Simple Machines Community Forum

Since it spans both v1.x.x and 2.x.x and it seems like a lot of people are always having spam problems, just thought I'd ask if a board (even child board) devoted to spam issues would be warranted.

Thanks for reading my suggestion.

You'd imagine so, wouldn't you?

Trouble is, you'd expect people to read the stickies.

They don't.

You'd expect people to use the "Search" facility.

They don't.

A modicum of intelligence is required.

That having been said, a board marked "Spam issues", or something, MIGHT just work, to a limited extent.

So, my vote would be "Why not try it out?"

How about a quick links page leading directly to each subject so if someone wants spam help they click a link for that but if they want SMF 2 or 1 support theres links for them so on. have a warning on that page to check stickies for common issues. Just a thought on what you both say.

Quote from: nightbre on February 23, 2013, 11:22:17 AM
How about a quick links page leading directly to each subject so if someone wants spam help they click a link for that but if they want SMF 2 or 1 support theres links for them so on. have a warning on that page to check stickies for common issues.

I don't know nightbre, I've found (unfortunately) that members needing help don't read rules or quick links or the like. They want answers and they want them fast. I do realize that over-boarding a forum isn't always a good idea, but I think in the case of this topic, it might be time for it's own board.

I would note that rejigging the boards around - so there would actually be fewer boards, but encouraging a spam board in the process, has been suggested before but never actually implemented.

At least a dedicated spam help board would give the moderators a rug to kick all the spam help posts under, getting them off the main support boards to make them cleaner for those who do bother to read before they post  ;)

Quote from: xrunner on February 23, 2013, 10:14:53 AM
Since it spans both v1.x.x and 2.x.x and it seems like a lot of people are always having spam problems, just thought I'd ask if a board (even child board) devoted to spam issues would be warranted.

Thanks for reading my suggestion.

Sounds like a good idea to me.  ;)

IMHO, people having trouble with spam will come here, but not read the rules, stickies, and whatnot. No great revelation there. I think however, they do at least look for the best board to post their issue in. I believe they will use the board. It's also a place for them to see that many others are having the same issue with spammers, so it might be nice for them to see they aren't alone in their suffering.  :)

If it doesn't work out, the Admins can just move the posts out of the Spam board, and no great harm will have been done. I just seems to me I'm seeing a lot of people having trouble with spammers lately, and it might be a good idea to at least try for a while.

A board (or child boards for 1.x and 2.x) dedicated to spam issues would be the intelligent thing to do, but for some reason TPTB at SMF are highly resistant to doing that. I've suggested it a number of times myself -- to clear out all the spam dross from the support boards would be a big improvement, and more people might even be able to find a solution themselves if presented with a concentrated group of spam-related topics. Of course, if they would just bother to search first, there would be about one spam-related topic per year.

Don't hold your breath.

I'm not sure it would really help that much, because you would still have users who just won't read.  Some people just turn up and post their thread/question/problem without ever bothering to see if the question has been asked before, even if there's a dedicated child board for spam issues.  I can also guarantee that you'd still end up with threads being posted in the wrong place.

A sticky of links to frequently posted topics regarding dealing with spam might be an option.  Of course, people still won't read it, but moderators could then just lock the duplicate threads with a link to the sticky.  That might get the message across in the end.

I say, keep count of what percentage of a given member's posts need to be moved because they were posted in the obviously wrong board. If they chronically exceed 5% after some startup leniency period, warn them and then ban them if they show they're still not bothering to read the board titles. Some people are just too stupid to be allowed to consume my oxygen supply.

I've complained about this forum's layout before. Of the boards that random members can post in, you put them up at the very top of the postable boards: Support 1.x, Support 2.x, Spam Issues. That way there's a good chance that they end up in the right board, even if they don't bother to read the titles. The current layout is stupid, as generally postable boards such as SMF Feedback and SMF Bugs come well before the Support boards, and get lots of support questions dumped in them. And before anyone objects "We have to have News near the top", that's not a generally postable board. Leave it near the top, because only a select few can post to it.

Quote from: Irisado on February 23, 2013, 03:52:38 PM
I'm not sure it would really help that much, because you would still have users who just won't read.  Some people just turn up and post their thread/question/problem without ever bothering to see if the question has been asked before, even if there's a dedicated child board for spam issues.  I can also guarantee that you'd still end up with threads being posted in the wrong place.

Hello Irisado,

I know what you are talking about. Having run and helped run several forums I know new (and sometimes old) members do not want to read rules and stickeys. Sometimes even if they do read the rules they will then "lawyer" them and try to corner you into minutia and aspects of the rules that you didn't address. But I don't see a big downside to making a spam discussion board. The worst thing that can happen is that it doesn't work out, and they can just move all the posts in it to another board(s).

Quote from: MrPhil on February 23, 2013, 05:36:14 PM
I've complained about this forum's layout before. Of the boards that random members can post in, you put them up at the very top of the postable boards: Support 1.x, Support 2.x, Spam Issues. That way there's a good chance that they end up in the right board, even if they don't bother to read the titles. The current layout is stupid, as generally postable boards such as SMF Feedback and SMF Bugs come well before the Support boards, and get lots of support questions dumped in them. And before anyone objects "We have to have News near the top", that's not a generally postable board. Leave it near the top, because only a select few can post to it.

MrPhil,

After reading your comments, the layout could be better, I agree. I would put the support boards close to the top, where new members needing help can find them faster. The more experienced members will be able to find the other boards nearer the bottom with no problem.

Yes, I know anyone should be able to find any board in any position, but they also should be able to search and read rules ...

Quote from: xrunner on February 23, 2013, 07:45:28 PM
Hello Irisado,

I know what you are talking about. Having run and helped run several forums I know new (and sometimes old) members do not want to read rules and stickeys. Sometimes even if they do read the rules they will then "lawyer" them and try to corner you into minutia and aspects of the rules that you didn't address. But I don't see a big downside to making a spam discussion board. The worst thing that can happen is that it doesn't work out, and they can just move all the posts in it to another board(s).

The downside is that you'd be creating a board which you don't necessarily need to create in the first place.  If you have a sticky thread of frequently posted topics, and include links to all the FAQs about dealing with spam/spammers, why would you need a separate board?  The moderators wouldn't even need to worry about moving threads.  I find it's much quicker to lock threads, and post links as answers than it is to move them.

Thanks for responding,

Quote from: Irisado on February 24, 2013, 06:28:23 PM
The downside is that you'd be creating a board which you don't necessarily need to create in the first place.

True, but as I said there is no big downside to doing it. Try it, if it doesn't prove to be a better resource related to spam issues, just move the posts out and close it. That's really easy to do.

Quote
If you have a sticky thread of frequently posted topics, and include links to all the FAQs about dealing with spam/spammers, why would you need a separate board?

Because the spam issue spans versions. It neither fits in 1.x.x or 2.x.x, specifically. I believe the spam issue is of concern equally to users of either version. If the posts were concentrated in one board, I believe users of both versions would find it a better resource area. Also, I think it's an interesting topic to discuss on it's own, so that contributes to my opinion it could support a board. That's my opinion, I might be wrong.

Let's say Sue runs a 1.x.x forum and hangs out in that support board looking for topics of interest. She has no interest in 2.x.x. If Ken has a 2.x.x forum and reports and gets a spam issue solved in the support board for 2.0, then Sue might not ever see it. Yes, yes, of course she should be able to search for anything, etc, etc, etc, but we know that doesn't always happen. But, the only "official" (that I can gather from the badging) to respond here has been K@, and he (she?) said it was worth considering. So far no other Admin has said anything. Plus as MrPhil has said, there are some other ideas floating around in the thread.

Bump,

I still contend that this new board would be useful because this topic spans both versions and a lot of people seem to always have problems with this issue.

I think it is a very good idea. I will make a proposal and be following up on this thread. Thank you for taking the time to bring this to attention.

Quote from: Colin on April 04, 2013, 02:08:20 PM
I think it is a very good idea. I will make a proposal and be following up on this thread. Thank you for taking the time to bring this to attention.

Thank you for even considering the idea. That's all I ever wanted a staff member to say.

how about someone creates a wikipage that can be linked too to give suggestions on how to deal with this?

You mean like http://wiki.simplemachines.org/smf/Spam_-_my_forum_is_flooded_with_spam,_what_can_I_do ?

The problem is that you need to get people to the wiki. Then beat them with a stick until they actually read it.

The point of the suggestions is about focusing all the spam questions in one place where hopefully people will read other suggestions before making their own, by virtue of it being even more prominent than a wiki article.

maybe we need to link it more in posts as i didnt even know about that page :/

Having a board reorganisation would actually help a great deal more generally.

its being finalised :)

I was just thinking more about this issue (I know you thought you smelled smoke)  ...

I think the spam issue is different than other issues. Say your theme is broken, at least you know you may have done something wrong and at least you can come here to find an answer. Sorta like a broken pipe and you need a plumber.

But I think the spam issue is different. It's like your home is being violated in a sense. You feel helpless because the invaders keep coming and you don't know why you are targeted. I think it needs more - how shall I say - community support - than other issues. Like it's own board where you can see that you are not alone.

And as always, I may be totally wrong in the way I see this, but I think I have a point or I wouldn't have said anything.

Thanks for reading my suggestions.

QuoteI think the spam issue is different than other issues. Say your theme is broken, at least you know you may have done something wrong and at least you can come here to find an answer. Sorta like a broken pipe and you need a plumber.

