Respecting Your Fellow JUs

Just a suggestion for coblogitating

from JoeUser Forums

I came to JoeUser in September of 2003.  Those that have been here a similar amount of time have seen my "activity" on the site wax and wane with seeming randomness.  My participation has been "random" because I haven't had any goal in mind for my blogging.  I originally joined when blogging was in its infancy and just wanted a place to spew whatever was on my mind.  It has served me well.

 

Over time, I saw that this wasn't a universal goal.  Some folks actually wish to develop a readership, and they want their blog to be high on the JU list of Top Users or Top Blogs, assumably because this serves to further their goal of having a readership.

 

I fully respect that goal, even though it is not my own, and so I am conscious of things I might do that would interfere with others' goals in much the same way that I would respect that other people exist in real life.  Example - I would not cut in line because the other people in line have an equal right to be served.

 

With that in mind, I'd like to make a small suggestion to fellow JUs.  You can safely put this in the "Preaching to the choir" category for all except one particular blogger, but since we aren't supposed to name names, preaching to the choir is the "correct" thing to do.

 

If you have lots of opinions, that's awesome.  It's good to think about lots of things, and it's good to have opinions.  But if you have, say, 10 opinions on a given day, it would be very respectful of you to create one article called "Today's Opinions" and put them all in that one article.  The reason is, many people navigate the "recent articles" list, and if you post 10 articles in one day, you are removing exposure of other bloggers who wish to have their blogs read, as well.  You also make it hard for me, who likes to read the opinions of more than just one person, to use the recent articles feature of the site to do so.  This is unkind.  It's unkind to the people writing on the site, and it's unkind to those of us that might just want to use the site to read.  I respectfully request that you please stop.

blogging
167,265 views 39 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top

Just to make the point, I didn't know a similar article to this one even existed until it came up in the "Recent comments" list.  And while that isn't unusual for me because I don't hang out on JU consistently, I think it still speaks to my point.

 

Any readers of this article, please also read this article by Tova7.

Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top

The Coalition for the Suppression of Disrespectful Bloggers is hereby formed.  It is based on the following idea:

It is our replies that encourage negative behavior, and even though it IS fun to take blind shots and still hit the target in the bullseye because the bullseye is about as big as the universe itself, it is having the side affect of hampering the enjoyment of our own collective space.

So take the oath with me - either here, or on Tova's article linked in comment #1.

I, state your JU name, will boycott any blogger who states that he/she doesn't care about his/her fellow bloggers fair use of the site. No matter how enticing it is to pull the metaphorical wings off of a fly-like argument, I will resist for the betterment of JU as a blog site and for the enjoyment of my fellow JUs whether I agree or disagree with those JUs on any other level.

RAmen (or substitute the prayer closing of your choice)

ObjectDock - Access shortcuts and frequently used applications from an animated dock.
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top

Great points and I like how you worded your reasoning.

However, I can't join your coalition until it's name makes a funky acronym.

How about DiBloSA?  Disrespectful Bloggers Suppression Association (Authority?)

Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
I, El Gran San Chonino, will boycott any blogger who states that he/she doesn't care about his/her fellow bloggers fair use of the site. No matter how enticing it is to pull the metaphorical wings off of a fly-like argument, I will resist for the betterment of JU as a blog site and for the enjoyment of my fellow JUs whether I agree or disagree with those JUs on any other level.


RAAAAAAAAAAA-MEEEEEEENNNNNNNNNNNNNNNUH.

I'm getting sick of having my long, time-consuming articles (that, in the case of my journal ones, are hand-written and then put in the computer, taking even more time and effort) buried under a pile of mindless drivel.

I will support wholeheartedly.
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
I, RoyLevosh , will boycott any blogger who states that he/she doesn't care about his/her fellow bloggers fair use of the site. No matter how enticing it is to pull the metaphorical wings off of a fly-like argument, I will resist for the betterment of JU as a blog site and for the enjoyment of my fellow JUs whether I agree or disagree with those JUs on any other level.


