

Either way, I think we've determined how this group prefers to handle 
this (that is: do nothing, filter and skip).  Those that don't find this 
difficult to ignore can leave.  For you, I, and others, that might be 
good advice.  It certainly seems to have worked for Andrei. ;)

If you do in fact use filtering, then I wonder why this was brought up 
at all?  I guess the filtering didn't work?

-JJR
Mar 16 2008
parent anonymous <anonymous anon.com> writes:
I do use filtering but I read some of Janice answers.I got curious the same way
I get curious about watching a car accident,as I said.The advice to leave
worked for Andrei but not for us.I do not see how it is a joke.

John Reimer Wrote:


 anonymous wrote:

 I use filtering.If it is perfect still I notice Andrei Alex stop posting.Soon
Janice stop posting,maybe.Then who is next.
 
 The quote I disagree with: <<I've only seen this with Janice; they annoyed
each other long in the past and have a habit of getting on each others'
nerves,>> I think it is wrong to put simmetry between what Janice did and what
Kris did.Janice made a mistake 6 months early.Kris is creating a personal
attack, long and evil.
 


 
 
 I was putting no symmetry (or asymmetry) between the two persons nor 
 weighing out who was wronged the other more.  That was not my object at 
 all (and really wouldn't achieve much either). Unfortunately, that must 
 not have been clear in my post?
 
 I was bringing up what I considered a more serious situation in this 
 newsgroup in general.  The particular instance you mention plays a small 
 part in the whole drama... that's all.
 
 Either way, I think we've determined how this group prefers to handle 
 this (that is: do nothing, filter and skip).  Those that don't find this 
 difficult to ignore can leave.  For you, I, and others, that might be 
 good advice.  It certainly seems to have worked for Andrei. ;)
 
 If you do in fact use filtering, then I wonder why this was brought up 
 at all?  I guess the filtering didn't work?
 
 -JJR
Mar 16 2008
prev sibling next sibling parent anonymous <anonymous anon.com> writes:
Apologies.I had a type-o in my search.

Kris Wrote:


 Unlike some, his post is not anonymous at all ... there's are a variety of 
 posts from dominik, replete with ip address and so on.
 
 
 "anonymous" <anonymous anon.com> wrote in message 
 news:frjon8$1152$1 digitalmars.com...

 Your post is also anonymous.So I am not impressed by your gonads.

 dominik Wrote:


 "anonymous" <anon anon.com> wrote in message
 news:frh97i$7ko$1 digitalmars.com...

I am a regular on this news group from Europe.Not Janice.I say this for 
her
protection for more attacks from kris.Walter can identify me from my IP 
and
confirm.


 Drama queen.
 Seriously, sod off anon. What's up with whining lately? Grow a pair, or 
 grow
 up. Leave this haven of ours alone and stop trolling.
Mar 16 2008
prev sibling parent anon <anon anon.org> writes:
John Reimer Wrote:


 anon wrote:

 John Reimer Wrote: another rehash of his kris apology . funniest thing about
kretinis is his minions . posing as objective reasonable fellas ... a bit
criticizing him ... patting him on the back ... always giving justification for
his antics . john real friends dont let friends miss therapy.


 
 
 hmm David B. Held?


i am kris right after his lithium. never lasts long.
Mar 16 2008