24 replies to this topic

[TheFountain]

Pattern of usage regarding the rating system. Expends most of his apparent negatives on me, votes down any positives I may have received.

Example, goten574 voted up the following post, along came good ole sciolaro and voted it down. Why?

TheFountain Re: i have yet to see somebody who looks as young as they claim...

View Postgoten574, on 21 August 2011 - 12:48 PM, said:
Without reading 89 pages of this thread, what supplements can someone like me (age 25) take to slow down the appearance of aging? I am starting to have visible forehead lines, is there anyway I can fade these? I was thinking Hyaluronic Acid and Silca?


If you use hyaluranic acid, try the skin eternals brand, I think this one is the absolute best. Another great supplement is biosil. Here's the study on it.

http://wingspanartsi...conintissue.pdf

Also, protect the skin from the sun. Check all the various threads on sunblocks. I would go with a mineral based one personally. ------

Now, Did that post deserve to be down rated?

Here is another example, rwac voted the following post up, and Sciolaro noticed a positive vote and came right along, for no good god damned reason at all, and voted it down.

http://www.longecity...385#entry474385

Again, did that deserve to be down rated?

There are many other examples I am sure, this person applies the same pattern to all my posts.

This person seems bent on diminishing my 'reputation'. The question is why? he seems to have a voting record that is consistent with how BEN feels about me. Gee, I wonder if he is ben on another account. Or possibly mikeinnaples, or someone one of these guys knows?

All I know is the above mentioned user account seems to be entirely dedicated to down voting me, which I find strange. And didn't caliban say that the negative rating system should only be used for 'low quality contributions' not just to down rate for the sake of down rating? Now the forementioned posts, were they REALLY low quality contributions? I think not. This exemplifies how horrible this rating system is when in the wrong hands. I bet that if sciolari's IP address were looked at it could easily be be matched with other users who dislike me because I have a strong feeling that they are one of the average users on another account, and if the IP addresses did not match it is likely these people use this account at another location at a job or such.

I am not even doing this for me, but for anyone else who does not subscribe to popular notions presented on this site and may wish to provide alternative views, or just anybody who makes contributions which are seen as decent and helpful but are arbitrarily down rated for them. I have seen a few other posts down rated which should not have been, because they were both high quality and people presented studies to clarify their positions. The question is, how are you going to augment the system to deal with this discrepancy?

[TheFountain]

Well isn't this lovely, yesterday I could view my reputation history and now I can't.

Caliban, did you take away my ability to see this because you hate me that much? Seriously, are you guys that insecure that you have to take away the power of individuals to see transparently who is manipulating the rating system? It's disgusting and I demand to be given back the right to see it, as it was unduly taken away just because you people do not wish me to have the power to see it, and you wish to systematically remove me from this site. Caliban should not be a moderator, he abuses his authority! If it wasn't Caliban who took this privilege away I want to know who it was and what their explanation is.

[rwac]

I did. It was meant to be a moderator tool, and somehow users got access to it. Now nobody has access to this anymore.

It gives rise to unnecessary acrimony, like this topic.

[TheFountain]

I disagree, it allows people the power to tell who might be creating user accounts SPECIFICALLY to vote someone else down and ruin their reputation. For all I know Sciolari could be caliban on another account! Moderators aren't doing the right thing so users need more power. I say you make it a constant option to grant users total transparency. Maybe then other's will start using the rating system responsibly.

[mikeinnaples]

This person seems bent on diminishing my 'reputation'. The question is why? he seems to have a voting record that is consistent with how BEN feels about me. Gee, I wonder if he is ben on another account. Or possibly mikeinnaples, or someone one of these guys knows?

Before you accuse me of stalking you again, I only noticed this because it appeared as a recent topic and I noticed my name in it.

1. Most forums have a tool to see where a user's IP address is coming from (so they can do things like IP ban people for spamming/trolling/being tools). Sure this can be circumvented, but it is better than nothing.

2. You should probably handle this via a private message next time so the people you are quick to accuse dont get see it, *hint*

[TheFountain]

For the amount of time I was able to see the transparency of peoples rating habits YOU mikeinnaples were also revealed to be a perpetual down voter!

[Ben]

I think it harms the discussion here, helping to enforce mainstream views by discouraging people who disagree.

[caliban]

Good call Rwac,

its not clear to me why 'transparency' was switched on for all users, but until we have made a decision to the contrary, it should remain closed to everyone, including admins.

The rating system should not be misused or abused and if there are real concerns that this could be happening, please contact a moderator and we will switch the 'detection' system back on momentarily.

However, a handful of votes, even if they are perplexing to you personally, are not a matter anyone should get excited about. Suspecting or persecuting those who register a critique via vote is not the type of behavior we expect on LongeCIty.

