Off Topic comments in Deal posts

[Deactivated] on 19/10/2011 - 22:58
Last edited 20/10/2011 - 08:03 by 1 other user

Given the various "religious wars", being waged by some very moralist members here.

BTW the wars are NOT just on religion, its on many products that some religiously believe it's their right to warn others of ad nauesem, as such…

Should we ban the following.

Religious products
Apple products
Android Products
Telco deals Vodafail, Helstra Floptus etc
Junk Food and Energy Drinks
Mainstream Retailers eg HN BL Coles Woolies
Books - except those for Children
Chinese/third world sourced products
Banking products (GFC)
any other suggestions

Or maybe we should just ban off topic comments…. and be able to move them to the discussion forums. The latter would require some coding on the site.

While the "list" above is put up in some sort of jest, some healthy discussion on the off topic/trolling trends in posts here might be of value.

Edit: moved to Feedback forum.

Site Discussion

Comments

  • llama on 19/10/2011 - 23:17

    Hard to enforce… some of the most epic threads are full of off-topic posts.

    It's really hard to decide what is trolling and what is heated discussion. Sometimes a negative view of the product itself is good to alert other members that a good "monetary bargain" doesn't necessarily mean that it is a wise purchase.

    Of course, religion is always going to be a bargain for some, yet a mehhh from others. I guess it's just like everything else, and depends on whether you need it or not.

  • andy19363 on 19/10/2011 - 23:56
    +1

    The neg vote is now the tool of the troll……
    Remove that, and I suspect half of the comments will disappear….

    • samfisher5986 on 20/10/2011 - 00:15
      +2

      I agree, the majority of negative votes are useless.

      Instead, why can't we just have a button where we can input a website with a better price.

      The only time this won't work is for cheap china junk posted by reps.

      • Tal_Shiar on 20/10/2011 - 03:32

        i like the hotukdeals system, instead of votes, the deal has a temperature gauge.

    • Fliedlice on 20/10/2011 - 03:44

      =[ Some of the offensive posts there angered me so much… Since when was it 'trendy' discriminating against other human beings? I don't believe i've ever hurt anyone. If anything, i've always tried to bring the best out of people.

      Btw thanks for the support andy19363.. this is my favourite website. But at the moment kind of feels like i'm going to be targeted now, just because of my beliefs Sigh =S

      • andy19363 on 20/10/2011 - 09:20

        thanks for the support andy19363

        Thanks for the thanks, but I couldn't say I was supporting anybody in particular…. (I personally think all religion is nonsense I'm afraid. However, tis not for me to argue anyones beliefs)

        ….. I just hate to see good deals disappear because of this negging system.

      • moocher on 20/10/2011 - 10:11

        @teabagzzz - it may help a little to remember that people tend to be ruder online than they would be in person. Sometimes they just want to air their own (rather strong) opinions on whatever the controversial issue of the day is, and they can do so sort of anonymously online without fearing any serious consequence. I hope you won't feel that you are being personally targetted.

  • moocher on 20/10/2011 - 09:22

    Should we ban the following.

    I realise that you put up the list partially in jest, but I assume you mean banning deal posts of the categories that generate much hostile discussion. If we did start banning categories, it would be rather sad for bargain hunters interested in those categories. Those posts that generate the hottest (and often most negative) arguments are probably also the categories that interest people the most. If we started doing this, I can also see the list of categories growing, and the people crying foul if their favourite categories are added to the blacklist, or if their hated categories aren't added to the list. Can't please everyone!

    OzBargain was meant to be a place for people to freely share their bargains (as long we keep it to 'G' rating), it would be disappointing if we had to ban categories.

    There will always be some out there who abuse their perceived right to comment. IMHO we should allow the posts but moderators will have to unpublish comments that serve no purpose other than to attack others. The comments are supposed to promote RELEVANT discussion about the deal, and not serve as a place for people to air their own agendas that have nothing to do with the deal itself. Those that are not interested in the product should move on instead of insulting those that find the product useful.

    There are always those who vote negative just because they don't think it's a good product, and as per our guidelines, that's not a valid reason to neg. If the negative vote hasn't been regulated by the community (by voting down the negative vote), then mods can fix up any reports of invalid negative votes as per our guidelines.

    I've probably over-simplified as I know that there are many cases where things are not as clear-cut as that.

    • andy19363 on 20/10/2011 - 09:33

      then mods can fix up any reports of invalid negative votes as per our guidelines.

      have things changed?

      Currently, (individual) negative votes are not being removed by moderators.

      http://www.ozbargain.com.au/wiki/help:voting_guidelines

      • moocher on 20/10/2011 - 09:44

        Sorry for being unclear, things haven't changed - that was just my own opinion. The preference is for the community to self-regulate the votes. My suggestion was that mods can step in if required if something has violated the guidelines.

        I have a suspiscion that not all users realise that they can downvote a negative vote, but I could be wrong. I seem to recall that it doesn't always happen even when there are comments that say that the neg vote was invalid.

