Looks like mainstream media - Post hidden due to member score or post score too low
Why does Galt's Gulch edit posts? "Post hidden due to member score or post score too low" End censorship. We can only learn from high pointers?
- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
Stop your bitchin' about how the site is being run. Geez, just because you cough up a couple of bucks you think you have the right to dictate how the OWNER gets to run his property. As I said before, if you don't like it, then leave.
"The owner", I submit, is an inapt term. "The proprietor" would be accurate.
As for being on the top of the points, that's merely a function of having a lot to say, and having a bit of time in the past few weeks. That's about to change, so I'll likely be dropping rapidly and soon.
As for what others give me or ding me, that's up to them. For example, I see that my post above about complaining so much now has 5 points. That seems to indicate that 4 others found that useful, insightful, or agree.
There is only one poster here of whom I've ever made a concerted effort to affect - and that was due to an undue number of posts that were what I considered spam. If you hover your mouse over the down thumb you will see that it says to use that if "this is spam." I felt it was an appropriate use and will defend that position.
I'm sure you've thought the same thing in here when you read comments about Christianity that are incorrect.
Usually, those of us who've been around a long time will tell you if they are taking away a point. BUt they don't have to, and assuming you know who is doing it? My experience is you'd be wrong more than right.
I rarely down vote. As a matter of fact, if I'm going to give someone comment that I disagree with, depending on how important I find the discussion-I will upvote it. Then it moves to the top of the thread. You are a valued contributor. You will begin to see your point total moving up quicker the more you post relevant articles and thoughts that encourage good discussion. The more you can tie those posts back to Ayn Rand, Objectivism and the movies the more participation you'll see on your posts -at least until everyone gets to know you better. That's just my take, others may disagree.
I don't have a good solution, though, other than those who want other opinions just scrolling down to read the less popular posts.
Curiously enough, after less than a week(?), I cancelled my producer upgrade, have not yet received a partial refund, and yet am no longer able to send private messages.
I have been around for awhile. It is common for newbies to come to the site and want to make changes to fit their comfort level. The admins would have to tell you for sure, but the site has been very successful. Overall, there is lots of great content, including your mini-series post. Relax a little and wait awhile
I only downvote out-and-out spam or direct insults. I just scroll down for something interesting and don't take time to vote often. I do wish there were a thankyou button to register my interest without having to waste time with a reply saying I agree.
I agree. I most often want someone to know I agree or appreciate their comment. It would be a nice feature. I don't now how hard that is to implement
http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/faq
Where it shows your name in the "Who's Online" section or on your profile, that number next to it is your points total.
In order for your posts to be hidden due to low points, your points have to fall below some very low value. I don't remember what the number is off hand. But in practice, it only happens when someone is really making trouble and wasting everyone's time.
There are other rare cases where the site admins have to take some specific action regarding a member's posts / comments.
But the basic idea is that good discussion is rewarded in some way and unless purposely testing the boundaries, you don't have to worry about it.
People have always held the mistaken belief that I need an audience to pontificate, however :)
You mean Ms Malkin?
I have no idea; I haven't read much of what she's had to say ever since I tweeted a link to a Jessie J music video and she blocked me. Close to a year now, I think.
I no longer care what your opinions are of me, or anything else.
Even if it isn't.
I agree some people post a lot of tripe and sludge worthy of Balph Eubanks, but the exposition of this tripe is the best weapon against it... not making the overarching decision to hide it for our own good.
Just my 2 cent opinion.
It was easier when the 3 networks and the newspaper were deciding what news we need. North Korea is still trying.
As far as hiding posts or comments that have a negative score, I don't think that should happen. Any item posted or any comment should be shown negative rating or not. The negatively rated posts and comments are as informative as any other. It shows the leanings of the majority of the readers.
If we're voting (and we're not) I vote let all post be shown.
Here's a link to the vile subject:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...
http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/4a...
http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/4a...
Let me once again compliment you on the high quality of design that's gone into the gulch website, sdesapio.
I was going to remove this comment lest someone follows the link and has a stroke.
You haven't seen his worst.
Very well...
"you are sorry to her and show it".