« Back to story "Unsubstantiated, Racist, Character Attacks; Propeller’s Front Page"

Story Comments

Posted by: not2needy 1 year, 3 months ago

This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.

All Comments Share Story Report

72%
not2needy1 year, 3 months ago

This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

I know what you're saying pop, and it makes perfect sense. However whether people who disagree with the articles ignore them and refuse to comment, the people who WANT to see them get to the front page will comment continuoulsy until they do. There are also enough of them to prop these articles to get them to the front page with or without comments.

Many on Propeller support this kind of thing. They prop/comment in a frenzy for the express purpose of getting inflammatory articles to the front page, where they know they can bait people who find them offensive. At that point it doesn't really matter, they have already succeeded in getting the article to the front page and whether we comment or not it stays there for at least a day.

These same people attack the scouts, anchors and other members if they express disdain over these inflammatory articles. Although there have been a couple of people banned, others who should have been are still here, attacking scouts, anchors and other members, simply because we can't agree with everything they say. For this reason, i quit participating for several weeks. Often times i find Propeller more stressful than any other aspect of my life because of the name calling and questioning of my intelligence. I report people, nothing comes of it, they are still here and still doing the same things from day to day.

Thanks Spade, you said what needed to be said. I tried once to fight fire with fire, but that's not really who i am, so i won't do that again.

(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 4) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
Reply
5 Replies

loading ...
- 90%
  Mdiar1 year, 3 months ago
  
  This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
  
  How about addressing the single member commenting multiple times issues to make it how many members are commenting, if that is possible?
  
  (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 2) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
  Reply
  2 Replies
  
  loading ...
  - not2needyComment removed: Spam
  - 78%
    not2needy1 year, 3 months ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    I said i agree Mdiar, don't know what was spam about it, but anyway/
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 6) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    0 Replies
    
    loading ...
- 78%
  populist1 year, 3 months ago
  
  This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
  
  Hey N2N - a good point.
  
  I do believe that what you're referring to is all the more reason to ignore those kinds of articles. If a person commented on an article they hated - 5 times for example - that would only solidify that article's position on the home page. When, instead, 5 comments elsewhere might bring a new article to attention or cause another article to rise above the one you didn't like.
  
  Yes, that was a run-on sentence!
  
  (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 2) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
  Reply
  1 Reply
  
  loading ...
  - ranchhandComment removed: Retracted by user

Post Reply

You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.

People Who Liked This Comment (21)

People Who Didn't Like This Comment (8)

Submit a Story

Advertisement