Careful, Joshk. You might get a point just for asking that…

I think the use of the “rude” flag should require the individual to give a reason.

atbglenn wrote:

I’m the one with 6 rude marks

atbglenn wrote:

Photoshop?

PS – I am now extremely curious about who has 48 points…
Is that maybe a “total” or something?
Maybe it’s someone in another thread that I just haven’t been reading?

atbglenn wrote:

Anyway, thanks for the laugh I have no idea how to do that htmp/css thingy.

Enderman wrote:

PS – I am now extremely curious about who has 48 points…
Is that maybe a “total” or something?
Maybe it’s someone in another thread that I just haven’t been reading?

Enderman wrote:

PS – I am now extremely curious about who has 48 points… Is that maybe a “total” or something? Maybe it’s someone in another thread that I just haven’t been reading?

Nope, those are current points. It was actually a bit higher in the past couple of days, but (s)he has calmed down and the points are slowly vanishing. No sense in speculating though, in fact I’d prefer that everyone didn’t, because if we pick a name as “most likely to have 48 rudeness points” in a sort of cruel mock election, we’ll definitely have an offended BLFer.

48, take a hint will ya.

sb56637 wrote:

Nope, those are current points. It was actually a bit higher in the past couple of days, but (s)he has calmed down and the points are slowly vanishing. No sense in speculating though, in fact I’d prefer that everyone didn’t, because if we pick a name as “most likely to have 48 rudeness points” in a sort of cruel mock election, we’ll definitely have an offended BLFer.

DavidEF wrote:

I don’t think I’ve ever even posted 48 times in 24 hours – ever! So, either the person is being both Spammy AND Rude! or lots of people are marking the same post(s) (indicating that the posts are VERY Rude!).

Enderman wrote:

atbglenn wrote:

Anyway, thanks for the laugh I have no idea how to do that htmp/css thingy.

I never knew how any of that worked until I started teaching myself html/css.
Fun stuff to trick people with

CRX wrote:

48, take a hint will ya.

There’s a reason why it runs off the scale after 10 and intrudes into the forum posts column…

atbglenn wrote:

I’m the one with 6 rude marks

atbglenn wrote:

sb56637 wrote:

Enderman wrote:

atbglenn wrote:

Anyway, thanks for the laugh I have no idea how to do that htmp/css thingy.

I never knew how any of that worked until I started teaching myself html/css. Fun stuff to trick people with

Yeah, don’t tell anyone, but screenshots as “proof” of something happening in a web browser are comically easy to generate. I could generate a screenshot right now to prove that I just send $1,553,234.42 to atbglenn@tesla.com via PayPal.

I wouldn’t mind if someone actually sent me that kind of money. I’m going to start a fund me account called “Glenn’s feelings were hurt on BLF. We don’t know if he will ever recover. So please help out this poor soul. Your’s truly, Not Glenn… lol

atbglenn wrote:

I wouldn’t mind if someone actually sent me that kind of money. I’m going to start a fund me account called “Glenn’s feelings were hurt on BLF. We don’t know if he will ever recover. So please help out this poor soul. Your’s truly, Not Glenn… lol

As a recent receipient of a huge number of Rude votes, (all coming from one thread that has been off the rails in various Off Topic discussion for months) I definately would like to see the anonymous system done away with.

If something is truly Rude… the Giver of the vote should have no problem with the Giveee knowing they gave the vote.

Just because someone chooses to mark a post rude does not automatically make it Rude.

Nor does dressing up an obviously Rude post with smiley faces make it not Rude.

“To me”, that is somewhat equal to Chocolate coating something the doggie dropped & serving it up as something wonderful. Yeah… it might look good at first glance…… till you get to the core of it that is. . And there are some on here that are masters of that technique.

IF there cannot be an anonymous system, I feel there should at very least there should be something simple that people could show agreement with a post.

And I see the word “vendetta” used in this thread. In fact it was used in obviously Rude ways aimed at the one who started this thread. Pretty amazing…not in a good way either.

To me, vendetta is when some anonymous person starts handing out Rude votes simply because someone does not agree with their opinion & it upsets their fragile little ego.

That………. is the real meaning of vendatta as far as I am concerned.

And at that point, might as well post about it as a “joke”; because that is exactly what it has become.

And posting about the injustice is no more Off Topic than the truck loads of other Off Topic chatter.

My .02…. ymmv…

teacher wrote:

Nor does dressing up an obviously Rude post with smiley faces make it not Rude.

i h8 u

….

teacher wrote:

As a recent receipient of a huge number of Rude votes, (all coming from one thread that has been off the rails in various Off Topic discussion for months) I definately would like to see the anonymous system done away with.

Quote:

Nor does dressing up an obviously Rude post with smiley faces make it not Rude.

“To me”, that is somewhat equal to Chocolate coating something the doggie dropped & serving it up as something wonderful. Yeah… it might look good at first glance…… till you get to the core of it that is.

When a lot of rude points start to rack up, there is often the false assumption that they are fraudulent hits. Seen from my end, it’s usually another story— in the case of a user that starts to go off the scale with rude hits, there are usually multiple users, many of whom have no dog in the fight, that mark the post(s) as rude.

I definitely will not be implementing a way for users to see who marked the post as rude. It doesn’t matter who marked it as rude, as long as it was a genuine response to something perceived as rudeness (as defined here), there’s basically no disputing it. Somebody was offended or concerned that rules were being broken, and it doesn’t matter who it was. What matters is what was said that offended the user. And that’s what you can see here:

http://budgetlightforum.com/my-problem-posts

As I said before, in the rare case that somebody tries to game the system to clobber a personal enemy with rude points, I can easily detect that and will take necessary corrective measures, including suspending the account.

Hey SB, can you give a list of most rude points given? Also without names.
That 48 current is a bit of a shock but made me think if there are, say 5 members giving 80% of all rudes or if it is a much smaller difference between the “top” 5 or 10 then 48-6-and lower.

The Miller wrote:

Hey SB, can you give a list of most rude points given? Also without names. That 48 current is a bit of a shock but made me think if there are, say 5 members giving 80% of all rudes or if it is a much smaller difference between the “top” 5 or 10 then 48-6-and lower.

Hmmm, I could probably figure out a way to generate that data, but it’s a bit harder to compile that. But I’m constantly checking my list of users that currently have non-expired rudeness points, and at any given moment it’s usually quite a short list (if any), and usually populated by a few repeat offenders.

I think the big question is who is going to organise the first 10000th rude post give-away.

How many did this thread alone generate for ya Glenn?

Not sure how else to contribute to this thread…

Just kidding, wasn’t me.