Timeline for Can we just get rid of vgv8?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 30, 2010 at 12:49 | comment | added | MDMarra | @Farseeker - Not really, it's one problem, since with him they are bundled together. You're right that with a normal user these are two separate problems. Part of SF is trying to explain to people where they are wrong so that they can have a better understanding going forward, or at the very least so that the OP understands why a specific answer is wrong. This is impossible to do with vgv8, due to his attitude. This can lead down two roads - 1)No one responds to him and the OP thinks his advice is correct. 2)People respond to him and he starts a verbal battle. | |
| Aug 30, 2010 at 3:49 | comment | added | Mark Henderson | @MarkM - there's two distinct issues in your comment: 1) Bad answers. These are already taken care of with downvotes by the community. Nothing to be done here. 2) Emotional responses to said downvotes. This is part of the reason why he's in the sinbin I'm guessing, so let's see if his attitude changes in the future. | |
| Aug 30, 2010 at 2:46 | comment | added | MDMarra | Not everyone can ignore him though. His answers are generally full of inaccurate info which could be harmful to users that are used to this site containing useful and generally responsible answers. A single downvote seems to send him into a tirade, nevermind explaining why. | |
| Aug 30, 2010 at 0:30 | comment | added | Mark Henderson | @Warner - I hope he does too. I'm inclined to agree with what you didn't say, and that is that he probably won't. But let's wait and see. If he continues like this on his third chance, then I will agree with you. | |
| Aug 30, 2010 at 0:27 | comment | added | Warner | You're entitled to your opinion and I respect it. In this case, I disagree. Hopefully if he returns on Oct 13, he demonstrates behavior deserving of your understanding. | |
| Aug 30, 2010 at 0:24 | comment | added | Mark Henderson | Fair enough. My point was that I don't believe he's being deliberately malicious, and I don't believe he's trolling, because if he is he's the most advanced version of a troll I've ever seen. I believe his behaviour is mostly innocent, and thus deserves more than once chance. This site is totally different to any other forum on the intertron so it might take a while for new users to wrap their head around. Hell, I've even chastised him myself. But I don't believe anything he's done is in malice and thus doesn't deserve a lifelong ban (yet). | |
| Aug 30, 2010 at 0:21 | comment | added | Warner | I did ignore him for the most part. Again, his behavior does not justify his continued presence. I think you're getting off track here. Everyone's not entitled to participate. | |
| Aug 30, 2010 at 0:15 | comment | added | Mark Henderson | In addendum, I really, really don't want this place (Meta, that is) to be like MSO when I first started participating there. I felt like an outsider, that nobody gave a shit and they were all running around in their own private space and refused to acknowledge outsiders. It's different there now, but I die a little bit inside each time I see something like that happen here. | |
| Aug 30, 2010 at 0:15 | comment | added | Ward - Trying Codidact Mod | Even if they're not always trolling, someone who - like vgv8 - is willing to spend the time it takes them to argue with everyone is a big distraction. | |
| Aug 30, 2010 at 0:13 | comment | added | Mark Henderson | @Warner - you don't have to cater to him if you don't want to. Just ignore him. I'm actually a tad annoyed because he allegedly had an answer to a long-outstanding question I have on SF and now I'll never know what it was. Of course, he could have just been pulling my tail but I'm trusting like that. | |
| Aug 29, 2010 at 23:09 | comment | added | Warner | If we cater to abusive users, irrespective of what you want to call their behavior, we're degrading the quality of the site as a whole. I see no reason to attempt to justify their behavior, as they are not providing a positive contribution to the site. There is no need for this to be a contentious subject. A 5% positive contribution does not negate the other 95%. | |
| Aug 29, 2010 at 21:27 | history | answered | Mark Henderson | CC BY-SA 2.5 |