Tagging users with "warnings"

April 10, 2002 5:58 AM

In AOL Instant Messenger there is the ability to 'warn' other users. Perhaps the ability to tag someone with a 'warning' and the subsequent monitoring of how many warnings people accumulate in a time frame could be an idea?
posted by Frasermoo to Feature Requests at 5:58 AM (48 comments total)

Interesting idea, it could also be tied into a system that blocked that person for x number of minutes....a penalty box so-to-speak. Someone is trolling, send that person to the corner for a few hours.
posted by mkelley at 6:07 AM on April 10, 2002

What is the problem you are solving? Technical responses to social issues are usually misguided.
posted by machaus at 6:30 AM on April 10, 2002

It's easier just to say *PLONK*

{/usenet}

posted by PrinceValium at 6:34 AM on April 10, 2002

machaus - this post got me thinking
posted by Frasermoo at 7:13 AM on April 10, 2002

The potential for abuse is too great. I'd prefer to have a system that lets me designate posters I particularly want or don't want to read and then visually distinguishes those posters' posts on my screen.
posted by anapestic at 7:24 AM on April 10, 2002

I dunno -- this kind of thing tends to "tag" the more passionate/vocal posters. And who does the tagging? Is there a jury or some "vote" that decides if people get the warning tag or not? Or does Matt just do it unilaterally? This kind of thing is just ripe for abuse; on AOL people use it to settle vendettas, muzzle dissent, and lots of other Bad Things.


posted by mrmanley at 7:25 AM on April 10, 2002

This is right out of Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash. I remember that criminals in that book, had messages like "POOR IMPULSE CONTROL" tattooed on their foreheads.
I can only imagine what it would be like on the filter.

ParisParamus:VOLATILE ON MIDDLE EAST.
clavdivs:inscrutable
jonmc:poor tag closer, do not excite

just a thought. :)
posted by jonmc at 7:40 AM on April 10, 2002

What anapestic said. I'd love a way to tag members I didn't want to hear from and have their text in #006699 so I wouldn't see it unless I deliberately highlighted it. I also wouldn't mind being able to tag others I enjoy hearing from and have their text indented or something similar.
posted by sennoma at 7:42 AM on April 10, 2002

We had a conversation about AOL-style warnings at DfC a while back. The verdict: It depends, as always....
posted by fraying at 7:47 AM on April 10, 2002

What is the problem you are solving?
the newbies, farklike posters and pretty much anything he doesn't like, whenever he doesn't like it. what a zoo something like this would turn into. guaranteed to kill mefi. who decides who gets warned about what? matt? like he time for that. boy i can see it now - mefi dead in the water and metalk overflowing with flame wars over who got warned about what.

you know what these forever bitching people really need, is a private, by invite only forum. thats the only way they can impose the sort of control they want. mefi has been a come one, come all community (except when the server couldn't handle it) and you don't get to define a community like that. it defines itself. get over it.
posted by quonsar at 7:49 AM on April 10, 2002

I am absolutely and utterly opposed to this idea! if anything, I think a person's identity on here should be de-emphasized.
posted by mcsweetie at 8:09 AM on April 10, 2002

I say let's start handing out yellow and red cards, football (soccer) style, mostly just follow football rules, and give each MeFi cop a whistle.

*Tweet* Double post, penalty
*Tweet* Troll *Shows yellow card*
posted by riffola at 8:14 AM on April 10, 2002

use it to settle

My thoughts exactly. (sorry, I could not resist that one...)
posted by adampsyche at 8:18 AM on April 10, 2002

quonsar, i hope i'm not being defined as someone who 'forever bitches', my track record shows more comments crying out for burning those who wish to change things.

twas just a thought that popped in my head old boy.

take a deep breath and don the chill hat or go kick a dog.
posted by Frasermoo at 8:31 AM on April 10, 2002

I think a person's identity on here should be de-emphasized.
So why have usernames or profiles at all? How can you have a conversation with someone if you don't know who they are?
posted by darukaru at 8:45 AM on April 10, 2002

you know what these forever bitching people really need, is a private, by invite only forum.