IT'S A-ME, MARIO!

It is actually a different kind of issue. Theme issues or code issues are technical problems. Spam isn't, it's a sociological one and a technical solution is only going to give you limited relief.

QuoteAnd as always, I may be totally wrong in the way I see this, but I think I have a point or I wouldn't have said anything.

Let me tell you why you're here. You're here because you know something. What you know you can't explain, but you feel it. You've felt it you're entire life, that there's something wrong with the world. You don't know what it is, but it's there, like a splinter in your mind, driving you mad. It is this feeling that brought you here. Do you know what I'm talking about?

The matrix has you.

You're right, it is a different breed of problem. People don't understand why it is happening or why it can't be fought off with technical solutions. They don't understand why they are relentless, while they will never stop. It's a war out there.

every point and opinion is valid :)

I wouldn't say that Runic...

Everyone HAS an opinion...   but many opinions are not valid because they are based on mistaken impressions, partial facts, or even complete untruths...

Quote from: Runic on April 04, 2013, 10:48:11 PM
every point and opinion is valid :)

Quote from: Kindred on April 05, 2013, 07:13:52 AM
I wouldn't say that Runic...

If everyone's opinon is valid, then Kindred's opinion is valid. But that would mean that his opinion that not everyone's opinion is valid - is valid. So not everyone's opinion is valid, so Runic's opinion that every opinion is valid - is not valid. But Runic said everyone's opinion is valid ...

Quote from: Arantor on April 04, 2013, 10:46:47 PM
Let me tell you why you're here. You're here because you know something. What you know you can't explain, but you feel it. You've felt it you're entire life, that there's something wrong with the world. You don't know what it is, but it's there, like a splinter in your mind, driving you mad. It is this feeling that brought you here. Do you know what I'm talking about?

Take the red pill (create a Spam board)!

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-McXGsEl5UUE/UIqrEp7yjxI/AAAAAAAAG_c/XDWSisXOpfg/s1600/Laurence+Fishburne+The+Matrix.PNG)

Quote from: xrunner on April 05, 2013, 08:31:05 AM
But that would mean that his opinion that not everyone's opinion is valid - is valid. So not everyone's opinion is valid, so Runic's opinion that every opinion is valid - is not valid.

"not everyone's opinion is valid" =/= "everyone's opinion is not valid" (that all opinions are invalid).

Your point about "everyone's opinion is valid" conflicting with "not everyone's opinion is valid" is still true. Perhaps what @Runic meant was "all opinions are worthy of a courteous evaluation and attempt to understand them"? (And if an opinion proves that the person is a complete dumbass..., have at 'em)

Our society is so PC and afraid of bruising someone else's ego that no one is willing to stand up and call a spade a spade. This allows all sorts of crackpots to flourish and confuse dimwitted people. Exhibit A: Faux Noise.

Quote from: MrPhil on April 05, 2013, 09:09:55 AMPerhaps what @Runic meant was "all opinions are worthy of a courteous evaluation and attempt to understand them"? (And if an opinion proves that the person is a complete dumbass..., have at 'em)

Actually ...

Everyone's opinion is valid. Not everyone's facts are though.

QuoteIn general, an opinion is a belief about matters commonly considered to be subjective, i.e., it is based on that which is less than absolutely certain, and is the result of emotion or interpretation of facts. An opinion may be supported by an argument, although people may draw opposing opinions from the same set of facts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion

Quote
o·pin·ion
[uh-pin-yuhn] Show IPA
noun
1.
a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2.
a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/opinion

All I have to do to have an valid opinion for you to consider, is to state that opinion as what I belive. If I do that - it's a valid opinion. It's valid because it's a subjective view of the world and I am not lying about it being my view. If I lyed about it being my opinion, then it would not be a valid opinion.

If John said it was his opinion that the Moon was made of green cheese - it's a perfectly valid opinion if he believed so and said it without lying. The fact is that the moon is not made of green cheese, but that refers to facts not opinions. Now, you are perfectly free to try to change John's opinion, but that still doesn't make the opinion invalid. Any opinion stated by a person, that is not lying that it is their true opinion, is a valid opinion.

If you can convince John that the Moon is made of rock, then his opinion might change. But even if you couldn't, it would still be a valid opinion, but one that contradicts the facts.

Isn't it interesting that all this deep stuff arises from a request for a spam board?

QuoteYour point about "everyone's opinion is valid" conflicting with "not everyone's opinion is valid" is still true. Perhaps what @Runic meant was "all opinions are worthy of a courteous evaluation and attempt to understand them"? (And if an opinion proves that the person is a complete dumbass..., have at 'em)

Runic voiced the part in quotes, Kindred the part in brackets. Funny man and straight man, the pair of them.

QuoteOur society is so PC and afraid of bruising someone else's ego that no one is willing to stand up and call a spade a spade.

Explain me then.

QuoteThis allows all sorts of crackpots to flourish and confuse dimwitted people.

Exhibit B: SEO

The resident crackpot says hello.

QuoteEveryone's opinion is valid. Not everyone's facts are though.

What about an opinion based on complete lies? Is that still valid even though the basis for it is a complete fabrication? They may believe it, but it doesn't make it so.

QuoteIsn't it interesting that all this deep stuff arises from a request for a spam board?

It is, but it's also sad that this is the umpteenth discussion on a board reorganisation and there's just talk, no do. Though this is possibly the first time something might actually happen.

QuoteEveryone's opinion is valid. Not everyone's facts are though.

Quote from: Arantor on April 05, 2013, 10:47:24 AM
What about an opinion based on complete lies? Is that still valid even though the basis for it is a complete fabrication? They may believe it, but it doesn't make it so.

Damn, I wish you were a member of my forum!

Well, were getting into the weeds for sure, but yes it's a valid opinion. We're getting into what is belief, what is knowledge, what is fact ...

I deal with opinions every day on my forum that are utter bull****** as far as relates to the facts as I see them. I don't want to get too much into religion here, but yea, the theists have valid opinions - if I had a rule that some opinions are invalid and can't be stated then we'd have a hard time having discussions. They are valid because they voice them as opinions and (as far as I can tell) they aren't lying. If they were lying about their opinion it would be an invalid opinion. But if they aren't lying - it's a valid opinion.

Now, if they start telling me as an atheist that a deity is, in fact, real, were getting into a whole other area. That would require empirical evidence (that's the method I use to obtain facts and knowledge).

Statement of Opinion: My opinion is that a god exists

^^^ This is a valid opinion

Statement of fact: I know a god exists

^^^ This is an invalid fact (as far as I'm concerned),

So we start off by hearing (valid) opinions but then progress and see if they are indeed factual.

QuoteIt is, but it's also sad that this is the umpteenth discussion on a board reorganisation and there's just talk, no do. Though this is possibly the first time something might actually happen.

Well the side discussion is fun anyway.

QuoteDamn, I wish you were a member of my forum!

No, you don't. I have been known to invite the door-knocking religious types, invite them in for a cup of tea then have a two hour argument with them about why their ideas of deities are wrong ;) And I don't back down, and they don't like it much.

QuoteStatement of Opinion: My opinion is that a god exists

^^^ This is a valid opinion

Statement of fact: I know a god exists

^^^ This is an invalid fact (as far as I'm concerned),

So we start off by hearing (valid) opinions but then progress and see if they are indeed factual.

Yup, this is why it's a problem.

I think we're holding different opinions on what "valid" means, when applied to an opinion. The confusion comes about by whether someone claims to be stating a solid fact, or just what they think is going on.

I personally take the stance that "valid" means "provably correct, or at least (for an opinion) reasonably plausible", not that it means "I hold it strongly and am entitled to it". As pointed out before, there are sorts of opinions out there not based on a shred of evidence, or that are not at least even plausible to a reasonable and rational person. Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but not all opinions are fact-based enough to satisfy my criteria for plausibility, so I consider most opinions to be invalid. Your opinion is that the Lizard People control our government through the Trilateral Commission; I call it invalid (and that you're nuts), but someone else will call it "valid" because they mean that you're entitled to hold that opinion, as crazy as (they agree) it is.

Quote

Quote
Our society is so PC and afraid of bruising someone else's ego that no one is willing to stand up and call a spade a spade.

Explain me then.

OK. The Donald stands before adoring crowds (of fellow crackpots) and screams, "The President is a Kenyan socialist!" Does the "lamestream" media stand up to him and ridicule him and shame him into shutting up? No, they just glance nervously at each other and whisper. Are they afraid he'll sue them for defamation? Has the "everyone gets a prize for participating" rule gotten so far out of hand that no one can be criticized? Imagine if Joseph Welch had not stood up to Senator Joe McCarthy with "Let us not assassinate this lad further, Senator. You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?" What if he had been afraid of offending the Wisconsin Nazi? There are lots of people out there who soundly deserve to have their butts mercilessly kicked.

Quote

Quote
This allows all sorts of crackpots to flourish and confuse dimwitted people.

Exhibit B: SEO

The resident crackpot says hello.

Hello, crackpot. Actually, I was thinking more along the lines of the birthers, truthers, conspiracy theorists, gun nuts, professional Christian hatemongers, and other members of the Tinfoil Hat Brigade. If you want to count yourself among them, be my guest.

