So Patrick Mc has rediscovered the SDMB, dug out his password from 2009 and started posting again. And by “posting” I mean “starting threads on par with code_grey, Ralph124c and Jinx”. Only he currently has a record the others can no longer obtain: every single one of his posts is a new thread in GQ.
35 posts
35 threads
At what point do the mods step in? What’s the protocol?
Yeah, I noticed this yesterday when I went into GQ and every thread on my screen was started by him.
I’m not sure I really see the problem. I looked through some of the threads he’s started, and most of them seem to be reasonably interesting questions. I mean, if he were posting all his threads on the same topic, or posting offensive stuff or whatever, that’s one thing. But he’s just posting a lot of GQ questions. I agree that it would be nice for him to come back and participate in his own threads, but it is GQ. I have a higher expectation for OP participation in Great Debates, IMHO, etc.
I agree with this. Although I haven’t actually looked at the threads. If they are legitimate questions, then so be it, IMO.
To an extent, you’re both right. But there has to be a limit, doesn’t there? If he were the most interesting man in the world and could post 100 really interesting questions an hour, that would be excessive, right? With zero interaction, for all we know he’s a bot spamming us with questions found on another site.
For instance, here’s his evolution thread. Yeah - interesting question that always gets replies. I say “always” because this question appears every month or so, and people answer it every time because they want to educate the OP on a number of misunderstandings or a bit of ignorance. (And hopefully teach the person how to use the search function.) But here those reasons don’t apply, because there’s no evidence that the OP has returned to even read the replies.
There’s certainly value in formulating a response in a thread like that, but the primary value is in communicating with the OP. Seems a bit of a waste of time to me.
I’m aware of him and his thread starting/posting habits. So far, all I can tell you for sure is that he’s not a bot but a real person. At least he doesn’t appear to have the bad habits of some other thread starters, although not returning to threads is disturbing and perplexing.
Yeah, I didn’t really think he was a bot - but he has the exact same personality as one. He certainly doesn’t pass the Turing Test. That’s a minimum threshold for me to respond at least (for the minimum amount of value that has…).
What do you propose it should be, specifically?
He’s had seven threads active in the past two days; he’s posted a total of 35 questions in a year and a half. At this point it doesn’t seem to me to be that excessive. If someone was actually posting so prolifically that they took up a significant part of the first page of GQ I’d see more of a problem.
Why? If that was the primary value, then we could all just reply to questions by PM or e-mail. We’re not an information service to answer individual questions; part of the value of the messageboard format is that anyone who is interested in the subject can learn about it as well as respond to others who have participated.
Suit yourself. You always have the choice not to respond, or in fact not to read, a thread.
While it would be better if he did show more involvement in the threads he starts, it’s hardly unique behavior.
As sam says, we’re aware of the situation. I’m not yet seeing a reason to take action.
Specifically? Probably how you define it - “a significant part of the first page”. He’s at 7% right now (100 threads/page). I’d think 10-15% would be “significant”.
Absolutely. But on a thread topic that appears every month, the only new person IS the OP - and that’s where the primary value is in this situation.
And as I stated, neither do I. That’s why I asked the question, which you so graciously turned around on me. If you didn’t want to answer the question, you always have the choice to not respond, or in fact not to read, a thread.
What’s the point of being a mode if you can’t spice up your day with some gratuitous antagonism?
It’s the outrageous salary we get. Wait!-----it’s the hookers and blow!–Wait!..it’s the prestige…er, uh,…it’s the groupies…no, it’s rising above the Cheeto stains on your body parts…jackboots…$7.95 comped membership…
I got nothing…
You mods need to join a union, go on strike, and bring the capitalist dogs that exploit your labour to their knees.
What about the official SDMB Mod coffee cup?
Ok. So you don’t see the current level as a problem.
We get several thousand new members every month. They haven’t seen the topic discussed here before. The topic may have value to them, especially since posters may link to previous discussions.
That’s not what your OP seemed to imply. You seemed to indicate that you saw a problem with the posting behavior of the person in question. Thank you for clarifying that you don’t see a present problem.
Glad to be of help.
Given that it’s a question about GQ in ATMB, as a GQ mod I don’t have that choice. It’s part of my job to read it and respond to it. And I have answered the question.
This is just as much bullshit as every other time you say it. Will Gary and Gfactor (the other GQ mods) be required to also stop by and offer their two cents? What about the 17 other mods? Nope - because it’s not required of you. samclem already responded - you had zero obligation to post your needless, antagonistic post.
And no - you have not answered the questions. They are still in the OP if you’d like to address them. I won’t hold my breath, as I know how rare it is for you to answer simple, direct questions. Also - it’s hilarious when you say “I don’t see the problem” and simultaneously admit you are “aware of Patrick Mc/the situation” and his posting habits.
Do we really get several thousand new members per month? Holy crap.
That sounds right. Most, however, never post a message. (You can see this by putting in a few random numbers to look at user profiles.)
I don’t recall having said that specifically before.
No, it’s not absolutely required, though it is part of my job to respond to queries in ATMB, especially regarding policy in GQ, which is what you were asking about. The other GQ mods may participate if they are so inclined, especially if they can offer additional perspective.
Antagonistic? I asked your opinion about the matter. I’m not sure exactly what you find “antagonistic” about my response.
OK:
We have no explicit protocol or specific level of posting where we would take action. This is not an issue that comes up very often. When it does it has been dealt with on a case by case basis by discussion among the mods.
From the Registration Agreement
There is no specific limitation on the number of threads on different topics a poster can post in a short time. However, it could be a problem if a single poster was posting so prolifically that they were dominating the front page. In the past, after discussion among the moderators, we have sometimes requested that posters slow it down by e-mail or PM.
We’ve had a report or two besides your query. We are aware that some posters have expressed concern. I don’t see how that is inconsistent with my opinion that the present level of posting is not a problem.
And probably a substantial percentage are spammers/bots.
Well, the Dos Equis Most Interesting Man In The World is on TV for hours every day, and that’s not excessive.
On the other hand, yeah it is. Nevermind.