h a l f b a k e r yIt might be better to just get another gerbil.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
moron marker
stops rant ideas from getting back on the recent list | |
As was mentioned on 'stupidest idea...', periodically someone finds an idea that most people hate, thinks they have a pearl of wisdom to add, and annotates so. I'd like it if it was possible to annotate [marked–for–moronic] so that even when this happens, the idea doesn't need to come back up to the
recent list*. This would save us from the inevitable opening up of old wounds, rants that only two or three people were ever involved in, and really annoying puns.
The effect would be the same as if it was marked for deletion, but it will still exist, and if you really think your opinion counts about V-Jam or Gun Control, you're perfectly welcome to annotate or vote. Just that you won't bring it back up the recent list to distract the rest of us.
*I did actually think, while I was posting this originally, that maybe [m-f-m]-ed ideas could still be listed on the purists' index-recent-by-date page, but prevented from occurring on the recent3 page. After all, that's how ideas in the halfbakery category as a whole are kept from the ranting masses.
[link]
|
| |
Maybe this should happen with all ideas of a certain age. |
|
| |
Besides, what would we have left? (present company excepted.) |
|
| |
The most recent idea that has been infected by gun control has currently broken out into a session of male bonding and sharing. It looks like infecting the idea with surreal thought has worked ... |
|
| |
Seconded, PS. I just posted a similar anno on Stupidest Ideas. |
|
| |
oi! don't second him, GF, croissant me! (idea edited for recent-3 invisibility only) |
|
| |
Croissant awarded in wake of idea alteration. I'd say [marked-for-moronic] may still be a tad too subjective and / or incendiary, though. Something subtler, perhaps, that a troll may not pick up on? [marked-for-*discussion*]... [marked-for-diversion]... [marked-for-digression]? |
|
| |
My line of thinking is just that sometimes an idea gets diverted into a half-empty style discussion that doesn't appeal to other 1/2Bakers and that maybe jutta doesn't want taking up space on her server. They stop being 1/2B ideas, but they can stay on the home page - which is kind of the first line of contact for surfers - for a long time. Some of us (well, me anyway <sheepish look>) can't resist the discussion, but don't want to see our own posts cause the home page to be covered in Gun Control / Religion / ID Cards / Whatever debates, knocking other ideas off the Top Three when those others are more in the spirit of the 1/2B. They may not be redundant, or WIBNI's, or rants, strictly speaking, but the digressive thread means the idea doesn't really fit jutta's guidelines anymore. And the fact that they sit on the home page may make them more likely to be continued by the surfing trolls with flamethrowers who would be less likely to go to the [recent] list. |
|
| |
I don't know, though, I admit. 'Moronic' is the wrong word, I think. And tagging ideas you don't like just to suppress them would be bad, I agree. It just seems like some of those threads that jutta may have already posted a [take it to half-empty] annotation on could be shunted to the side to make way for new ideas on the home page, but still be available for posting to if you really must. |
|
| |
I know, I know. I want to have my cake and eat it, and it's my own fault for answering back to trolls. Ah well. |
|
| |
Re [GuyFox], we seem to be having a problem where we want to have debates but not link them to ideas. |
|
| |
I think we're inevitably going to get off-topic debates that dignify otherwise rubbish ideas. One solution is we set up separate discussion groups where we can continue off-topic debates (and debate stuff without posting spurious ideas) but that's up to [jutta]. And there's no guarantee we'd use them. |
|
| |
I think part of the answer is simply that if we see a lot of discussion around a heavily fishboned idea, we know it's either trolls on a gun-control argument, or off topic or abuse or something in that line. I think we probably have to accept that we'll often find interesting debates in strange places, and enjoy the serendipity (of course, those of us who spend all our work hours at 1/2B are going to find these things in any case.) |
|
| |
But UB, if we delete troll ideas, when new players come along and fire up a new debate, old hands will have nothing to refer to when they say, “been there, done that.” |
|
| |
My suggestion for really tired ideas is to have a token, seldom (if ever) used, which stops annotations, and places links down the bottom of the page, presumably so that people can either say “we’ve milked this, end of story”, or “this has all been said before, end of story.” |
|
| |
Whoah! I didn't realise it had grown that large. I didn't even bother annotating, let alone checking up on it because I knew *that* would happen. I stand by my suggestion though, even though its pseudo-censorship. |
|
| |
You shouldn't have added all those m-f-ds though, UB. The trolls sense frustration like rabid dogs sense fear! |
|
| |
Trolls are like babies. They just want their nappies changed. Only respond to ideas couched in the formal politeness of 16th century courtly convention or laced with allusions to 600 halfbakery ideas and bakers. |
|
| |
Trolls are not put off by ridicule, humiliation, out-argument, jokes, irrelevancy, threats of violence, logic, arguments from authority, sarcastic agreement, non-sarcastic agreement, questioning their manhood and parentage, pinging rubber bands, pictures of eskimos, sniggering, mail-bombing, really long essays about bactrian camels, personal anecdote, fishbones, baked goods, emoticons, medieval Norwegian, abstruse scientific jargon or begging. I'm not certain that ignoring them works either, but it saves time, bandwidth and disk space. |
|
| |
And trying to out-troll a troll, though tempting and fun, doesn't really belong on a haven of rationality and good manners like the 1/2B. |
|
| |
Wow, amn't I mister smug today? Must be Mondays. |
|
| |
I actively go through and weed my ideas. Ones that are not well received or mis-understood tend to be quietly deleted. People should prune ideas to avoid unnecessary contraversy, especially at an early stage to avoid these kind of flame-wars. |
|
| |
This is all part of good collective site management. |
|
| |
The last gun-control thread did end on a positive discussion about singletons and dating that was actually quite heart-warming. |
|
| |
<off-topic>Hmm. The opposite of a Troll would be someone who doesn't take a stand in order to please everyone. What d'you call such a person? A smurf?</off-topic> |
|
| |