You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to what you can argue for. (http://theconversation.com/no-youre-not-entitled-to-your-opinion-9978)

This article is good too. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/teacher-network/2012/jan/02/opinion-argument-free-speech)

;)

QuoteHello, crackpot. Actually, I was thinking more along the lines of the birthers, truthers, conspiracy theorists, gun nuts, professional Christian hatemongers, and other members of the Tinfoil Hat Brigade. If you want to count yourself among them, be my guest.

No, I'm not in any of those groups (except possible the fringes of the THB), more that most of what you're saying does conceivably apply to me in this forum...

Quote from: MrPhil on April 05, 2013, 01:13:39 PM
I personally take the stance that "valid" means "provably correct,

I think green houses are beautiful - that is my valid opinion.

Now prove that my opinion is incorrect.

Quote
or at least (for an opinion) reasonably plausible", not that it means "I hold it strongly and am entitled to it".

But what is reasonably plausible for an opinion Mr. Phil? Not a fact - an opinion? Based on what criteria? Remember, we're talking opinions - not facts right now. You are already equating opinions as things that are true or false based on facts. Opinions are not facts. My opinion is valid as an opinion simply because I say so (and I am not lying about it being my opinion).

Quote
As pointed out before, there are sorts of opinions out there not based on a shred of evidence, or that are not at least even plausible to a reasonable and rational person.

They are still valid opinions. Stop equating facts and opinions - that's why they are two different words.

Quote
Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but not all opinions are fact-based enough to satisfy my criteria for plausibility,

Right!

Quote
so I consider most opinions to be invalid.

Wrong!

Quote from: ChalkCat on April 05, 2013, 01:17:11 PM
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to what you can argue for. (http://theconversation.com/no-youre-not-entitled-to-your-opinion-9978)

This article is good too. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/teacher-network/2012/jan/02/opinion-argument-free-speech)

Theyz quiet gud 4 uz untrelcturial types, wotz gud @spullin....

Quote from: K@ on April 05, 2013, 01:45:14 PM

Theyz quiet gud 4 uz untrelcturial types, wotz gud @spullin....

Aw youz gud @ spullin, for an Essex boy  ;)  Wait, did you mean spelling or pulling?  :P ;D

dnt b usin ur txtspk k thx iz lazy n luks slly

I can do Double-Dutch, if you'd prefer.

I'm quite fluent, in that (Yes, it's a real language, for those who don't know).

Which variation of language game is it? Tutnese, Pig Latin, Ubbi Dubbi?

xrunner,

I think you have missed the point.

"I think greenhouses are beautiful"
This is not a valid nor an invalid opinion. This is a opinion of perception, it has no fact or non-fact associated with it, because "beautiful" has no objective definition.

"Lizard people rule the world from the shadows"
This is an INVALID opinion. Facts DISPROVE this statement.

"Babe Ruth was a great baseball player"
This is a valid opinion, while still being debateable. Babe Ruth has characteristics that can be termed as objectively "great" when it comes to his playing baseball. He has an awesome record and hit home runs regularly.

"Babe Ruth was a lucky baseball player
This is a valid opinion, while still being debateable. Babe Ruth has characteristics that can be termed as objectively "lucky" when it comes to his playing baseball. He hit home runs regularly while being out of shape.

"Babe Ruth was not such a great baseball player"
This is a valid opinion, while still being debateable. Babe Ruth has characteristics that can be termed as objectively "not-so-great" when it comes to his playing baseball. Especially at the end of his career, he was fat and slow and only made bases because he hit home runs.

Do you see the differences between the factual opinion and the opinion of perception?


So... no, not every opinion is valid. Opinions which contradict the facts are, in fact, invalid.

Quote from: Arantor on April 05, 2013, 01:57:44 PM
Which variation of language game is it? Tutnese, Pig Latin, Ubbi Dubbi?

Most consonants get doubled, whilst some get sustituted.

"B" is "Bub", "T" is "Tut", but "C" is "Cash" and "H" is "Hutch".

I'm fluent in gibberish, too.

Now THAT is a valid opinion. :P

Quote"I think greenhouses are beautiful"
This is not a valid nor an invalid opinion. This is a opinion of perception, it has no fact or non-fact associated with it, because "beautiful" has no objective definition.

An opinion of perception can still be a valid opinion! Just because 'beautiful' is primarily subjective doesn't change the fact that it can be a valid opinion.

QuoteDo you see the differences between the factual opinion and the opinion of perception?

Not all opinions have to be rooted in fact to be valid.


@ K@: *nods* I know the variation. Hell, I once wrote a thing that could translate websites into it.

but it is my opinion that they do, Arantor. :P

I've considered doing a language pack, for that.

Cockney, too. :)

Quote from: Kindred on April 05, 2013, 02:06:57 PM
but it is my opinion that they do, Arantor. :P

And it's my opinion that you're wrong. And I can argue why I believe you to be wrong. ;)

Quote from: K@ on April 05, 2013, 02:07:52 PM
I've considered doing a language pack, for that.

Cockney, too. :)

There's a lot to translate. It is a rather dull process.

I sort of gathered that, as I looked through them.

Still, if I get tediously bored, one year... ;)

Just think, it took me 3 days to convert English US to English UK >_<

That's cause you brits use way wierd spellings and phrasings...   we (muricuns) have the stranglehold on "proper english" these days!

QuoteThat's cause you brits use way wierd spellings and phrasings...   we (muricuns) have the stranglehold on "proper english" these days!

We were doing our 'weird spellings and phrasings' before you were even a country. :P

yeah, but get with the times, man....    we're the new empire! :P

Quote from: Kindred on April 05, 2013, 02:20:55 PM
we (muricuns) have the stranglehold on "proper english" these days!

Is that "proper" spelt w-r-o-n-g?  :P

Where's the Klingon language pack?  You can't hope to compete in the inter-planetary forum business without one of those!

And that is my perfectly valid opinion ;)

Qa'pla!

The problem I have with language packs these days is that I have to fart around making sure I have an appropriate icon for them >_<

Double-Dutch is far easier to understand than Yankglish. ;)

Heh.

You should stop by That Other Site sometime, they have English UK support... and through a quirk of fate, the UK icon comes before the US icon (and for once it wasn't even intentional)

A certain Mr. Bryson made me reconsider some Yanks terms, though, I have to confess.

Seems that a lot of the words that I'd considered bastardised, by the Yanks, have, in truth, been bastardised by the English. A lot of those words, when spelt the American way, are the original way.

Not, I hasten to add, their predilection with the letter "Z"...

You mean words that were tainted by the French and their predilection with the letter U all over the place? ;)

That, too.

I mean... Only the Yanks could cripple "Centre" and "Metre", like that...

Takes a special talent, that. ;)

Quote from: Kindred on April 05, 2013, 02:00:36 PM
xrunner,

I think you have missed the point.

Ah he returns to the fray!  ;D I thought you had software problems to attend to?

Quote
"I think greenhouses are beautiful"
This is not a valid nor an invalid opinion. This is a opinion of perception, it has no fact or non-fact associated with it, because "beautiful" has no objective definition.

I've already explained why it is, so doing it again is pointless.

Quote
"Lizard people rule the world from the shadows"
This is an INVALID opinion. Facts DISPROVE this statement.

Again - you are mixing facts with opinions. That is wrong. Do you understand the difference?

Quote
"Babe Ruth was a great baseball player"
This is a valid opinion, while still being debateable. Babe Ruth has characteristics that can be termed as objectively "great" when it comes to his playing baseball. He has an awesome record and hit home runs regularly.


"Babe Ruth was a lucky baseball player
This is a valid opinion, while still being debateable. Babe Ruth has characteristics that can be termed as objectively "lucky" when it comes to his playing baseball. He hit home runs regularly while being out of shape.

"Babe Ruth was not such a great baseball player"
This is a valid opinion, while still being debateable. Babe Ruth has characteristics that can be termed as objectively "not-so-great" when it comes to his playing baseball. Especially at the end of his career, he was fat and slow and only made bases because he hit home runs.

Do you see the differences between the factual opinion and the opinion of perception?

We're talking about valid opinions - not facts. You have the same problem as Mr. Phil - your desire is to mix the two words. Please stop this. I see I have much work to do here. No worries - I'll tough it out until you understand.

If I said "Kindred sucks at telling members when their suggestions are being rejected" That's a valid opinion right?

Quote
So... no, not every opinion is valid. Opinions which contradict the facts are, in fact, invalid.

Wrong. Every opinion is valid if it is stated as opinion and not fact. Why is this so hard for you to understand? Now I see why you can't understand that having a spam board is a good idea. You have too many per-conceived biases. We're going to have to work on those.

Oh by the way Runic contradicts you so since he's your boss you lose.  8)

QuoteWe're talking about valid opinions - not facts. You have the same problem as Mr. Phil - your desire is to mix the two words. Please stop this. I see I have much work to do here. No worries - I'll tough it out until you understand.

I find it amusing that I'm considered one of the most hardnosed people here and yet I can quite happily separate the two ^_^

QuoteIf I said "Kindred sucks at telling members when their suggestions are being rejected" That's a valid opinion right?

/me would say so.

QuoteYou have too many per-conceived biases. We're going to have to work on those.

Remember what I said about shouting up from inside a well? Good luck.

Depends how one defines "Valid", too.

Just thought I'd throw that into the mix.

Coz I can. :)

Oh dear, now we have conflicting opinions on what constitutes an opinion  :-X

I fear we may have hit another deadlock.

For what it's worth I state that an opinion cannot be valid if it is contradicted by fact.  Yes the two are very different, but it's important to recognise the effect they have on each other also.

