[The Actual]

Am I the only one who thinks StupidFilter is a joke website?

Even if it were real, I would say it is better to have human moderators. Thanks for doing so much work for us.

 

[SR-71Panorama]

[size=small]fas·cism[/size] 2. Oppressive, dictatorial control.

2 thumbs WAY down.

 

[jellybones]

You're right..we can already say whatever the **** we want here..Why change that?

Oh yeah, forgot about that....

Quote:

Originally Posted by SR-71Panorama /img/forum/go_quote.gif [size=small]fas·cism[/size] 2. Oppressive, dictatorial control. 2 thumbs WAY down.

 

[Zarathustra19]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SR-71Panorama /img/forum/go_quote.gif [size=small]fas·cism[/size] 2. Oppressive, dictatorial control. 2 thumbs WAY down.

Fascism? Really? Censoring relevant, intelligent speech is fascism...censoring stupidity? Awesome. THATZ TEH AWESOMENESS!!!!!1111oneeleven

 

[jellybones]

Down with STUPID!

 

[goldenratiophi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SR-71Panorama /img/forum/go_quote.gif [size=small]fas·cism[/size] 2. Oppressive, dictatorial control. 2 thumbs WAY down.

May be a little strong, but I agree. Filtering posts out because a program thinks they are badly written isn't an awfully good idea IMO. I like keeping everything as unfiltered as possible.

It's not like Head-Fi even has a stupidity problem anyway, and the few stupid ones aren't usually the ones typing in all caps/leetspeek anyway.

 

[infinitesymphony]

I think it would be fun to have a version that users could manually enable that would place the rating (1-5) beneath all posts. It would be a subtle way of nudging people to write proper posts without the filtering.

StupidFilter reminds me of The Blog Readability Test. Give it a URL and it will rate the reading level of the text, from Elementary School to Genius level.

 

[Wmcmanus]

Quote:

Originally Posted by infinitesymphony /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think it would be fun to have a version that users could manually enable that would place the rating (1-5) beneath all posts. It would be a subtle way of nudging people to write proper posts without the filtering.

This would be kind of cool, actually, so long as it remained anonymous. I'd hate to make a post and come back to my computer 10 minutes later to see that 17 people have given my post a high rating and one unfortunate soul who is about to be banned gave my post a poor rating!

Nah, just kidding. I'd never do that.

It would kind of stink for people whose posts always received poor ratings. In no time, they would get discouraged and go away (pouting or otherwise) which in one sense would be the whole point but in an entirely different sense would be a real shame. I think we need to be as inclusive as possible at Head-Fi (and on all public forums for that matter) even if that means we allow stupid people making consistently stupid posts a little more time to identify themselves.

The present system we have works pretty well. As moderators, we're often guided by the opinions of our members, either via the "report post" feature, or by the PMs they send to us when someone is being annoying, or simply by what we see being expressed in the offending threads. I'd say that in at least 90% of the threads and posts that we delete, many other Head-Fi members have been offended by that thread/post as well. It's not like we're out there zapping everything under the sun just for the fun of it. Most of what we do involves simple common sense decisions.

 

[infinitesymphony]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wmcmanus /img/forum/go_quote.gif This would be kind of cool, actually, so long as it remained anonymous. I'd hate to make a post and come back to my computer 10 minutes later to see that 17 people have given my post a high rating and one unfortunate soul who is about to be banned gave my post a poor rating!

Hahah, nooooo, I meant the 1-5 rating assigned by StupidFilter. I definitely would be against post ratings.

 

[plainsong]

There are sites that do have rating systems for threads. Threads rated badly are relegated to the sewers and the the threads rated well go to... yeah, I'm describing Somethingawful.

 

[ENT]

I vote no. Some posts are ridiculously stupid - but they are readable none the less. I'm sure not many people here are doctors of rhetoric (please correct me if wrong) - and I guarantee not everyone here is perfect at grammar (I suck at it). I remember reading somewhere that in the English language only the first and last letter can determine the minds recognition of a word. Why filter those who are throwing in nonsense -> but in a way towards the discussion?

 

[Lazarus Short]

To paraphrase Wmcmanus: If it sounds stupid, then it is stupid.

 

[jp11801]

while I realize this thread is tounge in cheek it raises a great topic, headfi is suffocating from the endless "recommend me a great headphone for my audigy sound card for $50" threads. It is great to have an influx of members that are curious and eager but really people use the search function. Also yes there are a few people that routinely post things I might consider stupid being able to read them gives me a better idea of who is who and then I can put up my own filter.

 

[plainsong]

The stupid posts don't bother me as much as the "Ewww this person probably removes the wings off flies for fun" posts. A creepyfilter may be better.

 

[Lazarus Short]

Quote:

Originally Posted by plainsong /img/forum/go_quote.gif The stupid posts don't bother me as much as the "Ewww this person probably removes the wings off flies for fun" posts. A creepyfilter may be better.

Just no fezfilter, please.

Laz