+1 Loading…
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top

I, KellyW0498, will boycott any blogger who states that he/she doesn't care about his/her fellow bloggers fair use of the site. No matter how enticing it is to pull the metaphorical wings off of a fly-like argument, I will resist for the betterment of JU as a blog site and for the enjoyment of my fellow JUs whether I agree or disagree with those JUs on any other level.

+1 Loading…
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top

But come on, you guys, he only blogs in fifteen minute intervals.  We need to be COMPASSIONATE about this. *gag me* Whatever.

So...if he's only blogging in "fifteen minute" intervals, he's approximately been on JU for a bazillion hours?  And considering there are only 24 hours in a day...

I'm with you guys!

I, MarcieMoo, will boycott any blogger who states that he/she doesn't care about his/her fellow bloggers fair use of the site. No matter how enticing it is to pull the metaphorical wings off of a fly-like argument, I will resist for the betterment of JU as a blog site and for the enjoyment of my fellow JUs whether I agree or disagree with those JUs on any other level.

Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
One well thought out, well written, insightful article that takes multiple 15 minute chunks gets buried in fly poo. So sad.


It's a tragedy.

A travesty.

What a dickwaller.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top

First, his bio says hes 18.

Ah to be 18 again and KNOW EVERYTHING...hahaha.

Second, I can't sign the petition as its stated...because I do have an issue with a certain blogger (not this one), and fair use of the sight has nothing to do with it.  IMO, he insults every time he posts, even if its every five days.   So yeah, I don't care about his fair use of the sight, I don't think he should have ANY use...but I'm not the boss.

 

Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top

I, Stubbyfinger, will boycott any blogger who states that he/she doesn't care about his/her fellow bloggers fair use of the site. No matter how enticing it is to pull the metaphorical wings off of a fly-like argument, I will resist for the betterment of JU as a blog site and for the enjoyment of my fellow JUs whether I agree or disagree with those JUs on any other level.

Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
I, Erathoniel Woodenbow, will boycott any blogger who states that he/she doesn't care about his/her fellow bloggers fair use of the site. No matter how enticing it is to pull the metaphorical wings off of a fly-like argument, I will resist for the betterment of JU as a blog site and for the enjoyment of my fellow JUs whether I agree or disagree with those JUs on any other level.
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top

Hrum...well, that means I'll have find new victims to prey upon with my spectacular wit and dripping sarcasm.  It can be done, though. :)

I, the glorious and enviable Zoo, will boycott any blogger who states that he/she doesn't care about his/her fellow bloggers fair use of the site. No matter how enticing it is to pull the metaphorical wings off of a fly-like argument, I will resist for the betterment of JU as a blog site and for the enjoyment of my fellow JUs whether I agree or disagree with those JUs on any other level.

RAmen!

Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
Zoo: you can come after me until you find a more worthy target...I got thick skull...er...I meant to say skin!

Count me in, Ock.
+1 Loading…
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top

 Mindless drivel? say it isnt so! :)

+2 Loading…
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top

I've missed so many of my favourite JUser's posts because of the ridiculous amounts of 'On...' articles.  I'm happy to see I'm not the only one who feels this way. 

I, the unflinchingly talented Dynamaso, will boycott any blogger who states that he/she doesn't care about his/her fellow bloggers fair use of the site. No matter how enticing it is to pull the metaphorical wings off of a fly-like argument, I will resist for the betterment of JU as a blog site and for the enjoyment of my fellow JUs whether I agree or disagree with those JUs on any other level. Aaarrrggghmen...

+1 Loading…
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top

He thinks I hate him.  I don't.  I don't even know him, and I'm not a hateful person.

 

He has seen the last of me on his blogs though - which will save him precious deleting time, so I'm sure that's welcome.

+1 Loading…
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
Quick question to anyone else, is it against the TOU/TOS to form a petition for the expulsion of a member? I don't remember seeing anything in it, but I want to double check. If it isn't then I'd like to start one, but if it is, then I will just go about my way.


I'm going to answer Lucas's question here, because I don't want to give any more attention over there.

Whether it is a TOU violation would depend on how the Powers That Be choose to interpret the TOU in the moment. I could see it going either way; I've seen plenty of examples of "fluid interpretation" based on how they felt about certain individuals. :NOTSURE:

I'm sure admin is well aware of the situation. (Though rarely interjecting, they seem to pay attention to the goings on.) When and if they feel it needs addressed, they will, one way or another.

