Missin U <3 - lamentations for those felled by the SB

i'm saying that it was originally posted by gr8080 on another thread, and just sayinit seems relevant here if we're questioning how SB's expire.

Ah, okay, I though you were saying that Grady's return somehow relates to LJ's banning.

fuck this

delete ilx

it'd be funny if lj and nrq got jacked for one final shot at each other. kind of a john woo finale

http://www.guidetoliteraryagents.com/blog/content/binary/reservoir-dogs-mexican-standoff.jpg

this is like bugsy malone except instead of custard pies there are sb's and instead of excellent pedal cars there are polls about radiohead

http://blogs.pioneerlocal.com/entertainment/Stringer-and-Avon-Wire.jpg

I have a wee question re the SB function:

If you're 51ed then come back can the same 51 people 51 you again? And again? If that is the case does it effectively mean that 51 active users can keep LJ off the board forever?

Would be nice if someone addressed LJ's point re his January total too. It looks like SBs aren't expiring when they should.

If that is the case does it effectively mean that 51 active users can keep LJ off the board forever?

that's always been the case, though, and i agree with it up to a point where mods judge that it's effectively for no other reason than personal emnity. which it seems likely to be here, taking into account lj's posting over the past few months.

i thought that mods had already admitted to deleting sb's for other individuals where they felt that this kind of vendetta was happening?

(eh don't want to be a pain in the ass about this, but even the mods seem to spot something deeply fucked with this)

SBs are not generally deleted if we suspect a personal issue between two posters, they're deleted if there's some anomaly, like a brand new login suddenly SBing certain people, or people SBing with multiple logins. It happens semi-regularly.

So the same 51 people can get LJ banned again and again?

At least in theory, I mean.

so 51 seperate posters sb'd louis in 6 months?

is it even 6 months since his last SB?

(tks for replying matt, i know this is a pain in the ass job every time someone bites a ban)

yeah tbh if there are people that for whatever reason just don't like Louis, then where's the reward for him for toning himself down over recent months, if those same people aren't gonna tone down their itchy sb finger in response?

i really shoulda just left this up to tuomas and darragh tbh.

we have strength in numbers.

Is there any opportunity in the SB system for SB rescindment? (i'm pretty sure I've never banned him, but sometimes i'm drunk)

Probably best to PM a mod. I know I've asked a mod to take back an SB that I regretted. I dunno about if the guy's already SBd though.

sb's should work like bookmarks

Fuck tha SBs
Comin' straight from the underground
Young Jagger got it bad cuz I'm down
With vacuum cleaners, so board police think
They have the authority to ban the hilarity

(translated from the finnish)

lol tuomas!

Tuomas, I would like to point out that you are opposed to the suggest ban system, and yet, here you are, a man from Finland, on this thread, rapping. You see the conflict here, I presume.

awesome work, tuomas and j0hn D

John D, you don't like the finnish rap?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGkX12t4sxs

Yeah, you may diss me, but don't diss Finnish rap!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ifKegam4mU

shittiest thread derail ever, even if the thread badly needed derailing

re: the message from lj via grady up there - part of this is due to the fact that i went through several times and policed sockpuppet and dupe user bans on all of the high sb dudes, so all of them shed quite a few in the last few months (and then accrued more). that being said, as i mentioned above, there are some concerns about the accuracy of the early sb timestamps, which is why lj is prob only getting a month off - in most situations, getting 153ed would have to carry a way harsher penalty.

Why? I'm not alone in finding it hard to believe that LJ has done anything recently to merit SBing. Who is doing the banning and for what kind of posts? Mods constantly say that ilx is not a democracy and I'm fine with that, so why act like 51 = fucking game over man! no questions asked?

you all know that it's actually the anti-SB crew that's continually suggest-banning LJ (possibly in collaboration with him) in order to create "controversy" around the whole plan and build opposition to what is, in reality, a flawless and fair system, right?

well-played mock outrage btw, ledge

I don't think anyone's saying it's game over, if anything we're saying the opposite.

that's where i'm stuck, n/a- i've been arguing for sb this whole thread, but if the same 51 people are sb'ing lj regardless of what he posts then i think maybe there should be mod consideration, and not just to limit the ban to a month but to consider whether it's in any way valid given what the system is meant to achieve.

i can't put it any better than that, am sure it doesn't help, just wanted to say it.

mr moderator, tear down this ban

you all know that it's actually the anti-SB crew that's continually suggest-banning LJ (possibly in collaboration with him) in order to create "controversy" around the whole plan and build opposition to what is, in reality, a flawless and fair system, right?

http://i35.tinypic.com/314p3pk.jpg

Just dropping in here to register that this is crazy. I was anti-SB, but thought that the time limit on SBs plus assurance they were checked for socks rendered my misgivings void, but I guess I was very wrong on that front.

"you're talking about the sb system like it's a force of nature rather rather than something someone coded up and turned on, with parameters that can be altered by mods -- and an off switch."

^^^ very much this.

Also, this is not a personal snipe as I like Whiney, but if some people are hitting SB on everything that even vaguely displeases them maybe some kind of disincentive should be wired into the system, e.g. SBing someone else could count as, say, half an SB against yrself too
(way to post a half-formed idea that will result in ten fresh SBs for me for absolutely no gain)

new poll thread: "why did you SB l0u1s jagg3r?"

Here's a complicated solution that would be easy to implement via code: if a person is a serial SB'er, then their later SBs could count for less, like

your 1st - 5th sb are full strength
your 5th - 10th count for 90% of an sb
your 10th - 15th count for 80% of an sb
...

or something like that.

yes, i'm sure that's easy to implement via code.

You'd just have to keep a counter for each user that records how many sb's that user has given, and then use that counter to generate the multiple as you determine the sb counter of the person who received the sb. This is pretty straightforward code-wise.

personally i think your subsequent SBs should be worth exponentially more:

your 1st is worth 1
your 2nd is worth 2
your 3rd is worth 4
your 4th is worth 8

and so forth. the advantage of this system is that from seven onwards you actually have the power to instantly ban people you dislike, which will make ilx far more democratic.

maybe you should be limited to giving 51 sb's in any 6 month period?

Part of the problem is that Louis came back after his second banning and carried on with business as usual, and racked himself up another ton of SBs. Once he'd reformed he had such a high SB count and still made people mad from time to time so it was inevitable that he was going to hit a ban again.

I'm not sure what's the right thing to do about it; there's pretty good arguments on both sides: one is that he earned this ban and should have to take it anyway (the SBs he got wasn't just the usual BAN LOUIS types clicking on them, btw); the other is that he's obviously reformed and should be given leeway. I sympathise with both.

Regardless of his situ, it's not the case that 51 people can just keep banning the same person again and again.

maybe you should be limited to giving 51 sb's in any 6 month period?

I CAN'T LIVE LIKE THAT DUDE

I think Euler's idea of diminishing SBs is pretty good - it certainly would stop folks who SB left and right for lols.

SB'd you for that.

It's your luck I believe in passive resistance, so I don't SB you back.