To Flag or not to Flag

[TUFG] Doctor X

I've noticed that there are some people that "flag" responses as spam (since that is what flagging means) when they simply disagree with it or feel that that person is to much disagreeing with them. I think it would be nice if you allow people to disagree with you and still maintain a level of maturity and not use the spam button as your own personal anger management system.... I would suggest one of those rubber squeaky balls to get rid of that initial anger and then move on.

WaldoMag

Should I flag you or not???
I guess i will use the rubber ball.
Lol

Edit:
I am guessing people want a dislike button too.
They might be using flag for that. But as you mentioned that is not appropriate.

AviTrek

Since DB needs to review the flagged posts, it would be nice if people abusing the flag button are blocked from the forum. It can be a temporary block at first and then escalate as needed if they continue to abuse the feature.

Banjo1012

I was flagged for enjoying a post being raked over the coals. Hey, I thought it was funny. Bad taste, maybe. Abusive, no. In fact the people raking him over the coals were way more “abusive” than the guy laughing about it.

Peachtree Rex

If you think posts weren't reported in the old forum just because people disagreed with it, you're fooling yourself. This just makes it more transparent what has been reported.

Pallidyne

Peachtree Rex wrote: »

If you think posts weren't reported in the old forum just because people disagreed with it, you're fooling yourself. This just makes it more transparent what has been reported.

Does that mean that change should not be suggested nor supported? Just because something was does not mean it should be.

Peachtree Rex

Pallidyne wrote: »

Peachtree Rex wrote: »

If you think posts weren't reported in the old forum just because people disagreed with it, you're fooling yourself. This just makes it more transparent what has been reported.

Does that mean that change should not be suggested nor supported? Just because something was does not mean it should be.

Uhh...there's no actual change being proposed here. He's just saying "people shouldn't report posts they disagree with as spam".

I happen to agree with the sentiment (and I hope the mods have tools to ignore excessive spam reports) but the idea that this is somehow a new issue with the forums is laughable.

Pallidyne

Peachtree Rex wrote: »

Pallidyne wrote: »

Peachtree Rex wrote: »

If you think posts weren't reported in the old forum just because people disagreed with it, you're fooling yourself. This just makes it more transparent what has been reported.

Does that mean that change should not be suggested nor supported? Just because something was does not mean it should be.

Uhh...there's no actual change being proposed here. He's just saying "people shouldn't report posts they disagree with as spam".

I happen to agree with the sentiment (and I hope the mods have tools to ignore excessive spam reports) but the idea that this is somehow a new issue with the forums is laughable.

He is proposing social change, not regulatory.

And I agree that it is an existing issue, but should still be mentioned periodically. Who knows, maybe a person or two might listen.

[STJ] Wendell

I got flagged as spam once, Ironically it was a post I was somewhat serious about, while another post where I made a completely obscene albeit hilarious joke goes unflagged (see christmas gift 🎁 ideas in make it so).

Pallidyne

Lol I got flagged for commenting that someone was flagging inappropriately. Twice.

Peachtree Rex

Pallidyne wrote: »

Peachtree Rex wrote: »

Pallidyne wrote: »

Peachtree Rex wrote: »

If you think posts weren't reported in the old forum just because people disagreed with it, you're fooling yourself. This just makes it more transparent what has been reported.

Does that mean that change should not be suggested nor supported? Just because something was does not mean it should be.

Uhh...there's no actual change being proposed here. He's just saying "people shouldn't report posts they disagree with as spam".

I happen to agree with the sentiment (and I hope the mods have tools to ignore excessive spam reports) but the idea that this is somehow a new issue with the forums is laughable.

He is proposing social change, not regulatory.

And I agree that it is an existing issue, but should still be mentioned periodically. Who knows, maybe a person or two might listen.

I admire your optimism (serious, not sarcasm)

Magisse

Peachtree Rex wrote: »

Pallidyne wrote: »

Peachtree Rex wrote: »

Pallidyne wrote: »

Peachtree Rex wrote: »

If you think posts weren't reported in the old forum just because people disagreed with it, you're fooling yourself. This just makes it more transparent what has been reported.

Does that mean that change should not be suggested nor supported? Just because something was does not mean it should be.

Uhh...there's no actual change being proposed here. He's just saying "people shouldn't report posts they disagree with as spam".

I happen to agree with the sentiment (and I hope the mods have tools to ignore excessive spam reports) but the idea that this is somehow a new issue with the forums is laughable.

He is proposing social change, not regulatory.

And I agree that it is an existing issue, but should still be mentioned periodically. Who knows, maybe a person or two might listen.

I admire your optimism (serious, not sarcasm)

Ahh!! Optimism!!! Quick, flag it!! Must...stamp...out.

[TUFG] Doctor X

As a few have indicated I really am not asking for DB to change rules and I also am not fooling myself... I just would like people to think before acting. We all, me including, sometimes respond to fast in anger or annoyance and say things me might not really mean or would say to someone in person but I think I it is not helpful to mark something you disagree with as "spam". So I guess I might be fooling myself in thinking that this is possible.

Any way, thanks for humouring me by reading this post and/or responding to it and a big thanks to everyone for not marking it as spam

Asspin

Maybe it could be renamed to Spam instead of Flag? Not sure if that would help though!

[TUFG] Doctor X

Asspin wrote: »

Maybe it could be renamed to Spam instead of Flag? Not sure if that would help though!

I think that that would at least make it more obvious...

Dralix

Asspin wrote: »

Maybe it could be renamed to Spam instead of Flag? Not sure if that would help though!

If you click Flag, there's two options - Spam and Report. Seems clear enough to me.

[TUFG] Doctor X

Dralix wrote: »

Asspin wrote: »

Maybe it could be renamed to Spam instead of Flag? Not sure if that would help though!

If you click Flag, there's two options - Spam and Report. Seems clear enough to me.

I've never clicked on it so I did not know..... so I guess when someone does use it maliciously they are just being petty.

SMM

A tinned meat product made mainly from ham.

Paund Skumm

SMM wrote: »

A tinned meat product made mainly from ham.

Yeah, if it were mainly ham... it would be called ham. You really don’t want to know what goes in that tin, kind of like you don’t want to know what’s going into hot dog sausages... 🤔

Capt. Chaos

Paund Skumm wrote: »

SMM wrote: »

A tinned meat product made mainly from ham.

Yeah, if it were mainly ham... it would be called ham. You really don’t want to know what goes in that tin, kind of like you don’t want to know what’s going into hot dog sausages... 🤔

<singing>
"Piles and piles of
greasy gobs of fatty meat.
Snouts, tails, and entrails,
mutilated piggy feet."
</singing>

Magisse

Capt. Chaos wrote: »

<singing>
"Piles and piles of
greasy gobs of fatty meat.
Snouts, tails, and entrails,
mutilated piggy feet."
</singing>

Not bad, but I prefer Al's version:
youtube.com/watch?v=REnk67IFQBc

Capt. Chaos

Magisse wrote: »

Not bad, but I prefer Al's version:
youtube.com/watch?v=REnk67IFQBc

Ha, a classic!