QuoteOh dear, now we have conflicting opinions on what constitutes an opinion

I hit deadlocks in other things I do. My solution there cannot be applied here. My solution is simple, and brutal and involves killing processes.

QuoteFor what it's worth I state that an opinion cannot be valid if it is contradicted by fact.  Yes the two are very different, but it's important to recognise the effect they have on each other also.

But the logical inverse of that is that an opinion can be valid without having to be supported by fact. The only constraint is that it merely cannot be contradicted by it, so anything else becomes an option.

(http://www.katzy.dsl.pipex.com/Smileys/giveasht.jpg)

Quote from: Arantor on April 05, 2013, 02:51:19 PM
But the logical inverse of that is that an opinion can be valid without having to be supported by fact. The only constraint is that it merely cannot be contradicted by it, so anything else becomes an option.

Not at all.  An animal can't be a dog if it isn't a mammal, but that doesn't imply that all mammals are dogs ;)

QuoteNot at all.  An animal can't be a dog if it isn't a mammal, but that doesn't imply that all mammals are dogs

Never argue logical fallacies with programmers.

We then get into the debate about a "Fact".

Something that one man will claim as fact could be denied by another.

Proof, after all, is subjective.

Is that the five minutes or the full half hour?

Quote from: Arantor on April 05, 2013, 02:56:34 PM
Never argue logical fallacies with programmers.

I can argue all I like!  Of course, I won't necessarily win  ;D

Quote from: Arantor on April 05, 2013, 02:59:58 PM
Is that the five minutes or the full half hour?

Eloquently put, sirrah! (For those scratching their heads, do a Search for ""Monty python" argument")

(http://gamememorial.com/images/mpfc/mpfc_13_big.jpg)

They even did a computer game.

Quote from: Arantor on April 05, 2013, 02:21:56 PM

QuoteThat's cause you brits use way wierd spellings and phrasings...   we (muricuns) have the stranglehold on "proper english" these days!

We were doing our 'weird spellings and phrasings' before you were even a country. :P

Actually, American [English] has preserved some very old constructs that our cousins across the Pond dropped long ago.

• obsolete meanings such as "angry" for "mad"
• "en" form of past participles ("I had forgotten to mail the check"/"I had forgot to mail the cheque")
• past tense form of some verbs ("learned"/"learnt")
• retaining the definite article ("the injured were taken to the hospital"/"the injured were taken to hospital")
• ...and many more

I don't know when they diverged, and which was the original, but "collective nouns" are usually plural singular in American and singular plural in British ("IBM is going to announce..."/"IBM are going to announce...").

There is something to be said for Noah Webster's spelling rationalization (colour->color, theatre->theater, surprise->surprize, etc.). Interestingly, Firefox's built-in American English spell checker marks "color", "theater", and "surprise" as the correct spellings.

Correction: I did manage to swap "singular" and "plural". Sorry for any confusion this caused.

Quote from: Arantor on April 05, 2013, 03:09:23 PM
They even did a computer game.

I might have to try and find that...

Seeing the image URL, I might not need to look far. ;)

Quote from: MrPhil on April 05, 2013, 03:11:02 PM"IBM is going to announce..."/"IBM are going to announce..."

That'd be ambiguous, here. "IBM is a company" and "IBM are a company" would both be acceptable. Although a company is singular, it's collective members make it plural.

I doubt an English teacher would mark either as being wrong, nowadays.

Quote from: xrunner on April 05, 2013, 02:43:02 PM

Quote
So... no, not every opinion is valid. Opinions which contradict the facts are, in fact, invalid.

Wrong. Every opinion is valid if it is stated as opinion and not fact.

Aye, but there's the rub. Opinions are too often stated as facts (which [facts] can be proven/disproven), rather than with "I believe" or "I understand" or "I think". Evidence of sloppy thinking.

Quoteobsolete meanings such as "angry" for "mad"

Common in British English.

Quote"en" form of past participles ("I had forgotten to mail the check"/"I had forgot to mail the cheque")

'had forgot'... hmmm, most people I know around here would just come out with 'I forgot', but 'I had forgotten' is not uncommon here either.

Quotepast tense form of some verbs ("learned"/"learnt")

Both are valid here, pretty much interchangeably so. Most people quite happily interchange, too.

Quoteretaining the definite article ("the injured were taken to the hospital"/"the injured were taken to hospital")

Both are valid and common enough here. A lot of the issue for us is whether there is qualification needed for it. If there is only one local hospital, the locals tend to refer to 'the hospital' because it carries a certain implication, whereas if there are multiple hospitals or there is ambiguity in which hospital is being referred to, it will simply be 'to hospital'.

Quotebut "collective nouns" are usually plural in American and singular in British ("IBM is going to announce..."/"IBM are going to announce...").

We would usually refer to IBM in the collective sense here because a company is a collective of people. But also because we would refer to a company with third-person-plural pronouns, i.e. 'they' which naturally encourages 'are'.

In American English, 'color' and 'theater' are spelled in that fashion. But I've never encountered 'surprize' being the correct spelling in either variation.



@ K@

QuoteI might have to try and find that...

Gimme a shout if you're having trouble finding it.

Gotta get DOSBox sorted, first, I suspect...?

ummmm.... learnt is not a valid word in American English as far as I am concerned. I would mark my students down if they used that.

Either I am confused with reading your statement or you have them reversed, because in American English, most collective nouns are singular when there is a word which represents the group as a whole
The class IS...
IBM IS...
The company IS
Congress IS

However, when it is a generic plural collective
the police ARE
the people ARE

Quote from: K@ on April 05, 2013, 03:15:16 PM

Quote from: MrPhil on April 05, 2013, 03:11:02 PM"IBM is going to announce..."/"IBM are going to announce..."

That'd be ambiguous, here. "IBM is a company" and "IBM are a company" would both be acceptable. Although a company is singular, it's collective members make it plural.

I doubt an English teacher would mark either as being wrong, nowadays.

A British teacher would often mark the first one wrong (so I understand), and an American teacher would almost always mark the second one wrong. It's different standard usage in the two countries.

ah. yes.. provoing that I got confused by your phrasing.

IBM *IS* a company.

The company may be made up of employees, but the company it an entity on its own, with or without the employees.

Quote from: ChalkCat on April 05, 2013, 02:47:49 PM
Oh dear, now we have conflicting opinions on what constitutes an opinion  :-X

I fear we may have hit another deadlock.

For what it's worth I state that an opinion cannot be valid if it is contradicted by fact.  Yes the two are very different, but it's important to recognise the effect they have on each other also.

'cat - let me try to 'splain to you. See if this makes sense OK?

People are applying the term "valid" to "opinion" in an improper manner and that's where the problem is.

A "valid" opinion simply means this -

That it is in fact the opinion of a human being and it is not a lie that it is their opinion.

That's all it means.

The only thing that makes it an invalid opinion is if it was not really their opinion.

For example:

If I was to tell you I thought the Moon was made of green cheese, and I was not lying that it really is my opinion, then it's a valid opinion of me, a human being.

It doesn't have a flip to do with the truth of it all.

If I was to tell you I thought the Moon was made of green cheese, and I was lying that it really is my opinion (in other words I really thought it was made of rocks), then it's an invalid opinion of me, a human being. It's invalid because it's not really my opinion. NOT because it is or isn't factually true.

Does that make better sense?

We're still not past the point where people can untie the word valid from their other notions of what it means with regard to an opinion.

A valid fact is not the same entity as a valid opinion!

Some regard "Company", even in the commercial sense, as "A group of". That's why it's become ambiguous.

"Learnt" is the norm, here.

Quote from: Kindred on April 05, 2013, 03:21:36 PM
ummmm.... learnt is not a valid word in American English as far as I am concerned. I would mark my students down if they used that.

Either I am confused with reading your statement or you have them reversed, because in American English, most collective nouns are singular when there is a word which represents the group as a whole

I think you misread my post. I was comparing and contrasting American/British English practice. Americans would say "IBM is..." and the British would say "IBM are...". Sure, there are some collective nouns that Americans use the plural for ("the police are..."). "Learnt" is British usage.

Update: I see your post saying you were confused.

xrunner....

no, I was not confusing opinion with fact.
You are confused with my statements because you don't recognize that the only opinions I consider valid are ones that are based on fact.

In other words, it's not the word Opinion which is being miscontrued, it is the word VALID.   Valid = True/Backed by facts. Invalid = untrue/contradicted by facts.

Quote from: Kindred on April 05, 2013, 03:33:03 PM
xrunner....

no, I was not confusing opinion with fact.
You are confused with my statements because you don't recognize that the only opinions I consider valid are ones that are based on fact.

In other words, it's not the word Opinion which is being miscontrued, it is the word VALID.   Valid = True/Backed by facts. Invalid = untrue/contradicted by facts.

For pete's sake! You've been looking at too much php.

I just effing explained it and you still don't get it. A valid opinion has nothing to f*cking do with the truth or facts!

You are so bent on proving me wrong that you are taking leave of logic. If you can't understand what I wrote up above then take a break and think about it.

Stop mis-applying "valid" when used with opinion!

Good grief man.

I am not misapplying it. I explained my reasoning and logic.

My use of valid as "true/backed by facts" is independent of the word opinion.

xrunner - You and I clearly have different ideas about what constitutes a "valid opinion".  As per the articles I linked to earlier in the thread, which I hoped would explain my position better than I do, a "valid" opinion is one that can be justified, i.e. supported by evidence or at least argued for with sound logical reasoning.