@TheFoundain - it is great that you are so passionate about your 'reputation' although slightly puzzling to me how that squares with you self-adopted role as the resident 'borderline troll'. I think you have been around for a while, but I don't recall seeing you do anything at LongeCity, that would fill me with any kind of excitement, let alone 'hate'. However, I'm sure a less aggressive tone would not detract from the quality of your contributions and may even prevent some of the -in your view unwarranted- negative votes that you care so deeply about.

[Ben]

However, I'm sure a less aggressive tone would not detract from the quality of your contributions and may even prevent some of the -in your view unwarranted- negative votes that you care so deeply about.

To down vote a post due a perceived "aggressive tone" is idiotic.

[TheFountain]

However, I'm sure a less aggressive tone would not detract from the quality of your contributions and may even prevent some of the -in your view unwarranted- negative votes

Actually in YOUR view, they are unwarranted.

-- NEGATIVE votes are for low-quality contributions ONLY, do NOT vote a post down SIMPLY BECAUSE YOU DISAGREE
(this is so important that we'll think about putting in in the user agreement. Come on, you are grown ups, vote on quality, not sympathy)

http://www.longecity.org/forum/topic/49320-reputation-system-explained/page__fromsearch__1

Can you guys do your job now and make sure people like sciolari aren't giving unwarranted votes?

I understand and accept when I receive negative votes in the furtherance of vitriolic exchanges between myself and another user, but the ones referenced above? Obviously the product of some vendetta.

Edited by TheFountain, 20 October 2011 - 10:39 PM.

[Connor MacLeod]

Well isn't this lovely, yesterday I could view my reputation history and now I can't.

Excellent...

[mikeinnaples]

For the amount of time I was able to see the transparency of peoples rating habits YOU mikeinnaples were also revealed to be a perpetual down voter!

I am also a perpetual up voter. I fail to see your point of using the system as designed.

[mikeinnaples]

However, I'm sure a less aggressive tone would not detract from the quality of your contributions and may even prevent some of the -in your view unwarranted- negative votes that you care so deeply about.

To down vote a post due a perceived "aggressive tone" is idiotic.

Ben, I agree that you shoudnt vote someone down just because you disagree with them. Unfortunately I will have to disagree with you about not voting people down that get aggressive, abusive, condescending, arrogant, etc. with other people. SImply put, it detracts from the conversation and derails topics. I also think it is perfectly ok to vote people down for starting extremely silly topics for the sake of drawing attention to yourself. Why? It clutters up the forum with trash instead of useful topics to the community.

I would also like to point out that you can show passion about a topic without being aggressive and attacking other posters.

[maxwatt]

I believe there is a limit on how many votes one can cast per day. Better than nothing

[mikeinnaples]

Can you guys do your job now and make sure people like sciolari aren't giving unwarranted votes?

Do you understand that communicating this way isn't the best way to get what you want?

Sure this is a minor example and not that big of a deal, but it is representative of 'who' you are as a personality and what your reputation is in this forum. I vote you down all the time as you well know. Have you ever stopped to ask yourself 'why' I vote some of your posts down, or why other people do as well?

There is no real way to sugar coat this, so I am just going to be extremely candid with you. You could be the nicest and most respectful person in the world if we were to meet in person, however, you come across as condescending, arrogant, and down right abusive at times in the forums. Honestly, you should spend less time worrying about the -1 under one of your posts and more time worrying about why someone wasted the time to put it there.

Edited by mikeinnaples, 21 October 2011 - 12:31 PM.

[TheFountain]

Aggression has nothing to do with what one is a proponent of.

Do I sit here and call people douche bags non-stop? If the moderators look at the majority of the posts I get voted down for they would see a recurring theme, oh that's right there is no recurring theme, other than the users who keep voting me down, regardless of the content of my posts! Mikeinnaples is one of them!

I would also like to raise the issue of him bringing ad hominem tripe to my posts. I do not ask people to get personal with me, they bring it upon themselves to get personal because they do not like the nature of my posts. I prefer to keep the topics on topic!

Edited by TheFountain, 21 October 2011 - 12:38 PM.

[mikeinnaples]

Sorry I made the attempt to edit my post to be less harsh, but you beat me to it.

[mikeinnaples]

Aggression has nothing to do with what one is a proponent of.

Do sit here and call people douche bags non-stop? If the moderators look at the majority of the posts I get voted down for they would see a recurring theme, oh that's right there is no recurring theme, other than the users who keep voting me down, regardless of the content of my posts! Mikeinnaples is one of them!

I would also like to raise the issue of him bringing ad hominem tripe to my posts. I do not ask people to get personal with me, they bring it upon themselves to get personal because they do not like the nature of my posts. I prefer to keep the topics on topic!

This playing martyr thing of yours is becoming tiring.

[TheFountain]

Aggression has nothing to do with what one is a proponent of.

Do sit here and call people douche bags non-stop? If the moderators look at the majority of the posts I get voted down for they would see a recurring theme, oh that's right there is no recurring theme, other than the users who keep voting me down, regardless of the content of my posts! Mikeinnaples is one of them!

