Forum
>
Announcements
>
Thread
Log in |
Register
> Considering you registered for this site after the filter was implemented, and have made over 30 comments since, I can't see how you can make that claim.
Everytime I spend 5 minutes trying my luck with every single comment. That's not how it's supposed to work. I'll give up after 15 attempts.
Why not completely give up? You don't have to comment on this site at all if you don't want to or don't like the new filter. Just stop commenting.
English isn't my first language, so i don't have many alternatives.
This speaks in favor of my half-serious suggestion that maybe users could be given the ability to leave private, ahem, "notes" to the pictures. Then there could be an additional feature of turning such a private comment public and back again by the user. But only say once a week or only once. Except when it has been public and has been reported. Moderators could be given the option to force a comment private instead of emptying or removing it altogether.
There is no freedom of speech, even if you type a nice and polite comment.
Freedom of speech literally means the ability to set up a publishing medium. In other words, to construct your own site or start printing your own newspaper. It has never had the meaning of being able to say whatever you want in a publishing medium owned and run by someone else. People also have the freedom to eat, but that does not include the freedom to eat someone else's lunch.
This may cut down on the "what a woman" spam on EVERY pic that I've seen posted .... it gets.... old... fast...
This may cut down on the "what a woman" spam on EVERY pic that I've seen posted .... it gets.... old... fast...
It does get old, but why can't you just ignore comments that aren't being mean or derogatory toward other people?
I'm of the mindset that if people aren't being mean, rude, or disrespectful toward others, then let them say what they want. I ignore most comments anyway, so I can ignore those, too.
It does get old, but why can't you just ignore comments that aren't being mean or derogatory toward other people?
To know if you should ignore something it is necessary to read it first.
To ignore something means that you do not react to it. To ignore something does not mean that there is no time wasted. To tell people to ignore comments is not some wise and prudent advice that would solve the problem once and for all for everyone, but a form of reaction policing and attitude policing.
With your mindset the comments simply become "write only" or something like a public toilet for emotional reactions.
What if the drooling sycophants started ignoring the entire feature? It is not for them. It is for those who want to say something useful, fun or interesting about the picture for others to read. It's not there for anyone's pressing urge to just say something or react in some way.
To know if you should ignore something it is necessary to read it first.
To ignore something means that you do not react to it. To ignore something does not mean that there is no time wasted. To tell people to ignore comments is not some wise and prudent advice that would solve the problem once and for all for everyone, but a form of reaction policing and attitude policing.
With your mindset the comments simply become "write only" or something like a public toilet for emotional reactions.
What if the drooling sycophants started ignoring the entire feature? It is not for them. It is for those who want to say something useful, fun or interesting about the picture for others to read. It's not there for anyone's pressing urge to just say something or react in some way.
It's really not hard to just ignore benign comments. You're making this far more complicated than it should be. Comments are a place to sound off how you feel or think about a particular image/clip, not a place for dissertations and deep engagement. If you're not being mean, rude, or disrespectful, then sound off all you want. Most of the comments get ignored anyway, even the thoughtful ones.
I hope that this filter does improve the comment sections the way Chainer wants it to, but I think it's going to do more harm than good. For example, it could make comment word searches less useful because just posting "baseball bicep" might not be acceptable anymore. I could be wrong. I hope that I'm wrong.
I think that the more serious issue isn't the "boings" or other vapid comments, but rather the comments that disrespect or insult the women on this website. Those are harmful.
Comments are a place to sound off how you feel or think about a particular image/clip
Except when admins and moderators don't think so.
I find it even a little bit frustrating that people don't seem to get it that the decision has already been made. Now people can either understand why it has been made or submit to it without understanding why. What I have been doing here is trying to help those able and willing to understand it.
Of course it is possible to try to convince the admins and moderators to change their approach. But twenty people saying the exact same thing, namely that they feel like they and everyone else should be able to post their burps and farts and that everyone else can and should just walk around it clearly is not making the case.
I see there also an attempt to set up a false dialectic. The real question is if the comments could or should serve a useful purpose or be simply a place for primitive reactions. The fake dichotomy is between mean and plain inane primitive reactions. You're all wasting your time by again and again trying to have a different conversation.
I think that the more serious issue isn't the "boings" or other vapid comments, but rather the comments that disrespect or insult the women on this website.
That is called whataboutism. "What we are doing to our children is not the problem. Baby seals being clubbed to death is the problem."
I have heard that there are some very smart people who are capable of being aware of two different problems simultaneously.
To ignore something means that you do not react to it. To ignore something does not mean that there is no time wasted. To tell people to ignore comments is not some wise and prudent advice that would solve the problem once and for all for everyone, but a form of reaction policing and attitude policing.
This is the silliest thing I have read on this site. Isn't complaining about comments like "whoa" or some other random monosyllabic response the same "reaction policing" and "attitude policing"??
Again, you are insufferable.
This is the silliest thing I have read on this site. Isn't complaining about comments like "whoa" or some other random monosyllabic response the same "reaction policing" and "attitude policing"??
Again, you are insufferable.
No. Any disagreement about any reaction is not reaction policing or attitude policing. Especially not when there are other reasons that have been clearly stated again and again.
It is reaction policing and attitude policing when it only and purely tells someone how he should feel or think about something.