A person has the right to hold whatever opinion they like, but that doesn't imply a right to be respected for that opinion.  If a person holds an opinion that cannot be justified or that is disprovable by fact, then they cannot complain if others mock them for it   O:)

Quote from: Kindred on April 05, 2013, 03:42:08 PM
I am not misapplying it. I explained my reasoning and logic.

My use of valid as "true/backed by facts" is independent of the word opinion.

Valid as applied to an opinion simply means it's not a lie - that it is truthfully the opinion of a person - a valid opinion.

That's all it means.

It has nothing to do with any facts.

You are wrong.

Quote from: ChalkCat on April 05, 2013, 03:42:40 PM
xrunner - You and I clearly have different ideas about what constitutes a "valid opinion".  As per the articles I linked to earlier in the thread, which I hoped would explain my position better than I do, a "valid" opinion is one that can be justified, i.e. supported by evidence or at least argued for with sound logical reasoning.

If a belief - an valid opinion - is THEN justified later - it becomes knowledge, truth, a fact.

Two different steps and things.

Quote
A person has the right to hold whatever opinion they like, but that doesn't imply a right to be respected for that opinion.  If a person holds an opinion that cannot be justified or that is disprovable by fact, then they cannot complain if others mock them for it   O:)

Again, you are really getting away from the core problem of what is a valid opinion. A valid opinion is a truthfully stated opinion of a person. Nothing more or less.

Quote from: xrunner on April 05, 2013, 03:27:14 PM
A "valid" opinion simply means this -

That it is in fact the opinion of a human being and it is not a lie that it is their opinion.

That's all it means.

The only thing that makes it an invalid opinion is if it was not really their opinion.

xrunner - may I have permission to use this quote on ChalkCat to see what they think?

Sorry,,, but YOU are wrong, (in my opinion and in the opinion of logical arguments everywhere)

While you are ENTITLED to your own opinion, that does not automatically make your opinion VALID.



Once again... you assume that valid = not a lie. that is the root of your confusion.
valid = "TRUE/backed by facts" (which is different from "not a lie")

by your definition, yes, everyone could have a valid opinion. However, your definition is incorrect
let's look it up
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/valid

Quote
1: having legal efficacy or force; especially: executed with the proper legal authority and formalities <a valid contract>
2 a: well-grounded or justifiable : being at once relevant and meaningful <a valid theory>
   b: logically correct <a valid argument> <valid inference>
3: appropriate to the end in view : effective <every craft has its own valid methods>
4 of a taxon: conforming to accepted principles of sound biological classification

this is much closer to what I have been defining it as than what you have...
especially number 2 b.
even number 3, which is the weakest statement is not the same as your "not a lie"

Quote from: ChalkCat on April 05, 2013, 03:47:40 PM

Quote from: xrunner on April 05, 2013, 03:27:14 PM
A "valid" opinion simply means this -

That it is in fact the opinion of a human being and it is not a lie that it is their opinion.

That's all it means.

The only thing that makes it an invalid opinion is if it was not really their opinion.

xrunner - may I have permission to use this quote on ChalkCat to see what they think?

Sure.  :)

But I'm getting kinda overloaded with all this, I can barely support myself without more help.

Also, keep in mind that even if all your members disagree with my assertion, that does not make it wrong. Keep in mind the logical fallacies - namely that the number of people who believe in x doesn't mean x is correct. My explanations are here for you to copy if you wish, and I'll log in if you want me to support them more.

Thanks for the interest in this topic.

Quote from: Kindred on April 05, 2013, 03:49:50 PM
Sorry,,, but YOU are wrong, (in my opinion and in the opinion of logical arguments everywhere)

While you are ENTITLED to your own opinion, that does not automatically make your opinion VALID.

You are misunderstanding what the word valid means with opinion. As I've explained over and over. If you can't learn this I suggest you go support the software elsewhere and stop hounding me with you wrong ideas.

while that may be a logical fallacy to assume that...       that does not mean that everything that many people believe falls into the fallacy.

I have given PROOF based on the definition of the word VALID (which is what I am focused on. You are still obsessing over the word opinion. :P)



Wait...   How did I misinterpret the dictionary definition of the word valid (quoted)

definition 2 a and b clearly support my argument and defend my interpretation of the word.

You have explained over and over, but your explanations are based on the incorrect definition of the word!


Even better... form further down the definition/dictionary page:

Quote
valid, sound, cogent, convincing, telling mean having such force as to compel serious attention and usually acceptance. valid implies being supported by objective truth or generally accepted authority...

See that last sentence?  SUPPORTED BY OBJECTIVE TRUTH....

anyone can have an opinion. That does not make their opinion valid.

Quote from: Kindred on April 05, 2013, 03:49:50 PM

by your definition, yes, everyone could have a valid opinion.

Right! Now you getting it!

Quote
However, your definition is incorrect
let's look it up

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/valid

1: having legal efficacy or force; especially: executed with the proper legal authority and formalities <a valid contract>
2 a: well-grounded or justifiable : being at once relevant and meaningful <a valid theory>
   b: logically correct <a valid argument> <valid inference>

this is much closer to what I have been defining it as than what you have...
especially number 2 b.
even number 3, which is the weakest statement is not the same as your "not a lie"

No dear, you are again misinterpreting things.

Yes 2b does apply. What does it mean with respect to "valid opinion"?

It means that it's logically correct that an opinion that is not a lie is a valid opinion. That's what the "logically correct" part of means, that's why it's a valid opinion!

It does not mean in this case that the opinion is based on an external fact.

******ing meow man!

Thank you :)  I know some of my members will disagree with you but I'm interested to see how they present their disagreement.  I'm also very curious to see whether any of them will agree with you.  Do please feel free to pop in  :)

Heh... innit funny how people use "Opinion", when they mean "Belief".

http://mnsho.com/tag/opinion <--- Worth reading, this rant.

dude...  I understood your side of the argument ages ago.   I dismissed it because it is incorrect.
I know you're never going to come around, but I'll try one more time.

*YOU* are the one whose interpretation is missing the point. VALID IMPLIES BEING BACKED BY OBJECTIVE TRUTH.

Logically correct != (in any way, shape or form) "not a lie"

K@...   yup, that actually backs my argument even further, if you focus on the opinion side of the phrase. :)

let's go so far as to look for the whiole phrase...
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_a_valid_opinion

Quote
An opinion is someone's thoughts and feelings on a subject. That opinion is said to be "valid" if there is good reasoning behind it, or if it's understandable that someone would feel that way.

People often say "that's a valid opinion, but ..." to show they don't agree but they don't mean any insult to the other person and they're not wanting to get into a heated argument.

Of course, whether someone's opinion is valid or not is also a matter of opinion.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20101009130358AAbNeFd

Quote
Difference between "valid opinion" and "invalid opinion"?

My teacher told me that a valid opinion requires critical thought and analysis. Those are the ones that people have the right to and that garner respect. Opinions based solely on emotion with no fact are invalid and people have no right to force others to respect them.

and another:
http://mrshatzi.com/files/valid-opinions.pdf
and one more...
http://classroom.jc-schools.net/waltkek/FourthGCompU3W2.ppt





in other words... although just because a lot of people believe something does not make it correct might be true...   when there is a prepoderance of evidence, it leads to the conclusion that those people might actually be correct.

Quote from: ChalkCat on April 05, 2013, 04:02:19 PM
Thank you :)  I know some of my members will disagree with you but I'm interested to see how they present their disagreement.  I'm also very curious to see whether any of them will agree with you.  Do please feel free to pop in  :)

I've gotta take a break for a while, I can't hunt and peck type much longer.

QuoteVALID IMPLIES BEING BACKED BY OBJECTIVE TRUTH.

Yes and the objective truth in this case is that the opinion is not a lie, that is the only objective truth regarding the opinion of a person. That's why it's valid opinion if not a lie.

Kindred, I am not playing games with this definition. It's simply that the semantics are such that I believe you are not used to having the words applied together. In this case valid simply means it's a truthfully stated opinion and not a lie. It does not mean it's going to be proven factually true later.

So I'll check back in a few hours.

Peace.

I'd substitute "Objective truth" with "Objective reasoning", Kindy.

Essentially the same, though.

The OED says the same.

Sorry, but you ARE playing games. with the semantics.
and I am completely used to parsing these two words together, as we have used this definition in many of the classes that I have taken and that I teach.

BTW: xrunner...  I am an English teacher.  I know the meaning of words. ;)

:P


Also, please note the additions to my previous post which were apparently added while you were repsonding.

BTW: This one is particularly good
http://robertwalkeronline.com/2012/04/16/are-all-opinions-equally-valid/

Does the SMF Forum Need A Board for Spam only Discussions/Help? (http://www.katzy.dsl.pipex.com/Smileys/cangel.gif)

nah... we generate enough spam in this thread alone. :P

I'm not sure that that's a valid opinion. ;)

A valid belief, sure. But... :P

Quote from: Kindred on April 05, 2013, 04:15:52 PM
Sorry, but you ARE playing games. with the semantics.
and I am completely used to parsing these two words together, as we have used this definition in many of the classes that I have taken and that I teach.

So what? I don't give a rat's ass if you have 22 PhD's in English. You are wrong this time. You are using an appeal to authority fallacy for yourself. That's what you've resorted to now.

