[Imc-web] Re: [Imc] spam, spam, eggs, and spam

[Mike Lehman]

Jay,
He has been moving in that direction, so we have been moving in the 
direction of hiding more and more of the blatantly offensive posts, too. 
I would say that both trends are likely to accelerate, given the 
situation. But not fast enough for some, as I can see (and in fact agree 
with ;>). We'll try to work harder at this and I'll bring it up at the 
web meeting Wed. night to see how others feel.
Mike Lehman

jay morris wrote:
> 
> 
> Regarding the posts of Jack Ryan, Anon, etc. to the website.
> 
> Can a policy be constructed such that ye gods who take care of removing 
> obviously offensive posts use their own discretion with people who have 
> already proven themselves to be either obviously offensive or just plain 
> nuts? This can be done on a spammer by spammer basis, and maybe at the 
> steering committees a vote could determine whether any particular 
> spammer has moved to the 'removable at some webgod's discretion' status.
> 
> These 'You buy gerbils' and 'I know where you live' posts can be removed 
> without any significant loss to democracy as a whole.
> 
> ***OR***
> 
> Leave the posts but have someone attach a flag to them, which reads 
> "Please, for the love of sweet baby Jesus[1], do not respond to this 
> troll!!!"
> 
> Two cents(CDN),
> jay
> 
> 
> [1] views expressed in this email may not be those of Jesus, his 
> apostles, disciples or parent company God Inc.