Or an XML interface to MetaFilter so we can develop client software that lets us read this site with some Usenet-like features such as killfiles.
posted by rcade at 8:50 AM on April 10, 2002

Quonsar, do you visit Metatalk exclusively to complain about it? Because, you know, it's really fucking boring. If we gave you an official shiny Badge of Snarly Coolness, would that help?
posted by Skot at 8:56 AM on April 10, 2002

I also wouldn't mind being able to tag others I enjoy hearing from and have their text indented or something similar.

Remember, viewers, the ear tag doesn't hurt the MeFi, and it makes it easier for the fish and game department to track their movements and breeding habits (However unlikely the latter may be).

Remember, Mutual of Omaha are making life a little easier for you.
posted by Kafkaesque at 9:00 AM on April 10, 2002

you know what these forever bitching people really need, is a private, by invite only forum. thats the only way they can impose the sort of control they want. mefi has been a come one, come all community (except when the server couldn't handle it) and you don't get to define a community like that. it defines itself. get over it.

I couldn't agree more. Please set up such a forum, someone...and don't invite me to it.
posted by rushmc at 9:00 AM on April 10, 2002

How can you have a conversation with someone if you don't know who they are?

You've had about 781 such 'conversations'.
posted by Opus Dark at 9:04 AM on April 10, 2002

...or... we could let matt do his thing. it IS his site.
posted by jcterminal at 10:06 AM on April 10, 2002

Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
posted by fraying at 10:12 AM on April 10, 2002

. If we gave you an official shiny Badge of Snarly Coolness, would that help?
gimme! gimme! gimme!
posted by quonsar at 10:19 AM on April 10, 2002

frasermoo: no characterization of yourself was intended, it just seemed like a terrible idea to me. sorry.
posted by quonsar at 10:21 AM on April 10, 2002

spoken like a true gentleman. thanks.

it probably is a shite idea, but it's the only one I had at work today.
posted by Frasermoo at 10:26 AM on April 10, 2002

Are people misunderstanding the suggestion?

I take it to be -- users can set up their own settings. No one has to know. No problems about who's getting ignored or bolstered, who's a hero and who's a loser. Matt doesn't have to do anything.

You'd just select users that you want to mod up or down (even just a three-way switch would make me happy, like, plus one, zero, minus one). Then you'd apply it.

People who's comments you don't appreciate would be lighter in color (and thus less obtrusive). People who's comments you do like would be brighter in color (what's brigher than white? I dunno, but it's just the idea of the thing, not the thing itself).

I don't know about server loads and such, but I'm all for this otherwise.

posted by zpousman at 10:28 AM on April 10, 2002

I think, on second thought, that it was I that was misunderstanding the suggestion.

But my suggestion is still, well, my suggestion: forget about actually warning people, forget about monitoring your individual warnings, forget about having any centralized system at all. Imagine a settings page where you can make the comments from users x,y, and z, get alot closer to #069 so that they nearly disappear from view.

I don't think, btw, that you should be able to get comments from any one to disappear entirely. That seems to me a very unmetafilter thing to do. But you certainly can turn down the visual volume on those users whose posts and comments you don't appreciate (or don't have time for this week or whatever).

posted by zpousman at 10:36 AM on April 10, 2002

Kafkaesque:You were right; hot coffee sprayed thru the nose does clear the sinus and clean the keyboard at the same time. thank you.
posted by Mack Twain at 11:02 AM on April 10, 2002

How about on each user's member page, there are three options we can click. Say, "this is good", "this is bad", and "this is offensive". Only Matt would have access to the total stats, but each judgement could set visuals in a certain way, configurable by each user (either color differences, indentations, generic CSS (with appropriate divs wrapped around each comment by users in those three categories), etc).
posted by daveadams at 11:19 AM on April 10, 2002

So why have usernames or profiles at all? How can you have a conversation with someone if you don't know who they are?