Unfortunately it doesn't make you right.

An opinion is valid if it's truly the opinion the person, and invalid if it is a lie that it is a true opinion.

You are embarrassing yourself in front of the whole forum. And it's all because you didn't like how I responded to your condescending retort to me about the new spam board.

Shame on you for acting like a child.

An opinion is only valid if it's backed-up by reasoning, at least.

To make it valid, you have to say something like "This my opinion, because I believe that..."

If your opinion is not backed-up by reasoning and/or qualification(s), it's invalid. It's just an opinion.

THAT is a fact. :)

Quote from: K@ on April 05, 2013, 04:24:50 PM
An opinion is only valid if it's backed-up by reasoning, at least.

To make it valid, you have to say something like "This my opinion, because I believe that..."

If your opinion is not backed-up by reasoning and/or qualification(s), it's invalid. It's just an opinion.

THAT is a fact. :)

Agreed K@ :)

I really don't see how anyone could disagree, with that.

I bet someone does, though. ;)

It is my opinion that most of this thread is nonsense, with people displaying more pedantry than I normally stoop to, in order to try to get each other to figure out the difference between fact, opinion and so on.

It is also my opinion that there are people here who conflate opinion and fact and it is firmly my opinion that an opinion does not need objective fact to support it. It merely needs not to be blown apart by contradicting fact to continue to be a valid - if illogical, if irrational, if subjective, but still valid - opinion.

Quote from: Arantor on April 05, 2013, 04:36:44 PMpeople displaying more pedantry than I normally stoop to

That's saying something, too! (http://www.katzy.dsl.pipex.com/Smileys/giggle.gif)

My inability to type, much, has kinda cured me of that.



Mostly. ;)

I know, I was surprised. I leave you lot alone for an hour to go and deliver a dose of metal poisoning to some guards in Renaissance Italy and I come back to two whole pages of this.

(Oh, and K@... not DOSBox. That screenshot might have come from WinUAE. The Amiga version was somewhat superior to the PC version.)

I have WinUAE. :)

I might have some stuff of use to your site, too.

I'll generate a list and let you have it, if your PM box is open, by the time I finish it.

Mostly adf files, though a few in just plain directories or lzx/lha files. One or two annoying WHDLoad ones, too. I wish I could find a way of registering that damned thing...

Ha! Just found it! :)

http://www.whdload.de/reg.html

Doh!

lol... BTW: xrunner, appeal to authority as a fallacy is only a fallacy if the authority is invalid for the appeal.
As an English teacher (albeit American English) I actually do have logical and valid authority on the subject of words and meanings.

My OPINION is that You must be a college student who just finished philosophy 101. :) 
that opinion may be valid or invalid based on whether you are such or not...

Quote from: Kindred on April 05, 2013, 05:07:51 PM
lol... BTW: xrunner, appeal to authority as a fallacy is only a fallacy if the authority is invalid for the appeal.
As an English teacher (albeit American English) I actually do have logical and valid authority on the subject of words and meanings.

Then why can't you understand that all opinions are valid? You constantly demonstrate your misunderstandings of it. Something is amiss with you.

Quote
My OPINION is that You must be a college student who just finished philosophy 101. :) 
that opinion may be valid or invalid based on whether you are such or not...

And my opinion of you is that you are an overbearing, burned-out, condescending, staff member that writes off serious suggestions with LOLs and smily faces.

You don't intimidate me in the least with all that you show and tell.

Now what?

I am not trying to intimidate anyone...

I understand your argument and I am not misunderstanding anything. I hold to the assertion that you are just plain wrong based on my knowledge, my research and plain old logic.

Quote from: Kindred on April 05, 2013, 05:23:57 PM
I am not trying to intimidate anyone...

I understand your argument and I am not misunderstanding anything. I hold to the assertion that you are just plain wrong based on my knowledge, my research and plain old logic.

I disagree with your "logic" and I say you are wrong. Now what?

now we look at the facts (which I have alreayd presented to defend my argument.   So far your onl argument was "this is the way it is" You have presented no facts or support other than your "opinion" :)

So... we're at an impasse because you refuse to listen to valid arguments and I refuse to change my mind based on a single person stomping his feet and repeating "I'm right" with no backing evidence. If you had a SHRED of factual backing apart from your own belief, then you'd have a leg to stand on, as it stands, you don't (so far).

So... in other words, you can continue believing your mistaken belief and everyone else can move on with the facts as presented.

Quote from: Kindred on April 05, 2013, 05:29:48 PM
now we look at the facts (which I have alreayd presented to defend my argument.   So far your onl argument was "this is the way it is" You have presented no facts or support other than your "opinion" :)

Baloney.

Quote
So... we're at an impasse because you refuse to listen to valid arguments and I refuse to change my mind based on a single person stomping his feet and repeating "I'm right" with no backing evidence. If you had a SHRED of factual backing apart from your own belief, then you'd have a leg to stand on, as it stands, you don't (so far).

Again ridiculous. I've explained over and over to you, you are simply incapable of understanding it.

Quote
So... in other words, you can continue believing your mistaken belief and everyone else can move on with the facts as presented.

Back to ya, you've said nothing at all to make me believe you are doing anything more than acting belligerent in the face of facts. Shame on you. What a poor example to set for the community.

ummm...   xrunner - what thread have you been reading?

I presented dictionary definition, philosophical discussion and several other links which proved my definition and reasoning.

Your SOLE argument has been "you are misunderstanding." "You are wrong"  and "you refuse to listen to facts"
Give me some ACTUAL facts, in other words, statements from outside your own brain, which support your position and I'll consider it.

Quote from: Kindred on April 05, 2013, 05:36:05 PM
ummm...   xrunner - what thread have you been reading?

I presented dictionary definition, philosophical discussion and several other links which proved my definition and reasoning.

Your SOLE argument has been "you are misunderstanding." "You are wrong"  and "you refuse to listen to facts"
Give me some ACTUAL facts, in other words, statements from outside your own brain, which support your position and I'll consider it.

I already have. I'm getting ready to report you for trolling me, if this silliness that you say I haven't provided explanations keeps up.

QuoteI already have. I'm getting ready to report you for trolling me, if this silliness that you say I haven't provided explanations keeps up.

He's a moderator ;)

Quote from: Arantor on April 05, 2013, 05:59:17 PM

QuoteI already have. I'm getting ready to report you for trolling me, if this silliness that you say I haven't provided explanations keeps up.

He's a moderator ;)

Well he's setting an even worse example then isn't he?

Here Kindred, I'll attempt one more time. Why I don't know ...

An opinion is a state of mind in a human. We all agree with that. It's an entity, if you will, that exists in a human mind. That's why we made a word for it. I have an opinion ...

Let's call that state in the mind, an opinion, the state called {op}.

In order to be valid, the state {op} has to conform to the standard of being, in fact, an opinion of a human being.

If it does that, the state {op} is valid - it's an opinion that's valid as it follows the rules of being a real human opinion - a valid opinion.

If the state {op} is flawed - not in fact an opinion in the mind, then it's invalid as a state {op}. It's some other state.

For example, it might be a lie that something you say is your opinion, or you might not even have an opinion, but yet say to another person that you do have an opinion. Therfore, the state {op} does not meet the criteria for being an opinion. It's an invalid opinion.

All an opinion has to do to be a valid opinion is meet the criteria for an opinion. It neither has to be true or factual as relates to any outside empirical evidence. If it's in your mind, and you are not lying about it being a real opinion - it's a valid opinion - as an opinion and nothing more. <-- That's important.

Definition of state {op}

1. Held by a human being
2. Not a lie
3. Stated to a second party as a truthfully held opinion

If all those are satisfied - the condition {op} is valid - it's a valid opinion.

You are Hell-bent on trying to force definitions on the term "valid opinion" that don't have a ******-god-damn-bit to do with it. I have no idea why you are doing this, other than your idea of retribution against me for calling you out as a condescending staff member. In other words my valid opinion is that you are smart enough to "get it" but act like you don't want to, for the sake of not having to agree with me.

But you are wrong about what a valid opinion is.

Oh yea I forgot, you need to take it up with Runic too, as he agress that everyone's opinion is valid.

There is no retribution involved.

I feel that it is my duty, as a teacher, to correct misapprehensions of language.

Your presentation is very pretty and nicely laid out.
It is, however, flawed at the very base of your argument
I have already proven (by the very definition of the word, in the dictionary) that the term "Valid" implies that there is some objective truth to the matter.

You have presented {op} as a subjective truth which != objective truth
objective truth requires some outside corroboration. Hence my continuing argument that a valid opinion requires some outside facts to back it up.

Now... I am willing to concede Arantor's point of order - that an opinion could be considered valid barring the absence of any DISproof contradicting the opinion statement.

Finally, as nicely presented as your argument is, it is still from your head.
Find me some outside, corroborating evidence to support your statement and I will conede that you MAY have a point, barring that, I stick to my assertion, as stated, that you are incorrect.

QuoteYou have presented {op} as a subjective truth which != objective truth

What is subjective to one is objective to another. Which means you're now needing to define 'truth'. Have fun with that. What is truth to me is not truth to you.

Quote from: Kindred on April 05, 2013, 06:18:35 PM

You have presented {op} as a subjective truth which != objective truth
objective truth requires some outside corroboration.

Then there is no such thing as an opinion, because you cannot prove anyone has any opinions at all.

Do you see where your argument is headed?

ummm.... no. Now you've gone beyond what I said, thus arguing the absurd.