Considering Jennifer1 initially got defended, and the chilly reception given to the most recent shunning, I would not hold my breath.


(But that's just my ever-defeatist attitude. Continue prosecuting the matter in whatever ways you think will help. ;) )

 

Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top
Why join the kicking party, Lucas? You've been on the recieving end and know what it feels like. You should befriend this dude, not join the party. We aren't going to 'like' you for it.


Erathoniel may be a spammer, but at least he doesn't add :shrug: to the end of every sentence, or use the horribly cutesy word 'anywho', or breathe heavily through his mouth (this is an assumption, I don't know for certain that Lucas is a mouthbreather, but I suspect he is).

Anyway, petitions are lame. There's something inherently 1990s about them. In the modern world we snub with wild abandon. It's more pleasing - nothing gives a man strength more than a windmill to tilt against, so deny them that and let them wither away cold and alone, indifference on every side.

As for the pledge, I'll support this measure as long as the spammers don't say anything interesting. But if they do, I reserve the right to abandon my stance. I don't care about personalities so long as they say something interesting. If I started judging people I'd never have any time to get anything done.
+1 Loading…
Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top

I replied on the initially reported thread.  I'll just jump in here with a few quick comments.

The petition is not against site terms of use.  So long as you're just saying you're going to completely ignore an annoying user it's fine. 

It will cross the line if it goes to the point where you're actively bullying an annoying user.  In the past this has included (but is not limited to) things like:

  • Writing rather nasty articles about other users, but changing their name in the article itself so as to barely skirt the no personal attacks rule.
  • Writing to admins repeatedly because you do not "like" a user
  • Dogging a users every article with nasty comments (this was while blacklisting was broken).
  • Using real life information to harass or go after users beyond the walls of this site.

Why don't we step into these things very often?  Because we honestly don't care if a given user is liked or not liked.  We give folks a LOT of wiggle room (including folks who have been on the recent set of threads about the current "issue").  This is the Internet.  If you don't like someone, we don't care.  Be an adult about it and simply ignore them and walk away.

Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top
I'll comment on this blog as it will not break my promise to comment on the other blog...

Be an adult about it and simply ignore them and walk away.


EXACTLY.

It appals me how JUers will critisize and condemn a known and active troll and then turn around and continuously FEED IT. Heh, the dude knows what he's doing and any comments you leave on his blog is just fuel for the fire. Take Zoomba's excellent advice folks AND IGNORE HIM!
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top
None of this was ever about having anyone banned or exiled. I do not support that line of reason.

The guy has posted 117 articles in 27 days. That's 4.33 per day since he came here 27 days ago. It affects the visibility of other members here.

If each of those ((or hell, even HALF...gah...if even ONE) articles was rich with content, it would be easier to swallow the fact that some articles that are rich with content are getting buried.

When so many people all point at the same thing and complain about it, I think it is fair to say that it does in fact

(n) Interfere with another member's use and enjoyment of the Service or another entity's use and enjoyment of similar services.


As for the pledge, I'll support this measure as long as the spammers don't say anything interesting.


Consider that amendment 1 to the pledge. If any such people actually start posting anything interesting, I would also encourage further participation.

But as long as the drivel continues, the only recourse we have is to ignore him as best as possible. For me, that means no more replying. Your (collective) mileage may vary.
Reply #22 from JoeUser Forums Top
Writing rather nasty articles about other users, but changing their name in the article itself so as to barely skirt the no personal attacks rule.


I guess writing something nasty about someone and shortening their name is ok.
Reply #23 from JoeUser Forums Top

As someone with a casual interest in this site... I find these melodramatic soap operas amusing.

Reply #24 from JoeUser Forums Top
I'll support this measure as long as the spammers don't say anything interesting. But if they do, I reserve the right to abandon my stance. I don't care about personalities so long as they say something interesting


LOL

Ditto

Reply #25 from JoeUser Forums Top
As someone with a casual interest in this site... I find these melodramatic soap operas amusing.


When you have a large group of diverse people blogging about any and everything. There is gonna be drama.