Is there a TOS criteria for meaningless incessant rambling
Is there a TOS criteria for meaningless incessant rambling
As in the subject title, is there anything in the existing TOS to tackle this kind of problem? For if there is not, any person with sever mental disorder, or who is not fluent in English, or BOTH, can just keep posting lengthy, confusing, and meaningless posts that severely disrupt/distract the smooth natural flow of discussion threads. I already suggested to one specific forum member here to try to post in his native language and hopefully someone else who speaks his language can help with translation, but so far he refuses to reveal his real nationality. His incessant rambling on many threads are very disturbing or distractive at the least.
- DNS
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17230
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
- Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
- Contact:
Re: Is there a TOS criteria for meaningless incessant rambling
Yes, 2.e.
Since you're not a moderator, you can't see it, but we have started to disapprove or remove some of those ramblings where this Atma - person continually complains about his censure at DW, how bad DW is, how we should all be meditating in some cave, but yet, Atma still finds time to make posts here. Go figure?e. Disruptive meta-discussion (i.e. discussion about discussion, including in-topic complaints about the existence of discussions that don't suit your preferences)
Re: Is there a TOS criteria for meaningless incessant rambling
Also 2i, which is
So yes, I think we could do a bit more under current ToS to keep this prolific rambler more under control. It's been suggested he use Google Translator, but to no avail.
It's a fine line, but even if the person posting is attempting to be mindful of the topic in hand, the post itself is not mindful, in the sense of having no apparent link to the topic.i. Posts that are not mindful of the current topic, as defined in the initial post
So yes, I think we could do a bit more under current ToS to keep this prolific rambler more under control. It's been suggested he use Google Translator, but to no avail.
Re: Is there a TOS criteria for meaningless incessant rambling
Re: Is there a TOS criteria for meaningless incessant rambling
I actually appreciate Atma’s posts the way they are. I enjoy the effort required to unscramble them. They may be rambling and possibly incessant but are certainly not meaningless.
- DNS
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17230
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
- Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
- Contact:
Re: Is there a TOS criteria for meaningless incessant rambling
Moderator note: you're seeing the posts that were approved or not removed. There are several other posts that you are not seeing that were removed or not approved.
Re: Is there a TOS criteria for meaningless incessant rambling
There's a simple yet effective quick fix: put him on some sort of "waiting list" of people whose posts will not immediately show to the public right after they click the Submit button, but instead will first have to go to you the moderators/admins for review/edit and approval before releasing. At least the time delay by the review/edit/approval process will slow him down and prevent him from flooding every threads with his nonsense.DNS wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 11:34 pm Yes, 2.e.
Since you're not a moderator, you can't see it, but we have started to disapprove or remove some of those ramblings where this Atma - person continually complains about his censure at DW, how bad DW is, how we should all be meditating in some cave, but yet, Atma still finds time to make posts here. Go figure?e. Disruptive meta-discussion (i.e. discussion about discussion, including in-topic complaints about the existence of discussions that don't suit your preferences)
- DNS
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17230
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
- Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
- Contact:
Re: Is there a TOS criteria for meaningless incessant rambling
Yes, we have that, but sometimes others mods and I get too generous and approve some of the nonsense. We tend to lean on the flexible - free speech side in our moderation policy. So when we see our mistake, then we remove the post.santa100 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 1:17 am There's a simple yet effective quick fix: put him on some sort of "waiting list" of people whose posts will not immediately show to the public right after they click the Submit button, but instead will first have to go to you the moderators/admins for review/edit and approval before releasing. At least the time delay by the review/edit/approval process will slow him down and prevent him from flooding every threads with his nonsense.
Re: Is there a TOS criteria for meaningless incessant rambling
At least should hold off his posts a bit longer before releasing, it's like introduce a bottleneck to slow down the traffic flow. He's been posting WAY too many crazy messages, too much to even laypeople's standard, let alone monastics' !DNS wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 1:20 amYes, we have that, but sometimes others mods and I get too generous and approve some of the nonsense. We tend to lean on the flexible - free speech side in our moderation policy. So when we see our mistake, then we remove the post.santa100 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 1:17 am There's a simple yet effective quick fix: put him on some sort of "waiting list" of people whose posts will not immediately show to the public right after they click the Submit button, but instead will first have to go to you the moderators/admins for review/edit and approval before releasing. At least the time delay by the review/edit/approval process will slow him down and prevent him from flooding every threads with his nonsense.
Re: Is there a TOS criteria for meaningless incessant rambling
The board has become much more enjoyable since I put him on my ignore list (which only has one other entry - now banned so irrelevant), so I don't actually have to read the posts unless they are quoted. That's my suggestion for non-moderators to deal with such postings - don't feed the rambler...
Mike
Mike
-
- Posts: 375
- Joined: Mon May 09, 2022 12:11 am
Re: Is there a TOS criteria for meaningless incessant rambling
I like them. I have found what they say of benefit on occasion. Not the unsubtle admonishing of respected and established teachers, but some of the other stuff is alright. It would be a shame to lose them all together in my opinion. I am grateful the moderation team hasn't done away with them completely yet, though understandable if it does happen. Pretty solid moderator team here now that I think about it.
Just as a bird, wherever it goes, flies with its wings as its only burden; so too is he content with a set of robes to provide for his body and almsfood to provide for his hunger. Wherever he goes, he takes only his barest necessities along. This is how a monk is content.(DN11)
- JamesTheGiant
- Posts: 2157
- Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2015 8:41 am
- Location: New Zealand
Re: Is there a TOS criteria for meaningless incessant rambling
Yes I'm also impressed by the restraint of the moderators. I would not have the patience.
Re: Is there a TOS criteria for meaningless incessant rambling
Bodily actions, verbal, encouragement, or approve, that's all the same, and TOS wouldn't fix the results being other then the deeds qualities. But simily virtue, and element, binds people. Common people have ways for a better, when their leaders change to good ways, or feel at ease when much care to don't.
May good householder try to focus on mindfulness and alertness as the liberating refuge, the Gems.
May good householder try to focus on mindfulness and alertness as the liberating refuge, the Gems.
-
- Posts: 1802
- Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:20 am
Re: Is there a TOS criteria for meaningless incessant rambling
There is also the possibility it's a giant wind-up.