One bad apple...
From URBAN DICTIONARY ( http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.ph... )
Troll: One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument
- - -
Unfortunately, as the result of a single individual's downvoting madness yesterday ( http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/51... ), we were left with no choice but to immediately implement "Producers Only" voting in the Gulch.
In an attempt to bury member comments, a rogue troll was creating new accounts with the sole purpose of downvoting everyone taking part in the discussion... accept of course for the trolling accounts (EdvardHovanesian, AbdulRahmanKarimi, MertonDabney, IlanRosenberger, LouGranger, CaitlinOClery, JackieEly, LorenMuttoone, PatHaden, DaleTipton, ShelbyGarner). Thankfully, a few members flagged the discussion and alerted us to the suspicious activity. Our reactive attempts to mitigate the damage however were proving to be an exercise in futility - we would suspend one account, they would create another.
Because we had very little in place to stop and/or prevent further activity, the simplest, quickest and most effective solution was to "turn on" Producers only voting. Several months ago, as the result of another Gulch conversation, we had actually gone through the exercise of writing code that would accomplish this so the code was already in place, just not active. Last night, it was simply a matter of turning that code on.
This move to Producer only voting should in no way be interpreted as punishment of guest members. Most guest member activity is honorable, and valued, and we may reinstate guest voting in the future. Until we have mechanisms in place to more effectively combat this type of intrusion however, Producers only voting will remain in effect.
Scott
EDIT: 03-03-2014: Unless the voting privilege was explicitly revoked from your account, if you have 100+ points, you can now vote. Thanks to blarman for the suggestion ( http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/51... ) and of course jbaker for making it happen so quickly.
Troll: One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument
- - -
Unfortunately, as the result of a single individual's downvoting madness yesterday ( http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/51... ), we were left with no choice but to immediately implement "Producers Only" voting in the Gulch.
In an attempt to bury member comments, a rogue troll was creating new accounts with the sole purpose of downvoting everyone taking part in the discussion... accept of course for the trolling accounts (EdvardHovanesian, AbdulRahmanKarimi, MertonDabney, IlanRosenberger, LouGranger, CaitlinOClery, JackieEly, LorenMuttoone, PatHaden, DaleTipton, ShelbyGarner). Thankfully, a few members flagged the discussion and alerted us to the suspicious activity. Our reactive attempts to mitigate the damage however were proving to be an exercise in futility - we would suspend one account, they would create another.
Because we had very little in place to stop and/or prevent further activity, the simplest, quickest and most effective solution was to "turn on" Producers only voting. Several months ago, as the result of another Gulch conversation, we had actually gone through the exercise of writing code that would accomplish this so the code was already in place, just not active. Last night, it was simply a matter of turning that code on.
This move to Producer only voting should in no way be interpreted as punishment of guest members. Most guest member activity is honorable, and valued, and we may reinstate guest voting in the future. Until we have mechanisms in place to more effectively combat this type of intrusion however, Producers only voting will remain in effect.
Scott
EDIT: 03-03-2014: Unless the voting privilege was explicitly revoked from your account, if you have 100+ points, you can now vote. Thanks to blarman for the suggestion ( http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/51... ) and of course jbaker for making it happen so quickly.
The unfettered downgrading of comments and posts was being abused by one aor perhaps a few to the detriment of all.
It is unfortunate that many good people have to have their access restricted. Perhaps in the future this will be set back to an open option, but it cannot be so now.
It is astonishing how angry people like that are about this Atlas movie. Their anger comes from a real fear over it. They pick on the production quality, the box office gross, and all of us in general because they fear the message of the films. That's the bottom line.
In a world of free ideals if this movie were so bad, they wouldn't troll here trying to stop it. They are afraid of Atlas Shrugged, because they know that they are the villains in it.
I wasn't even mean to that guy and he came out with a parade of insults. When we are involved with something that people like that fear so much, we should be proud. That doesn't mean they have the rights to ruin something we enjoy.
Is the Gulch free? Should anybody be allowed to come here. After all, this is a movie promotion site. Well, the Gulch has become more than that, and we have to treat it the way we feel about it. We should be prepared to defend it the same as if it were in the real world.
where I am proud to announce I got a personal insult, and had a good laugh.
The downside of the new rule is that should I want to show appreciation of a post, as a non-paying member, I cannot now do it by flicking the mouse button but I have to actually write something.
(Work is the curse of the drinking classes).
There is a lesson here-
it is tempting when faced with something written that goes against core ideas to become angry, abusive or sarcastic, then thump out a rejoinder. Ok, but do not press the send button until sure that is what you want sent.
"The moving finger writes,
and having writ, moves on,
nor all thy piety nor wit can wipe out a word of it".
The moving finger is your own.
You are correct that it has happened in the past and probably will in the future because, as overman said, we think therefore we are a threat. I just don't remember anyone taking the time to create 10 accounts and be so prolific in the down votes. It would be interesting to see if it is the same person as on fb.
I absolutely agree with people [both members and admins.] taking quick action, and I also agree with cp256. Remember "a person can't be argued out of something he wasn't argue into"? If you are a certain type of person, you can't help but feel a stab of hurt when something you did not do ends up penalizing you. All that you, the admins., can do is to say what you said, pay attention, and when a good patch is proposed, jump on it - all of which you did. Congratulations.
Now, curious human that I am, I want to know what went on - but not enough to push the invisibility button!
Regardless of how it "should" be interpreted, it has degraded the Gulch experience enough for me so that I think I'll be moving on. It just isn't enjoyable canceling the stupid popup over and over again because I am used to voting. Ciao.
I'm really disappointed that this individual chose to do this, but also very disappointed in the heavy-handed response. I had been enjoying the Gulch for the free thought.
btw, if you're an example of an Objectivist, I think I prefer communists. I expect deceit from them.
Just my 2 cents. Use if for what it's worth.
Policy only works by the voluntary self-enforcement of the users. When you have those that choose to abuse, it falls apart and more restrictive measures, as instituted by the moderators, are necessary.
Thank you for the answer and solution.
Larry
I don't blame you guys, I'd do the same!