        • andy19363 on 20/10/2011 - 10:09

          I have a suspiscion that not all users realise that they can downvote a negative vote

          I agree…..

          I think also that sometimes if a post is removed from view quickly by negative votes, the no-one will be able to downvote it.

      • scotty on 20/10/2011 - 09:47
        +1

        Negative votes on the deals are handled by either

        • Moderators have supreme authority on deciding the validity of each vote
        • All deal votes are completely self-moderated using the comment vote system and moderators would not intervene.

        I'll say it's somewhere in between. In most cases deal votes are moderated by other members. At the same time moderators still have the right to step in if he/she feels the community has gone the wrong way.

  • scotty on 20/10/2011 - 10:01
    +1

    Expressing opinions are fine IMHO and the voting system (+1/-1) simply just reduce that expression into a single click (actually a bit more work for negative votes). The source of heated discussions here are the way people expressing their negative opinion — the use of words, personal attacks, etc. Removing negative votes WILL NOT remove these issues. Keyboard warriors will continue to troll and start flame wars with or without that -1 button.

    Ultimately people need to understand this is a online community, and the goal of OzBargain is to help people finding good bargains. Even trolling in a post that benefit a significant minority (let's say, WinPhone7 deals) is not helpful.

    Well, it's hard to change how people behave (I wish I can). As a developer and a moderator of OzBargain, it all comes down to

    • Developing automated tools to reduce flame wars
    • More moderation to ensure the community stays on the right track

    Anyway.

    I think OzBargain has always been short of moderators (especially when neil is on holidays at the moment). If you think you are able to help, have time to help, and you are in line with what the existing moderation team believe, feel free to post in Talk with a Moderator thread.

    • andy19363 on 20/10/2011 - 10:17

      Removing negative votes WILL NOT remove these issues. Keyboard warriors will continue to troll and start flame wars with or without that -1 button.

      I agree….. people will always troll….. however, the big red -ve makes it so much louder, as they attract opposition to their comments….. AND opposition to their use of the negative vote…. win-win for the trolls. Losing the neg will at least reduce the latter.

      Personally, I hate to see inappropriate negatives……. Often I comment in the hope that
      A) the negger will see the possible error of their ways, or
      B) it might galvanise others to downvote the negative.

      Standard comments I am less likely to comment back.

    • samfisher5986 on 20/10/2011 - 12:59
      +2

      IMO I don't think more moderation should be a goal.

      Moderation should be for spam and illegal content, the rest should be community run.

      The goal should be to add tools, incentives and other things that make it unappealing or pointless to troll etc.

      Ozbargain is like Reddit/Digg but with bargains instead of news. The moderators at those places only remove illegal content most of the time

      • [Deactivated] on 24/10/2011 - 18:39

        The goal should be to add tools, incentives and other things that make it unappealing or pointless to troll etc.

        Sounds nice, but how would this work? Incentives? Not losing your account for a few weeks?

        • samfisher5986 on 24/10/2011 - 19:01

          The only thing I can think of at the moment is a karma system.

          All votes are counted in your profile and totaled.

          And perhaps anyone with negative karma has some sort of downside

        • [Deactivated] on 24/10/2011 - 22:23
          +1

          Problem still resides with the pack voting. When a group of pro - lets say Coke drinkers gang up on the Pepsi drinkers, they each vote each other up. So now we have the bigger gang overpowering the little gang, with cross voting and building "karma". And we then still have this gang warfare, each believing that it has a right to convert the other side.

          If you know a way around that issue, then we might have something…

  • Lego Spaceman on 27/10/2011 - 15:03

    I definitely agree that attacks and aggressive remarks should never be tolerated.

    Some members believe that drawing attention to the ethical or unethical practices of businesses is not relevant to a bargain, and I think that that is very unfortunate.

    My own purchase decisions are influenced by my understanding of the ethos of a business. If someone draws attention to the positive or negative actions or impact of a business then I am very grateful - it may or may not sway me. If remarks about ethos or ethics were to be excluded that would actually be a political position itself (I.e. price is the only indicator of value, and this end justifies the means whether it is legal, ethical, or not).

    I think that moralism has no place anywhere, yet, the distinction between moralism and the option of making an informed decision is not always recognised by some easily threatened, defencive members.

    • andy19363 on 27/10/2011 - 15:42

      Some members believe that drawing attention to the ethical or unethical practices of businesses is not relevant to a bargain.

      Unfortunately, as often happens, adding negative votes to such information can mean that the post disappears from view, along with such valuable information….. Thus removing the option of making an informed decision…

    • [Deactivated] on 27/10/2011 - 16:14

      Lego S

      Totally agree. The moderation of unethical "behaviour" by the business being promoted, if it relates to the deal itself, eg I bought from x store and they told me to get stuffed.

      But at the same time moralising about a particular company is often used as an excuse.

      Eg one member thinks its ok for a company to use slave labour, by a company that makes the product they use, but not for a competitor, then justifies this by saying, that the competitor has more money in the bank, so they should set the standard.

      So what do we do??

      Maybe we are getting confused with overall unethical practices and anti customer behaviour.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join