I'm out of this forum!
- Login o registrati per inviare commenti
Having recently posted a response, to someone who asked for thoughts about a recent piece of news - and, being that response of mine an important fact concerning that same news, that I thought I should warn people about - I was surprised to see today that that same response of mine was *hidden* after having been given a "score" of "-2" in the new system that is used to manage posts on this forum.
And, concerning this, what I would like to say, is that...
I'm used to having people constantly trying to discredit me, whenever I denounce important facts, concerning the inner and hidden works of the establishment and people working for it. But, what I'm not used to, and won't tolerate, is being censored for doing that - since that "Freedom of Speech" is one of the things that I most value.
Also, I'm experienced in forum discussions, and such, were people post things that are considered garbage or uninteresting. And, unless those same persons post things that are, in some way, obscene or criminal - and have their posts rightly deleted, because of that - whenever I see a post that I don't like, or don't want to read, I just hit a button called "Page Down" - which doesn't give me any trouble.
But, if the new system on this forum is one that allows a group of people (or even a single person - that can create two different accounts) to hide messages that they don't like, then this is a system in which I don't want to participate.
So, farewell, you all...
(So much for "Freedom" in here, hey?)
I'm just as opposed to the new system as you, and I think a lot of other people are.
https://trisquel.info/en/forum/so-now-we-ban-unpopular-posts
This forum is not Reddit, so why did Ruben add this stupid feature?
> This forum is not Reddit, so why did Ruben add this stupid feature?
Since you mentioned me...
Because Reddit's community-moderation mechanism works nicely. All comments are preserved and can be replied to, but inappropriate messages no longer lower the tone of the conversation. The details of the mechanism can be tuned up, but I think they are working well so far.
All comments are preserved and can be replied to, but inappropriate messages no longer lower the tone of the conversation.
A fine example of double-think.
The two statements are contradictory.
"...an important fact concerning that same news..."
Saying that "The EFF is a fake organization controlled by the establishment itself" is not a fact, and trying to present it in this thread as if you were only relaying facts is troublesome.
"I was surprised"
You shouldn't be, considering that many people here support the FSF and EFF.
"(So much for "Freedom" in here, hey?)"
Please see http://xkcd.com/1357/
Goodbye and goodluck with your distro.
I'm not staying, or returning, whilst you're employing such a system of censorship.
I wish you well.
You do realise that if this system had been in existence since a hundred or so years that Gandhi would have been silenced before he could get anything done? Ditto MLK. Ditto everyone else who has questioned the status quo or provided evidence of criminality or conspiracy.
For that matter - would the Linux kernel or GNU/Linux have got where they are if the community was able to silence and remove any voice it didn't agree with in the first instance?
This is not intelligent debate finessed, this is rank cowardice. Any community who silences people for anything other than incitement to violence, prejudice or hatred has lost its way.
That logical fallacy is called "Affirming the consequent".
"They told Gandhi to shut up so since they are telling me to shut up I'm a oppressed freedom fighter". No, that doesn't add up.
> provided evidence of criminality or conspiracy.
Accusing an organization of criminality or conspiracy *with* evidence is something to praise. Doing it without proof, and while disrupting conversations in a community forum is the opposite of activism and benefits nobody.
That's two strawman arguments in one post.
I did not claim to be like Gandhi, I merely tried to point out the flaws in your system.
If the British had been able to use a few people to get Gandhi's message silenced, they would have done. And this is what is wrong with this system - it allows the minority to silence people they don't agree with - this is cowardice.
Accusing an organization of criminality or conspiracy *with* evidence is something to praise. Doing it without proof, and while disrupting conversations in a community forum is the opposite of activism and benefits nobody.
Agreed, but again, this is not the point is it? People are not only being silenced for these reasons, but because they say things that are inconvenient. Again, this is cowardice.
It's your site, do as you please with it, but, you need to know - you're no longer on the side of the angels.
name at domain wrote:
> But, if the new system on this forum is one that allows a group of
> people (or even a single person - that can create two different
> accounts) to hide messages that they don't like, then this is a system
> in which I don't want to participate.
Or you could choose to participate in the Trisquel-users mailing list
where your ratings are your own and you decide what is shown.
I am a translator!
The new voting system is stupid and I don't like it. I already said that and I'll repeat it each time the topic comes out. This is not reddit nor stupid failbook. It is not that it is censoring - it is just stupid.
As far as the fernando negro's claims about eff.org - that is plain stupid (eff is a fake...) and you have no idea what you are talking about. Yours is not an "important fact" - it is plain dumbness!!