I agree that people have opinions.

Your contention is that any person's opinion is valid, by your definition of the word "valid" meaning "not a lie" and the assumption that, unless they were purposefully telling a lie, the person's statement of opinion is true in their eyes.

I contend that opinions held by a person may be valid or invalid because the term "valid" relates to objective truth (i.e. the presence of facts supporting (or at the very least, lacks of facts contradicting) that person's opinion)

Except that's not what you were contending at all. You were actually asserting that most 'opinions' are not valid because of an absence of supporting objective truth. Except that there's virtually no such thing as objective truth outside of mathematics (which is the nearest thing you can get to completely objective truth when you think about it), so by extension virtually no opinion is actually valid.

Simple example: I believe the colour of the sky, on a clear day, during the daytime is blue. Is that an opinion? Is it a valid opinion?

Quote from: Kindred on April 05, 2013, 06:36:43 PM
ummm.... no. Now you've gone beyond what I said, thus arguing the absurd.

I agree that people have opinions.

Great, because otherwise it would have really gone awry.

Quote
Your contention is that any person's opinion is valid, by your definition of the word "valid" meaning "not a lie" and the assumption that, unless they were purposefully telling a lie, the person's statement of opinion is true in their eyes.

Yea pretty much. The valid refers to not the truth of the contents of the opinion, but the fact it's an actual true opinion in a mind.

Quote
I contend that opinions held by a person may be valid or invalid because the term "valid" relates to objective truth (i.e. the presence of facts supporting (or at the very least, lacks of facts contradicting) that person's opinion)

I wouldn't say it that way, that's where the problem lies.

I would term it more like this -

All opinions are valid opinions (if not lies etc. like I've said), however the truth of the contents of the opinions, i.e. what's in the "container", may or may not be objectively true and factual.

In other words a valid opinion may turn out to have a truth or untruth when examined.

so, now we reach the heart of the matter and the misunderstanding.

I contend that the subjective sense of the opinion (it's true because I believe it is so) does not matter for validity.
I contend that the objective sense of the opinion (it's true because there is evidence supporting it) is what matters for validity
BTW: That is the contention that all of the other definitions of "valid opinion" that I could find support as well

you contend the opposite


So... it comes down to that... and I don't think either of us is going to budge at this point. :P

So, answer my question:

QuoteSimple example: I believe the colour of the sky, on a clear day, during the daytime is blue. Is that an opinion? Is it a valid opinion?

Quote from: Kindred on April 05, 2013, 06:54:15 PM
I contend that the subjective sense of the opinion (it's true because I believe it is so) does not matter for validity.

Did you mean me above where it says "I"?

Quote
I contend that the objective sense of the opinion (it's true because there is evidence supporting it) is what matters for validity
BTW: That is the contention that all of the other definitions of "valid opinion" that I could find support as well

you contend the opposite

Quote
So... it comes down to that... and I don't think either of us is going to budge at this point. :P

We're not done yet.

Here's a definition of valid opinion that basically fits my arguments -

QuoteWhat is a valid opinion?
Answer:
An opinion is someone's thoughts and feelings on a subject. That opinion is said to be "valid" if there is good reasoning behind it, or if it's understandable that someone would feel that way.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_a_valid_opinion

Basically that's what I've been saying. If it's understandable that someone would feel that way, it's a valid opinion but that's all. Not whether you or I would feel a certain way, or agree with it, but whether someone else would feel that way. Basically if they aren't lying, and lay out a case for their opinion,  for their feelings, then it's a valid opinion. It's not for us to say the opinion is invalid, but sure, we can examine the claims of the opinion no-holds-barred.

In other words I understand how theists feel the way they do, they have valid opinions, but I don't agree with them.

The container is valid, but the contents aren't.

no. I meant for both starting statements to be "I"

you say that the container is all the matters. I say that the contents are what matters.

Quote from: Kindred on April 05, 2013, 07:19:37 PM
you say that the container is all the matters. I say that the contents are what matters.

In one sentence, yep.

Trust me, you and I are surely in total agreement as to what constitutes facts, critical thinking, rational thinking, etc.

And surely, I think many people's opinions hold the most ridiculous assertions you can imagine - I seen them all for 6 years.

But ... what's in the container is not the container.

A beautiful vase can hold a gallon of sewage. that doesn't reflect on the vase does it?

And we should not taint the definition of valid opinion with what it contains, which could easily be complete idiocy.

(http://www.smileyvault.com/albums/userpics/10172/deadhorsebeat_2.gif)

Quote from: IchBin™ on April 07, 2013, 07:09:39 PM
(http://www.smileyvault.com/albums/userpics/10172/deadhorsebeat_2.gif)

is that a valid opinion?

I am into science, and have had all sorts of opinions presented to me, but the ones that have more credibility it seems (looking at many discussions, research papers etc) are the opinions with some evidence/back up.... maybe the terms 'credible opionion' and 'valid opinion' are getting muddled up?

Flame away!

 :)

Quote from: petabyte on April 10, 2013, 04:26:48 PM
I am into science, and have had all sorts of opinions presented to me, but the ones that have more credibility it seems (looking at many discussions, research papers etc) are the opinions with some evidence/back up.... maybe the terms 'credible opionion' and 'valid opinion' are getting muddled up?

I'm into science also.

What you are talking about   "the ones that have more credibility it seems (looking at many discussions, research papers etc) are the opinions with some evidence/back up"  is more the hypothesis - theory route of progression, not an opinion.

Quote
A hypothesis (plural hypotheses) is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon. For a hypothesis to be a scientific hypothesis, the scientific method requires that one can test it. Scientists generally base scientific hypotheses on previous observations that cannot satisfactorily be explained with the available scientific theories.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothesis

Quotea : a view, judgment, or appraisal formed in the mind about a particular matter

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/opinion

Any idiot can have an opinion, and it's valid as such an entity as long as it's consistent with the definition.

Me stating an opinion is a far lower rung on the ladder than a hypothesis, for it does not mean I have any evidence or propose evidence to back it up. People have the most ridiculous opinions you can imagine, but there is no requirement to have scientific evidence for it to state it. I'm merely saying the opinions of people are all valid because they are not misusing the word as applied to the state of mind we call "opinion".

That's all there is to it.

QuoteThat's all there is to it.

Unless you're certain people on this site in which case an opinion has to be backed up by objective proof. ;D

Quote from: Arantor on April 10, 2013, 05:18:04 PM

QuoteThat's all there is to it.

Unless you're certain people on this site in which case an opinion has to be backed up by objective proof. ;D

Here we go again!

(http://www.atheistthinktank.net/HAL/threadbombs/deliverance1.jpg)

Here I Go Again? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyF8RHM1OCg) (EMI Music may block this video for you if you're not in one of the approved countries, or something.)

Quote from: Arantor on April 10, 2013, 05:27:07 PM
Here I Go Again? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyF8RHM1OCg) (EMI Music may block this video for you if you're not in one of the approved countries, or something.)

Bingo!

The uploader has not made this video available in your country.

Normally it's the other way around, but for once EMI is being nice and letting me in the UK watch it. (Here I Go Again - Whitesnake)

anyway... I still maintain my position on the meaning of the word valid and I dispute xrunner's position. :P

I have seen no evidence to convince me to change my mind. :D

And no, petabyte, I am not confusing the word credible with the word valid.

Confusing? No. Conflating? Maybe :P

So, anyway. We agree that we have different ideas as to what makes a valid opinion.

It is still my opinion, and IT IS DAMN WELL VALID, that a board for spam discussion would actually be useful.

Quote from: Kindred on April 10, 2013, 05:50:12 PM
anyway... I still maintain my position on the meaning of the word valid and I dispute xrunner's position. :P

(http://www.atheistthinktank.net/HAL/threadbombs/fight1.jpg)

Quote from: Kindred on April 10, 2013, 05:50:12 PM
And no, petabyte, I am not confusing the word credible with the word valid.

I did not think so, to be honest :)

Quote from: Arantor on April 10, 2013, 05:52:40 PM
So, anyway. We agree that we have different ideas as to what makes a valid opinion.

I think we can agree with this.

I am of the opinion (there, I said it), that yes, every man and their pekinese poodle can have an opinion (more strength to them), and it can be as bizarre and out there as hell, but for an opinion to be valid - I don't think is a clear-cut answer, nd I think som are just going to have to agree to disagree.

ETA: How in the heck did a discussion of a spam sub-board turn into this debate (don't get me wrong, it is a good debate).

"Thread-drift" is only one of the amazing services offered by Simple Machines Forum NPO. :)

Of which Arantor, ZCE, SMF Master (tm) (R) (pat. pending) is a grand expert :P

And when all the dust has settled, we can discuss what the precise meaning of is is...

So, to summarize, which opinion is more valid, that there needs to be a board for spam discussions, or that there doesn't need to be one?  ???

and with some more breeze, the thread drifts further...



That's it!   We need to have a "Certified SMF Professional" program.
We can require 3,000 hours of SMF coding, 30,000 support posts and $3,000 for "training classes"
and then the "Certifiable SMF Master" is the next level after that.

(and yes, that first word was chosen intentionally)

Quote from: Vector's Shadow on April 11, 2013, 09:45:22 AM
So, to summarize, which opinion is more valid, that there needs to be a board for spam discussions, or that there doesn't need to be one?  ???

I have no idea. Despite trying to re-rail the topic some posts back, even.