I dunno, but this isn't Yahoo! Personals.
posted by mcsweetie at 11:33 AM on April 10, 2002

NO! Quonsar can't have it. It's Mine, and I'm not giving it up.

I'm Special.


posted by Perigee at 11:56 AM on April 10, 2002

geeper goyz itza kopz.

Kopper: "alright wrabbit, wears rocky, wears e' idin"

Bugs:(zwwwweeeppp) "He aint in dis stove"

Kopper: "SOooooooze idin in da stove eh?"

Bugs: "Would I turn on the gaz if my friend rocky was in

In here...."

Kopper: "Ya might rabbit, ya jus might"

I think it is cartoons myself.
posted by clavdivs at 12:55 PM on April 10, 2002

You've had about 781 such 'conversations'.
I dunno, but this isn't Yahoo! Personals.
Oh, come off it, you know what I mean. I'm not talking about knowing the intimate details of posters' lives, just that you get to know after a while about how people think.
posted by darukaru at 1:27 PM on April 10, 2002

Oh, come off it, you know what I mean. I'm not talking about knowing the intimate details of posters' lives, just that you get to know after a while about how people think.

precisely. if you want to get to know somebody, send them an ICQ message or hit up a mefi gathering.
posted by mcsweetie at 2:18 PM on April 10, 2002

Not that it's really an issue -- but my only experience with warnings was when everyone in my old office used AIM and these little "warning wars" would be set off -- the idea being to pelt a person with warnings, jack up their level and lock them out. It wasn't so bad, sometimes even fun, but it taught me that the concept really doesn't work, as currently executable. Way too hard to fuck around with.
posted by BT at 3:08 PM on April 10, 2002

How did I miss THIS thread for so long? Oh! I know: I was having a life. But now I'm back from it.
posted by ParisParamus at 5:53 PM on April 10, 2002

That's one groovy badge.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:14 PM on April 10, 2002

thanks for your input, ParisParamus.
posted by mcsweetie at 6:23 PM on April 10, 2002

perigee: LMFAO!!!! gimme! gimme! gimme!
posted by quonsar at 7:52 PM on April 10, 2002

zpousman - Ooh, I like it. Although the comments also might have to get smaller, otherwise the front page would start to look like this (the large blue space, not the Squirrel Porn tab). It could be like a volume control. Although in the end that would probably just cause even more miscommunications as people on either side of an issue would barely even see the opposing arguments...

Alternatively, what if there was some sort of reputation system (a la Slashdot and Kuro5hin)? Would that detract from the individual reputations that we each end up assigning frequent users that we notice?
posted by bshort at 9:25 PM on April 10, 2002

S'my badge. Cain't have it.

So there.
posted by Perigee at 12:03 AM on April 11, 2002

The Fonz smiles way too much to be snarly.
posted by iconomy at 5:38 AM on April 11, 2002

Call me slow, but I had no idea that Perigee was Henry Winkler!
posted by urban greeting at 5:42 AM on April 11, 2002

*considers some sort of apogee/perigee jape, comes up snake-eyes*
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:50 AM on April 11, 2002

This is just the latest insipid campaign to censor thoughts you don't like.
posted by ParisParamus at 12:08 PM on April 11, 2002

No it's not.
posted by rodii at 12:58 PM on April 11, 2002

This is just the latest insipid campaign to censor thoughts you don't like.

Case in point: if we had a tagging system, that text would have been invisible (MeTa grey) on my screen.
posted by sennoma at 6:48 PM on April 11, 2002

Insipid?

How less insipid could it be by posting it to the front page?

However it has been interesti.send money to frasermoo.ng to see peoples reactions to this.
posted by Frasermoo at 8:42 AM on April 12, 2002