Bye bye Fernando - try some site like "cheapconspiracyofworlddomination.com"
Nah, it's not supposed to be Reddit or anywhere else. This is the Trisquel forums, nothing more and nothing less. I personally like the notion of community moderation where they get to directly indicate what sort of behavior is and isn't acceptable here.
Its garbage and you probably have bias since you and Ruben are golf buddies.
Honestly, I don't get what the big deal is. As long as my ability to use the forum without JavaScript extensions is unhindered (and it is), I don't mind.
Also, Fernando_Negro, I completely agree with that post getting a negative rating. It had absolutely nothing to do with the thread in question, and as has already been pointed out, it was an assertion that you made without evidence.
free speech part from freedom
When prevent person from talking
This means that you stand against freedom
The new system is fundamentally flawed because of the following reasons:
It creates severe misrepresentations, since a red mark implies "most of the community disagrees with this post" while a green mark implies "wow, look at this awesome post everybody likes" while in reallity it just means that you have two fanboys or hater out there.
Consider a post 99 percent of the board members are ok with but three people feel really offended... well, the thread will get a red mark and vanish.
It doesn't succeed in representing the opinions of the members and it sure isn't the right way of handling spam or troll posts either.
The latter one should be done by a moderator if and only if there is some grounds for it, like endorsing crime or something along those lines.
To sum it up, the new rating system was installed for the wrong purpose and on top of that it was done the wrong way.
No matter how you look at it, it's just hypocritical to treat opinions like that in a board for hardcore freedom fighters.
I mean no hardware project ever mentioned in this board was free enough for certain persons, but obviously they're fine with hiding unwelcome posts.
I am a member!
Since people are commenting on this I would like to as well.
I do not like these vote type things. I dislike reading a post and then asking myself why I may not feel as others do. It's tiring and an unnecessary distraction. I prefer being the judge of which statements I agree with or disagree with--reading in private by myself, without counts of +'s and -'s or colors showing me the "score".
Also, many times people cover more than a single topic in their post, as I am now doing--saying that I believe people ought to respect a thread and stay within what is being covered there.
What if you agree with my second statement but not the first? You get one vote if you feel like voting. What have you voted for and how will other readers know what you meant with your vote?
To me, this new system will shape conversations into an inaccurate group-think conformity. I don't like that.
It's like F1 tyres at the start of 2012: Quick-degrading? Perhaps good.
Exploding somewhere in Spain and England? Not good.
(Which is to say that a score of "-2" should not be enough to hide a comment, "-10" or "-7" would perhaps be a bit more sane.)
Honestly I don't think a comment should be hidden at all. The worst thing that should happen to it is getting a bright red/maroon background with the text being changed to white.
davidnotcoulthard said:
Exploding somewhere in Spain and England? Not good.
Spain exploited every civilization and culture they could put their hands on in the past. I will care less if they are exploding with internal political issues. They abuse and exploited humans in the form of slaves.
The English exploited every Nation they own with the slave trade. Who is the lesser of evil?
I said exploding - F1 (Formula 1) tyres were literally exploding in Catalunya & Silverstone, regardless of the past of the countries the 2 are in.
Anyway, the exploding tyres were actually last year, I think, not 2012.
please, somebody downvote.
It would be too nice to see this post being hidden because people dislike it...
I am a member!
My thought, every time I see someone is announcing they are leaving this mailing list (forum) >> https://twitter.com/BryanCranston/status/524255816724275200
Yes, and then they hang out on the forums to continue talking even after making their great announcement of exodus.
There's really no need for someone to announce that they're leaving so my first thought when I see such posts is "No you're not" because, if they were going to, they'd have done it already.
I consider it to be cowardice to just make a big critique to someone (or to some organization) and then flee the scene, to not face the responses to such a critique.
(And, I hadn't completely put apart the possibility that my critique might cause some people to rethink the new system.)
I'm here only to respond to such responses, that I consider worthy of a response, and then I'm leaving.
Farewell. "Over & Out".
Responding to jxself and quidam,
I do present evidence of what I say. Since that, I left a link to a previous post of mine, where (1) I point people to one of the EFF's own subpages, that states who is funding them - which, among others, includes an individual well known for only funding organizations that work in the interest of the establishment, and to even have a huge network built just for that same purpose - and where (2) I give an example of one most important issue concerning electronic privacy that this EFF organization refuses to cover.