"Just don't be annoyed." "Just don't feel like you have wasted your time."
What I have been doing here is trying to help those able and willing to understand it.
I don't need explaining to. I understand it. I'm expressing my opinion, as we're wont to do on these forums. I think that it's presumptuous to think that you speak for the admin or mods. You're simply stating your interpretation of what is going on. We can only speak for ourselves.
Of course it is possible to try to convince the admins and moderators to change their approach.
I'm not trying to do that. I'm just stating my opinion as a longtime fan of this website.
I see there also an attempt to set up a false dialectic. The real question is if the comments could or should serve a useful purpose or be simply a place for primitive reactions. The fake dichotomy is between mean and plain inane primitive reactions. You're all wasting your time by again and again trying to have a different conversation.
Are you conflating "false dialectic" and "fake dichotomy?" https://www.theifod.com/dichotomous-vs-dialec... My concern is that the comment filter will hinder the useful purpose that many comments serve for me, which is that I like to utilize the comments search function in order to find specific phrases (attributes of FBBs that I find attractive).
That is called whataboutism. "What we are doing to our children is not the problem. Baby seals being clubbed to death is the problem."
By calling it "whataboutism" it sounds like you want to dismiss what I'm saying. I did not bring it up to dismiss the issue that some people have with the "boings" -- I am not using my concern as a red herring to "boing." I am just stating my opinion. Take it or leave it. I don't care. To reiterate my opinion, if we're going to police language, then being disrespectful, hateful, and mean towards the FBBs featured on this website are more concerning to me than someone saying "boing," though it could be argued that "boing" is being disrespectful, I suppose. That's just my opinion. But, I don't run this website. I fully understand that my concern here does not negate the concern about the "boings."
I have heard that there are some very smart people who are capable of being aware of two different problems simultaneously.
I'll take that as a compliment.
Are you conflating "false dialectic" and "fake dichotomy?"
No. In a dialectic the whole point of the exercise is to wield power by setting the terms of the struggle. This is exactly what I was referring to and the link only confirms my understanding. It is in effect saying that you, as a participant in the struggle, are foolish and immature if you stick to the side assigned to you but smart and prudent if you work towards the predetermined middle way.
It's a method of ruling, not a method of arriving at a truth. This is the whole point of Hegel's Phänomenologie and what confuses people about it is that you are supposed to simultaneously get and not get the same thing and choose to enter an imaginary reality where everything is a dialectic. Not knowing that you can also choose to not enter it.
By calling it "whataboutism" it sounds like you want to dismiss what I'm saying.
The mean, hateful and disrespectful comments are not a problem because there's nobody arguing for them and technically everyone knows how to deal with them. In other words, use the report button and let the moderators handle it.
I am not using my concern as a red herring to "boing."
But you are using it as a red herring anyway.
We can only speak for ourselves.
Yeah. Everything is an opinion. And everything is just an interpretation.
But that's just your opinion and your interpretation. I disagree with it.
I'd MUCH rather scroll past a short, silly comment than have to put up with somebody's PhD thesis on short, silly comments taking up ridiculous amounts of real estate in a thread.
I'd MUCH rather scroll past a short, silly comment than have to put up with somebody's PhD thesis on short, silly comments taking up ridiculous amounts of real estate in a thread.
100% agree. Every post is TLDR;
No. In a dialectic the whole point of the exercise is to wield power by setting the terms of the struggle. This is exactly what I was referring to and the link only confirms my understanding. It is in effect saying that you, as a participant in the struggle, are foolish and immature if you stick to the side assigned to you but smart and prudent if you work towards the predetermined middle way.
It's a method of ruling, not a method of arriving at a truth. This is the whole point of Hegel's Phänomenologie and what confuses people about it is that you are supposed to simultaneously get and not get the same thing and choose to enter an imaginary reality where everything is a dialectic. Not knowing that you can also choose to not enter it.
The mean, hateful and disrespectful comments are not a problem because there's nobody arguing for them and technically everyone knows how to deal with them. In other words, use the report button and let the moderators handle it.
But you are using it as a red herring anyway.
Yeah. Everything is an opinion. And everything is just an interpretation.
But that's just your opinion and your interpretation. I disagree with it.
I disagree.
I disagree.
—I'm standing about ten feet away from you.
—No! I am standing ten feet away from you!!!
—I'm standing about ten feet away from you.
—No! I am standing ten feet away from you!!!
LOL
I just didn't feel like continuing the discussion.
Not a big fan of Hegel. Agree with Kierkegaard's critique of him. But, I digress.
Take care!
Didn't expect an academic discussion on philosophy in this thread. Never got past Hume in my last class, I'm afraid. Almost minored in it, but didn't want to doom myself to a career in academia.
It always makes me laugh in these threads when someone claims to know more than someone else, and goes into great pointless detail to try to prove their point. I have got much better things to do.
I don't see a problem.
There is a better chance of discussion than ever before. If engagement is just another name for primitive reactions then I think those are not wanted. To me this seems like repeating the same argument and the same complaint again and again.
I have no power here and I do not pretend to make any decisions. But I think that those who have the power already decided against such "engagement" in favor of discussion as it is commonly understood. That is, not as twenty cavemen grunting in turn.
I think it's not an AI but some simple old-fashioned code.