Web site etiquette and or who gets to control the commons

Hello. I happen to go to a particular web site. People there are 'free' to post what they want.

Some particular person posts pictures and commentary.

This person does it almost everyday.. and in the process virtually takes control of the web site.

Drives everything down. Down into eventual oblivion. And in the process it seems like he is the director, controller and owner
not just of the web site but the conduct of behavior there as well.

Safe to say..I do not like it.

What should I do?

Thanks for any and all responses
Bye
G

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gorn

What should I do?

Thanks for any and all responses
Bye
G

---

It's a bit hard to say without knowing more. Of course, my first feeling is to say, "just don't go there," but I suppose you have a reason that you want to visit it despite the problem. If the person is the owner of the website, then there's nothing you can do. If that person isn't, then you could contact the owner and discuss it with them, and propose that perhaps making a rule against over-posting would help the site, or something like that. Just to say, though, it isn't a commons. The Internet itself is a sort of commons now, but not individual sites.

Hello. The person is not the owner. I do not think the domain or site is owned per se by anyone. But someone has got to set it up. (Hmm..?)

It has a moderator...not sure if I want to talk to this person though I would like to. Without seeming biased. After all I know I don't own it either. But
it's late for me..I will have to get back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gorn

Hello. The person is not the owner. I do not think the domain or site is owned per se by anyone. But someone has got to set it up. (Hmm..?)

---

Yes, all sites have an owner, or at least a publisher, at least initially, since they cannot pop into spontaneous existence. As you say, somebody has to have set it up, and somebody has to have the admin account. Of course, there are sites that were set up by someone (as on a free server) who then died, so the site is sort of on automatic pilot. But generally speaking, with a forum like the one you are talking about, there is an owner, and frequently it is the moderator, so that would definitely be the person to contact. And you don't need to worry about being biased, since you have what you think is a legitimate concern. Tell them, "I am afraid that the forum is losing popularity because of that one poster, so you might think about what to do..."

Agree with Jens.
Simply contact the moderator(s) and point out what you see as a problem.

They may act - but it's possible they may be unsympathetic.

Don't visit that website. It's that simple.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John Mendenhall

Don't visit that website. It's that simple.

---

Well, that's a case of letting one bad apple spoil the bunch.

And if Gorn feels this way, likely others do too.

It does no harm to mention it to the mods. It's up to them to decide that they like having traffic.

I don't really know what to say. For a long time on most of my accounts I have been dealing with some taking a lot my stuff wwwwwaaaaaaayyyyyy out of context or reading into stuff that is not even there. I think at times they are trying to get me kicked of here or trying to hurt a job that I might get. Either I criticized something they held as a sacred cow, been very critical on something of theirs or even cost them a job but most of it childish in my view. If I stop communicating on the net it might effect the chance of getting a job and some people enjoy some of the photos I take so I will not stop posting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaveC426913

Well, that's a case of letting one bad apple spoil the bunch.

And if Gorn feels this way, likely others do too.

It does no harm to mention it to the mods. It's up to them to decide that they like having traffic.

---

Yes, you are correct. But Gorm sounds as if the site is unmoderated. Unlike CQ/UT, one bad apple will ruin the barrel.

Yes. Not visiting the website is another option I understand but there is another reason I want to continue there.

Others don't mind it..I'm pretty sure..at least not yet.

Note: I am fine with things by the way. I will simply do what I want or will do.

An aside here: what if there was a tightly controled site that rateed the credibility of other sites? Is that possible?

Hello. If there is C H I L D I S H N E S S..involved make sure to fight it for sure. If people ultimately don't like or want to read what they are reading
or what other people are saying..then SIMPLY MOVE ALONG!

Bye
G

Credibility is not a word I would be using. I am thinking Democracy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John Mendenhall

An aside here: what if there was a tightly controled site that rateed the credibility of other sites? Is that possible?

---

It's a thing.

Elon Musk wants to set up a site that lets the public rate journalists. He already has the domain, at pravduh.com (presumably unaware of the irony of that choice). That'll no doubt turn out to be the same kind of relentless force for truth and fairness as Tripadvisor.

Grant Hutchison

I want one for movie critics. Hmm...I think I got other ideas as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grant hutchison

Elon Musk wants to set up a site that lets the public rate journalists. He already has the domain, at pravduh.com (presumably unaware of the irony of that choice). That'll no doubt turn out to be the same kind of relentless force for truth and fairness as Tripadvisor.

---

With a name like that, I can’t imagine that he didn’t choose it knowing the possibility of irony at least.

It reminds me of something a prof told me when I was in university (before 1989). She said that in the Soviet Union, there was no truth is Pravda and no news in Isvestia (the government newspaper).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gorn

I want one for movie critics. Hmm...I think I got other ideas as well.

---

Then we could also have a site to rate sites that rate critics. [emoji4]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jens

It reminds me of something a prof told me when I was in university (before 1989). She said that in the Soviet Union, there was no truth is Pravda and no news in Isvestia (the government newspaper).