And, I can add that, organizations that really fight for people's rights and Freedom, are not described as "venerable" by the "New York Times", whose directors attend secretive meetings with the Western heads-of-state and CEOs of the main corporations, that are taking away our rights (i.e. Bilderberg Club meetings). And that, people who really and seriously denounce and fight against the continuing loss of our electronic privacy, are censored by that same mainstream media (http://www.infowars.com/the-guardian-revealed-a-major-nsa-scoop-then-deleted-it-from-their-website/).
I expect people to research more about this organization, on their own, before making the judgement if I'm right or wrong. And, being this a Free Software-related forum, I can't come here and bombard people with information of a political nature.
I keep on finding very naïve people in here. That, apparently because they never tried to seriously fight the establishment, are not aware of all the dirty tricks and traps that the latter uses against its adversaries. And, if people here don't know who George Soros is, and what the true nature of the media financed by big economic interests that they read is, then it's their fault that they don't know the world they live in.
I could elaborate more on this, but that would require a big explanation on my part. And, as I said, this is not a forum about politics.
But, this mechanism, where some people can silence one that is saying things that they don't like, or don't believe in, is one that I profoundly disagree with.
And, unfortunately, this is a case where we have a difference of opinion, that is serious enough to make us go separate ways.
Take care.
"that states who is funding them"
And the FSF also gets money from companies that are not friendly to free software. That doesn't mean they get to control the org and that they're nothing more than a fake org.
I partly respond to that in the thread in which I denounce the EFF, here: https://trisquel.info/en/forum/linux-voice-asking-community-where-should-50-their-profits-go#comment-45995
"Bad corporations" are forced to monetarily support Free Software, because they also *use* it.
They are morally obliged to offer something back to the community, after having used Free Software products so much. And, above all, they also have an interest in improving such products, and developing others, so that they can later *use* them.
Yes, they are unfriendly to the Free Software ideology, in itself. But, not to some of the great products that come out of it. Which they can later subvert, by adding their own proprietary components.
Also, the financing part, is /just one/ of the things that may raise suspicions about the true nature of an organization.
Ultimately, what mostly determines any sane and intelligent person's evaluation, is the old saying "judge a tree by its fruits".
And, all the "fruits" that I taste from the EFF don't have any flavour. (Meaning, I don't learn of anything new or important from it.)
While, on the other hand, I know of the existence of other trees that produce much better "fruits" (that is, other media organizations that denounce a lot of things that the EFF doesn't denounce) that are not promoted by the mainstream media, that is known to be in collusion with the establishment.
And, another fact is also that, this latter media (which denounces much more important things - an example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZQXxUmROIU#t=1h8m25s) doesn't get monetary support from a person like George Soros.
So, you can all use your neurons, and draw your own conclusions... (Or "connect the dots" in any way you want...)
I have to say, your crazy conspiracy theories can be entertaining at times.
And, jxself,
I resent you telling me to read such an insulting "webcomic", that distorts one's right to Freedom of Speech within previously accepted rules, that don't include the right to silence a person for saying things that some other people don't like.
I am a translator!
trisq - your post made me think once again about this voting shajt..
I don't care if a post has 153 pluses or 322 minuses - I have a brain and a will; I also am a conscious individual that is not influenced by what the majority deems or not to be right,cool,wrong,stupid etc etc. Otherwise I would probably use windblowz and not trisquel.. yeaa windblowz is so cool that everyboy uses it!!
I don't think this voting system helps anyone to find the most useful post or a solution to a request for a problem or whatever. It just points to the post that 3 or 4 dudes reckoned to be the best post.. which signifies NOTHING!!
And above all - and this I told to someone of you in an email who was asking my opinion about this voting shajt, which I'm gonna repeat exactly the same way -
expressing ones opinions, dislikes or appreciations using + and - is very very stupid and infantile (it suits well on facebook because they want you to be stupid and infantile!).
Are we some kind of dumb children or human beings capable of expressing all the beautiful shades of semantics??
If this voting dumbness irritates you I suggest that someone creates a post titled "Lets vote the voting shajt" and then after a week or so, when everybody has voted (not with a + and - but with human words) the forum's authority counts the votes and removes it (yes. I am pretty certain that it would get removed, after a poll!!)
regards
I am a translator!
fernando - will you please stop this nonsense - please go look at all the great things eff did since it was founded in 1990! Read and inform yourself before posting here. The electronic Frontier Foundation has struggled for more than three decades in order to protect the freedom and the privacy and the phisical security of a lot of people!!
They take money from everybody just as FSF does. Money is much needed! That doesn't mean they agree or cooperate with those who give them money!!
fernaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaandooooooooooo
Does anybody remember GNUser? If he were still around there'd be rage posts of the ass on this new voting system.
