CPAPtalk.com

4937 wrote:

Guest wrote:And, none of the rest of those folks want to risk having their privileges removed.

Most of them had their buttons removed long ago. That is unless the also have alter Ids which may indeed be the case and part of the problem. Now that is something Johnny can work on to mellow things out.
Morbius hasn't been posting so is he posting under another name, is he xxxyzx or another regular here? Was Morbius part of that big SPAM attack? Is he trying to drive business to another site? Morbius probly has more IDs on this forum than anyone. What motivates a person to behave this way? What kind of disorder is it?

Well, Yes and No. I'm not sure about your other assertions, but only Johnny and Carolyn know for sure.
Back in time, there had been a number of folks who had lost their "Report Spam" buttons.
But, there were some changes made in early 2009 and Johnny made this post. Essentially "wiping the slate clean".




New Report Spam Button Policy

Postby johnnygoodman on Mon Apr 20, 2009 11:29 am

Howdy All,

Based on CPAPtalk feedback and internal debates, we are changing the way our beloved Report Spam buttons work.

1. They will appear after a minimum of 90 days of registered time and 50 posts as a registered user.

2. The slate is washed clean for those who have lost their spam button in the past. If you meet the requirements, you have the button back unless a board administrator bounces a reported spam as not spam. Remember: Viagra ads, easily spam; Post you disagree with, most likely NOT spam.

As with last time, once its marked, it is set in stone. This keeps me well out of the way of "should I have my spam button" debates. I think this will work better as those who "earn" their button receive it and those who are just trying to milk or disrupt CPAPtalk are denied it.

Lastly, thanks to all who help keep the streets of CPAPtalk clean! Your button is not more powerful than ever and should hopefully have to be used a lot less.

Johnny

Morbius wrote:Well then don't allow the insults, foul language and attacks anymore. To allow them to occur under the guise of "freedom of speech" is a lame excuse for laziness. Appoint some moderators to keep the board clean and flowing smoothly. You know tons of people have left because of the discord. If you are really interested in helping the CPAP Community then run a responsible board.

O come on, grow up will ya, this is not your first time either... and to think you are a healthcare professional, more like un-professional. YOU are giving sleep techs a bad name. Is your boss proud of you or were hired you to cause chaos for the competition? What gives?

Guest wrote:But, there were some changes made in early 2009 and Johnny made this post. Essentially "wiping the slate clean".

So you're assuming they haven't repeated the very same bad behavior in 8 yrs since? This Morbius incident proves that wrong. Enuff said.

MaxINTJ wrote:Any Internet method of group communication (going back to BBSs) is going to have trolls, rude people, stupid people, and a whole bunch of good people.

The choices are to start banning the trolls, rude people, and stupid people, or to allow the good people to grow a bit thicker of a skin.

Words cannot physically hurt anyone and I would hate to see any group be run by folks with a "victim based" perception. Don't read it if it offends you and surely don't comment on it.

The only thing worse than having obnoxious people in a group is when yet another group starts acting like offended 5 year olds.

Just my $0.02

^(1+n)

I wish to invite you to join my club, "POOP" - People Offended by Offended People.

Guest wrote:

Guest wrote:But, there were some changes made in early 2009 and Johnny made this post. Essentially "wiping the slate clean".

So you're assuming they haven't repeated the very same bad behavior in 8 yrs since? This Morbius incident proves that wrong. Enuff said.

NO! You were asserting/inferring that those who had had their buttons removed years ago didn't have that capability.
I'm just showing the point in time when they WERE restored. I have no idea what has transpired since then as to those who have lost their buttons. "Morbius" (in all his other identities) had a thing about coming up with another identity when his post count hit 1000.
He was always a very helpful forum member with regard to technical and sleep-related subjects. I have nothing derogatory to say about him. I've never met him and don't know him personally so I can't vouch for anything other than what he's posted on this and other forums over the years.

From Johnny...The mission of this forum is to help people with CPAP issues - peer to peer. The means we use to accomplish this is honoring the ideas of libertarianism and low censorship. These ideas are not proving to be self correcting. The level of discourse has more and more frequently degenerated into personal attacks. Quit it. Use respectful ideas to win. I'll sooner change the forums precepts than do harm to new CPAP users. We're nearing that point. Please change course or risk being the first act of a more involved CPAPtalk moderation team.

I agree completely with the mission and generally with the means.

I only visit here occasionally, and I rarely wade into these topics, but this one is an exception. I have benefited from much good advice hereabouts, and I would love to see cordial and knowledgeable posters continue, and to see rude, impetuous, ignorant, remarkably BEYOND ignorant, and yet perpetually posting posters somehow eliminated from our fine forum.

That said, a well (but not overly) moderated forum might just be better than a good forum gone bad, because of a few highly, highly offensive posters.

If it were put to a vote, please mark me down for a sparingly moderated forum.

.

Captain_Midnight wrote:
That said, a well (but not overly) moderated forum might just be better than a good forum gone bad, because of a few highly, highly offensive posters.

If it were put to a vote, please mark me down for a sparingly moderated forum.

.

+ 1 from me

Guest wrote:NO! You were asserting/inferring that those who had had their buttons removed years ago didn't have that capability.

The assertion was that those who were mentioned earlier

Guest wrote:

xxyzx wrote:
you need to delete the spam reporting button from
lsat
palerider
tasmart
guest
julie
and others who are now deleting my posts as part of their harassment and bullying that has occurred since day 1

Wrong! Again and again.
Non-registered posters (aka "guests") don't have "Report Spam" buttons.
And, none of the rest of those folks want to risk having their privileges removed.

had lost their spam buttons before today and could not have used those IDs to delete anything today (or yesterday). There was no mention of 2009 until you brought it up.

4937 wrote:

Guest wrote:NO! You were asserting/inferring that those who had had their buttons removed years ago didn't have that capability.

The assertion was that those who were mentioned earlier

Guest wrote:

xxyzx wrote:
you need to delete the spam reporting button from
lsat
palerider
tasmart
guest
julie
and others who are now deleting my posts as part of their harassment and bullying that has occurred since day 1

Wrong! Again and again.
Non-registered posters (aka "guests") don't have "Report Spam" buttons.
And, none of the rest of those folks want to risk having their privileges removed.

had lost their spam buttons before today and could not have used those IDs to delete anything today (or yesterday). There was no mention of 2009 until you brought it up.

I still doubt your assertion, but unless you're actually working as an IT person at CPAP/CPAPTalk, you don't know for sure either.

I guess if you weren't around here before 2009, you wouldn't have known about the situation.
Were you here before then or not?

grayghost4 wrote:

Captain_Midnight wrote:
That said, a well (but not overly) moderated forum might just be better than a good forum gone bad, because of a few highly, highly offensive posters.

If it were put to a vote, please mark me down for a sparingly moderated forum.

.

+ 1 from me

+1

Guest wrote:I still doubt your assertion,

The words speak for themselves.

Guest wrote:I guess if you weren't around here before 2009,

CG, I was fully aware of 2009 but was referring to recent events and made no reference to 2009 for that reason.

Guest wrote:I still doubt your assertion,

The words speak for themselves.

Guest wrote:I guess if you weren't around here before 2009,

CG, I was fully aware of 2009 but was referring to recent events and made no reference to 2009 for that reason.

This entire thread is blowing my mind When someone knows who's on first, let me know.

Yep...pretty confusing

At the risk of sounding like an offended five year old, this thread is now illustrating the problem beautifully.