I would also like to raise the issue of him bringing ad hominem tripe to my posts. I do not ask people to get personal with me, they bring it upon themselves to get personal because they do not like the nature of my posts. I prefer to keep the topics on topic!

This playing martyr thing of yours is becoming tiring.

This you being everything you're being became tiring long ago.

[TheFountain]

here is a good example, I did not personally attack anybody and along comes mikeinnaples to attempt a personal insult based on the approach to the subject I outlined.

http://www.longecity...en-they-hit-40/

The approach is an attempt to take emphasis off the subject at hand and make it about me, which is irrelevant since there is inadequate information about me for the person in question to proceed with such arrogant analysis. The above subject was intended as a serious debate, despite the initial sarcasm (directed at no specific person I might add).

I am not the one who gets personal on this forum in most cases, unless I am provoked by someone elses personal attacks either in the form of a direct verbal attack or an unwarranted negative vote, both of which mikeinnapples is prone to do.

[mikeinnaples]

Aggression has nothing to do with what one is a proponent of.

Do sit here and call people douche bags non-stop? If the moderators look at the majority of the posts I get voted down for they would see a recurring theme, oh that's right there is no recurring theme, other than the users who keep voting me down, regardless of the content of my posts! Mikeinnaples is one of them!

I would also like to raise the issue of him bringing ad hominem tripe to my posts. I do not ask people to get personal with me, they bring it upon themselves to get personal because they do not like the nature of my posts. I prefer to keep the topics on topic!

This playing martyr thing of yours is becoming tiring.

This you being everything you're being became tiring long ago.

*sigh* I am trying to help you here by being straight forward and honest with you. Rather than playing martyr and pointing fingers everywhere else, you should take a good hard look at the things you post and try to put yourself in the shoes of the people you direct them at or the people that observe them.

How do you expect people to react when you are condescending towards them? Do you realize that you are derailing your own post/topic and detracting from what you are trying to say by doing this? When you phrase your posts in such a way that attack another person's intelligence, you are the one who is in fact making it personal to begin with.

[mikeinnaples]

http://www.longecity...en-they-hit-40/

You might want to read that again and find a better example.

Anyways, this is quickly becoming silly and quite pointless. I would suggest that you use the 'report' function or send a PM to a forum moderator if you think I am 'picking' on you or using a fake account to down vote you. I will likewise continue to vote you down and call you out for acting the way you do whenever I observe it. Making a thread in a public location that calls out people and accuses them of misdeeds really only serves the purpose of drawing attention to yourself and inviting trouble. Sadly I let you lure me in and troll me quite well.

Edited by mikeinnaples, 21 October 2011 - 01:10 PM.

[TheFountain]

My main complaint about mikeinnaples is that he gets ad hominem and unnecessarily votes me down. I want topics to remain on topic. I don't care if I get negative votes for throwing an insult someones way, I deserve them at that point (as long as you see that other's who do the same deserve it equally). But his rating tendency is indiscriminate.

[mikeinnaples]

Sadly, not only are you are misusing ad hominem, but you are complaining (whining) about someone's opinion when it comes to voting you down. I came straight out and told you why I vote you down, and it is hardly indiscriminate.

Anyways, I hope your realize that this back and forth between us only really serves to make us BOTH look like idiots. I realized this before I made my first post, but for some reason I couldnt help myself.

Edited by mikeinnaples, 21 October 2011 - 02:25 PM.

[caliban]

However, I'm sure a less aggressive tone would not detract from the quality of your contributions and may even prevent some of the -in your view unwarranted- negative votes

Actually in YOUR view, they are unwarranted.

-- NEGATIVE votes are for low-quality contributions ONLY, do NOT vote a post down SIMPLY BECAUSE YOU DISAGREE
(this is so important that we'll think about putting in in the user agreement. Come on, you are grown ups, vote on quality, not sympathy)

http://www.longecity...__fromsearch__1

Can you guys do your job now and make sure people like sciolari aren't giving unwarranted votes?

I understand and accept when I receive negative votes in the furtherance of vitriolic exchanges between myself and another user, but the ones referenced above? Obviously the product of some vendetta.

[my emphasis]

Again: Individual votes up or down are not something to get excited about. Moderators will and should not investigate individual votes or even voting patterns. This is would be intrusion of privacy let alone an unwarranted waste of volunteer time. However, moderators can be called on to look into suspected systemic abuses.

I have looked into the account Sciolaro and there is nothing to suggest that this is not a genuine user.
This concludes the matter.

I'm sorry to be closing down discussions in this forum section, but I want to make sure we get alerted to real current forum issues and I can't do that effectively with long discussions going on after the specific topic has been addressed. If this is a more general discussion, maybe conduct it in 'unrelated' or 'Bill O'Rights'.