GNUser is still around; his last post was 11 days ago: https://trisquel.info/en/forum/trisquel-eee-pc-2-gb-hard-drive#comment-59817
That he isn'tmight mean that he's lsft, sadly - albeit quietly.
I don't like that people keep talking about the voting system as if it's "censorship". The posts in question don't get deleted. From what I'm hearing, they get collapsed by default if you run the requested JavaScript code. And if you don't run the requested JavaScript code, like me, all you see is the date banner being colored red. The latter isn't even remotely like censorship.
The former, well, still not even close to censorship. If hiding a post by default is "censorship", then having your TV off by default (i.e. hiding what's on TV) is "censorship". This is a completely absurd definition of "censorship". It leads to the conclusion that TV Tropes "censors" most of its own pages by collapsing them by default when JavaScript is enabled, that Slashdot "censors" posts by collapsing them into one-line summaries, that books having covers on them is "censorship", etc.
It's obvious why low-rated posts get collapsed by default when JavaScript is on: it's meant as a convenience for readers, so that they can more quickly skip posts that the community has deemed to be garbage. Is it really worth it? Maybe not. Is -2 too high of a rating to be the threshold for this? Maybe. Is it censorship? Absolutely not.
Your TV analogy is horribly wrong.
First of all, somebody who is watching TV is similar to the reader of this forum - she consumes what gets provided on this platform, *not at all* to the broadcasting company.
Turning off the TV equals not reading the forum, closing the browser window or just jumping over certain posts.
What happened here is as if a tv channel decided to move a certail show to an unpopular channel marked in red for the 'bad and unpopular shows' and people have to switch there seperately.
That wouldn't be so surprising, since in television it's all about popularity and money out of advertises.
This forum has a different porpuse than to make money with really popular posts.
"I don't like that people keep talking about the voting system as if it's "censorship". "
And I don't like false analogies that give people wrong ideas.
I have a few thoughts on this:
Firstly, I think that the system is a response to the derailing of
topics, which in itself could be considered a form of censorship (of the
original topic). I'm sorry Fernando, but at least some of the topics
that you have hijacked with your conspiracy theories have been taken
*entirely* off-topic, likewise for other users.
I guess I also agree with the general consensus that the system could be
abused to hide dissenting and minority views, although I'm not sure if
that has happened yet.
I think that a per-user ability to hide posts of particular users, such
as included in phpBB, could be useful. That way each user could decide
that they don't want to view posts of a particular user, i.e. hide those
posts by default.
More than this, I think that users who take discussions off-topic should
be asked to continue their discussions elsewhere. This is the Trisquel
forum, not a General Discussion forum. I do not think it is censorship
to ask users to remain on-topic. There are other places for general and
non-Trisquel discussions.
Andrew
Of what censorship are you referring to? There's no comment deletion, they are just collapsed and you can see them if you want by clicking on them... it's that simple, isn't it?
I never claimed that this is a real form of censorship though I think that it has some similarities.
Just because the post is 'hidden' and not deleted doesn't make this system legit.
Imagine a bookstore installs such a rating system:
if three people don't like a certain book, it gets stored in a seperate room for the bad books with a stamp on it and people have to go there if they want to have a look at it.
In theory, the books are still accessable for the public, but in reality: how many people will go to this seperate room and read it?
So in the end, the readership has been successfully cut and we have to some good percentage achieved what real censorship would have done.
Maybe I would like to call it 'soft censorship' because it shares the same spirit.
> if three people don't like a certain book, it gets stored
> in a seperate room for the bad books with a stamp on it
> and people have to go there if they want to have a look at
> it.
It's more like having the books closed on the display. You can still see that the post is there. All you can't see is what's in the post. You're completely overblowing this.
> how many people will go to this seperate room and read it?
You know, most people don't go past the first page of a Google search. Is Google guilty of "censorship" because it puts most of its results on pages other than the first page?
"You know, most people don't go past the first page of a Google search. Is Google guilty of "censorship" because it puts most of its results on pages other than the first page?"
That's nonsense - displaying results in some kind of order is a practical neccessity and trisquel always did so, too.
You have to scroll down in order to see later posts, or you even have to switch to the next page.
Imagine google would hide posts based on user ratings; I don't think that'd be very popular!
I just checked with JavaScript on, and there seems to be some kind of bug that's causing several posts to be hidden in this thread by default because of another unrelated post's rating. That should be fixed.
- Login o registrati per inviare commenti