---

That only works if you know what the words "pravda" and "izvestia" mean.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jens

With a name like that, I can’t imagine that he didn’t choose it knowing the possibility of irony at least.

It reminds me of something a prof told me when I was in university (before 1989). She said that in the Soviet Union, there was no truth is Pravda and no news in Isvestia (the government newspaper).

---

And that, in bold, is the well-known ironic reference I was thinking of. I presume Musk is hoping for truth, or at least the appearance thereof. If Pravda was known for one thing in the West, it was that mismatch between title and reality.

ETA: Oh wait. You think he's accusing the journalists of working for the untruthful Pravda? If he is, I think he hasn't thought the whole "name of my website" thing through.

Grant Hutchison

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grant hutchison

And that, in bold, is the well-known ironic reference I was thinking of. I presume Musk is hoping for truth, or at least the appearance thereof. If Pravda was known for one thing in the West, it was that mismatch between title and reality.

ETA: Oh wait. You think he's accusing the journalists of working for the untruthful Pravda? If he is, I think he hasn't thought the whole "name of my website" thing through.

---

Well, this is just my wild guess, and I could very well be wrong. But my guess was that he took Pravda and then changed the "da" to "duh" because the domain wasn't taken but also because it means "being stupid," so perhaps it is meant to say "stupidity in pursuit of the truth" or "stupidity by people who should be pursuing the truth" or something like that? Maybe I'm thinking about it too hard, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John Mendenhall

Yes, you are correct. But Gorm sounds as if the site is unmoderated.

---

Gorn posted this:

Quote:

---

It has a moderator...not sure if I want to talk to this person though I would like to.

---

So it is moderated. Though perhaps not very thoroughly moderated. Or at least they don't have a rule about a person posting a lot.

In fact Gorn posted this:

Quote:

---

This person does it almost everyday.. and in the process virtually takes control of the web site.

---

Somehow I'm not crystal clear on how posting almost everyday leads to taking over the website... But Gorn hasn't been so clear about what exactly the problem is. Maybe it's just that nobody else posts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jens

Well, this is just my wild guess, and I could very well be wrong. But my guess was that he took Pravda and then changed the "da" to "duh" because the domain wasn't taken but also because it means "being stupid," so perhaps it is meant to say "stupidity in pursuit of the truth" or "stupidity by people who should be pursuing the truth" or something like that? Maybe I'm thinking about it too hard, though.

---

Yes, I agree that's what he wants the domain name to mean. But it's like calling your website Idiots or Liars - it's too easy for people to say, "Yeah, you got that right."

Grant Hutchison

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strange

That only works if you know what the words "pravda" and "izvestia" mean.

---

It works better in the original Russian. :) I think the original went Нет известий в «Правде», и нет правды в «Известиях» - no isvestia in Pravda, and no pravda in Isvestia.

Grant Hutchison

Sorry when one post's on this particular web site..what was posted before is pushed down to accommodate what was more recently posted.

Now if this continues..you would have to scroll down for a week's time because there are 500 posts above you.

Hope that gives a sense of the situation. That does not go for this particular thread by the way because the original post that started it all

is pinned to the 'top' and or the beginning of the thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gorn

Sorry when one post's on this particular web site..what was posted before is pushed down to accommodate what was more recently posted.

Now if this continues..you would have to scroll down for a week's time because there are 500 posts above you.

Hope that gives a sense of the situation. That does not go for this particular thread by the way because the original post that started it all

is pinned to the 'top' and or the beginning of the thread.

---

Ah-ha! The site you are complaining about has the most recent post first? If so, there are definetly posters who would try to dominate the site.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grant hutchison

It's a thing.

Elon Musk wants to set up a site that lets the public rate journalists. He already has the domain, at pravduh.com (presumably unaware of the irony of that choice). That'll no doubt turn out to be the same kind of relentless force for truth and fairness as Tripadvisor.

Grant Hutchison

---

Thanks, Grant. I'll check it out.

Regards, John M.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grant hutchison

It works better in the original Russian. :) I think the original went Нет известий в «Правде», и нет правды в «Известиях» - no isvestia in Pravda, and no pravda in Isvestia.

---

Right, now I remember that. It was a long time ago... I don't remember that much about the class (it was a course on Eastern Europe), except for the anecdotes the professor told us. I remember she told us that she subscribed to the Great Soviet Encyclopedia or something, and that after Beria was executed, the editor sent out a letter that said, "sorry, we made a mistake an included an entry on a person who didn't exist. We've prepared an entry on the Bering Straits, so please paste this on top of the mistaken entry." I don't know if it's true, but it's a cool story anyway.

Also, the posting is taking place at least every day...if not on the hour. Hmm...what does one think or do then?

In that case I'd definitely talk to the moderator and mention that so many posts by one person means that other people's posts can't be seen, and that that hinders other people from posting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grant hutchison

It works better in the original Russian. :) I think the original went Нет известий в «Правде», и нет правды в «Известиях» - no isvestia in Pravda, and no pravda in Isvestia.

Grant Hutchison

---

That was my memory as well (but Wikipedia disagreed so who am I to say...)