Quote from: Kindred on April 11, 2013, 09:46:04 AM
and with some more breeze, the thread drifts further...



That's it!   We need to have a "Certified SMF Professional" program.
We can require 3,000 hours of SMF coding, 30,000 support posts and $3,000 for "training classes"
and then the "Certifiable SMF Master" is the next level after that.

(and yes, that first word was chosen intentionally)

Where do I sign up? I mean, I definitely have the first two. TAKE MY DARN MONEY ALREADY.

Hmm, I don't know if I can come up with 30,000 support questions...

hmmm.... just another thought though - We'd have to add a test for a certification

but wait...   Arantor is probably the person who would be most qualified to write the test....
How do you take a test that you wrote? hrmmmmm....    :o

Quote from: Vector's Shadow on April 11, 2013, 09:52:14 AM
Hmm, I don't know if I can come up with 30,000 support questions...

They wouldn't count towards the 30,000 support posts.

Quotebut wait...   Arantor is probably the person who would be most qualified to write the test....
How do you take a test that you wrote? hrmmmmm....

Extremely successfully ;D

Quote from: Arantor on April 11, 2013, 09:57:08 AM
They wouldn't count towards the 30,000 support posts.

Oh, I see. Would derailing 30,000 support posts count?

Quote from: Arantor on April 11, 2013, 09:57:08 AM
Extremely successfully ;D

Not if he's not allowed to cheat by asking himself the answers!

QuoteOh, I see. Would derailing 30,000 support posts count?

Apparently so ;D

QuoteNot if he's not allowed to cheat by asking himself the answers!

But that would imply that I simultaneously know and can't know the answers. Schrödinger's Answers!


So, can we haz spam board plz?

Vector's Shadow's principle: Every discussion on SMF boards, if allowed to proceed long enough, will end up mentioning, directly or indirectly, cats.

Quote from: Vector's Shadow on April 11, 2013, 10:06:51 AM
Vector's Shadow's principle: Every discussion on SMF boards, if allowed to proceed long enough, will end up mentioning, directly or indirectly, cats.

Arantor's Corollary: It is only matter of time before either Vector's Shadow's principle, or Godwin's Law comes into effect on any given forum.

there's one! there's one!!

Quote from: marwa89 on April 11, 2013, 05:39:01 PM
hello
very big thanks

Hello! You're a spammer right? Wouldn't you visit the new board if it was available? I hope so because I have a few questions to ask you.

By the way please visit Spamhaven and invite all your spammer friends!

Spamhaven (http://www.atheistthinktank.net/spamhaven/index.php)

/me wonders if you've had a traffic uptake lately?

Quote from: Arantor on April 11, 2013, 05:47:13 PM
/me wonders if you've had a traffic uptake lately?

No sir. I need spammers there. If anyone knows any spammers please send them to Spamhaven!

I put a link in my sig, naughty bots should be picking it up ;)

Quote from: Arantor on April 11, 2013, 05:48:57 PM
I put a link in my sig, naughty bots should be picking it up ;)

Thanks.

I just PMed Marwa89 and sent the Spamhaven link!  8)

(http://sangham.net/Smileys/forgiveme_sangham.gif) spam only board hmm...

Quote from: Johann B on April 15, 2013, 01:45:07 AM
(http://sangham.net/Smileys/forgiveme_sangham.gif) spam only board hmm...

No deep mysterious thoughts this time?

Actually, Johann has demonstrated a *remarkable* talent for succinct and focused topics when it's requesting help. It's almost like a different person.

Where ever you like to have me or don't like to have me, I'll be there. (http://sangham.net/Smileys/smile_sangham.gif) Somehow like a mirroracle but also a kind of work with wild chicken.

Oops, I spoke too soon. Just when I thought we got past all the nonsense and convolution, it strikes again.

Quote from: Johann B on April 16, 2013, 02:25:16 AM
Where ever you like to have me or don't like to have me, I'll be there. (http://sangham.net/Smileys/smile_sangham.gif) Somehow like a mirroracle but also a kind of work with wild chicken.

Read -

"If people hate you, that's when you're let off the hook. You can come and go as you like without having to worry about whether or not they'll miss you or get upset at your going. And you don't have to bring any presents for them when you come back. You're free to do as you like." - Ajahn Funag "

I don't hate you Johann B, so I'm not letting you off the hook. Ever. Plus, I want presents.

Oh freddled gruntbuggly,
Thy micturations are to me,
As plurdled gabbleblotchits on a lurgid bee.
Groop I implore thee, my foonting turlingdromes,
And hooptiously drangle me with crinkly bindlewurdles,
Or, I will rend thee in the gobberwarts with my blurglecruncheon,
See if I don't!

QuoteVogon poetry is of course, the third worst in the universe. The second worst is that of the Azgoths of Kria. During a recitation by their poet master Grunthos the Flatulent of his poem "Ode To A Small Lump Of Green Putty I Found In My Armpit One Midsummer Morning " four of his audience died of internal hemorrhaging and the president of the Mid-Galactic Arts Nobbling Council survived only by gnawing one of his own legs off. Grunthos was reported to have been "disappointed" by the poem's reception, and was about to embark on a reading of his 12-book epic entitled "My Favourite Bathtime Gurgles" when his own major intestine--in a desperate attempt to save life itself--leapt straight up through his neck and throttled his brain. The very worst poetry of all perished along with its creator, Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings of Sussex, in the destruction of the planet Earth. Vogon poetry is mild by comparison.

wait... Isn't that K@'s sister? Must run in the family... :P

The thing is, we are trying to DECREASE the number of boards, (and we're actually moving forward on that, shortly)
People have a hard enough time postig in the correct board to start with and we've discussed consolodating some of the boards because of that. Do we really need to add yet another spot for people to mis-post or for us to have to move things into?

Quote from: Kindred on April 16, 2013, 09:32:13 AMDo we really need to add yet another spot for people to mis-post or for us to have to move things into?

Is that a rhetorical question or are you sincerely interested in the answer to it? I just want to make sure I don't waste my time with more explanations if you have already made up your mind.

Thanks.

it was more or less rhetorical. :P

I have seen the arguments for it...   I have presented arguments against it.

Unless someone has something new....... (?)

In the end, I'm not in charge (anymore) so I can make recommendations, but it's someoene else who makes the final decision. :)

Quote from: Arantor on April 16, 2013, 08:35:45 AM
Oops, I spoke too soon. Just when I thought we got past all the nonsense and convolution, it strikes again.

Crowd out is not forgive. (http://sangham.net/Smileys/smile_sangham.gif) It will always come back.

Quote from: xrunner on April 16, 2013, 08:38:16 AM

Quote from: Johann B on April 16, 2013, 02:25:16 AM
Where ever you like to have me or don't like to have me, I'll be there. (http://sangham.net/Smileys/smile_sangham.gif) Somehow like a mirroracle but also a kind of work with wild chicken.

Read -

"If people hate you, that's when you're let off the hook. You can come and go as you like without having to worry about whether or not they'll miss you or get upset at your going. And you don't have to bring any presents for them when you come back. You're free to do as you like." - Ajahn Funag "

I don't hate you Johann B, so I'm not letting you off the hook. Ever. Plus, I want presents.

You are so in love that you even what a spam only forum. Here we are. (http://sangham.net/Smileys/smile_sangham.gif) Very needed.

Quote from: Kindred on April 16, 2013, 09:32:13 AM
wait... Isn't that K@'s sister? Must run in the family... :P

Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings? Yep! Another bloody English poet...

Quote
The thing is, we are trying to DECREASE the number of boards, (and we're actually moving forward on that, shortly)
People have a hard enough time postig in the correct board to start with and we've discussed consolodating some of the boards because of that. Do we really need to add yet another spot for people to mis-post or for us to have to move things into?

OK, granted that most people are stupid and can't find the right board to post into with both their hands. However, I note that both the 1.x and 2.x support boards are clogged to overflowing with requests for help with fighting spam. This makes it harder for people looking for other topics to find information or help, amongst all the noise about spam. Since spam-related posts are such a huge part of the support boards, I think it would be to SMF's advantage to separate them out into their own board (or child board for each of 1.x and 2.x). Having all spam-related stuff in one place would increase the chance of people finding their answer without having to post Yet Another spam-fighting question, and would leave the real support boards less cluttered. So, that's my vote. I appreciate that you're trying to consolidate boards and reduce the board count, but I think this is a case where More is Better.

And let's not forget that the reason most people are posting into the wrong board is that the boards are in the wrong order. As I've said many times before, you must arrange the categories and boards to put the boards most likely to be the right place to post up at the top. Otherwise morons noobs are posting support issues in Site Feedback. You can put "read only" boards (restricted permissions) before 1.x Support and 2.x Support, as the general population can't post into them, but 1.x Support and 2.x Support should be the very first boards listed that anyone can post into. Can I make this issue any simpler, or is a PhD thesis needed?

I'd actually contend that putting the support boards first is illogical.

When I look at any forum, I expect to find announcement boards, and other administrative type boards first, followed by the main content in the next category.  Where I do agree is that SMF support could be placed higher up the list of categories,  It could easily come before development, for example.

That's EXACTLY what I said to do. You can put "Read Only" (to the general population) boards up at the very top, because there's no danger of the ignorant masses posting into them. The first boards that the general population are allowed to post into must come before more specialized boards such as SMF Feedback.

Why do we even need an SMF Feedback board?

Quote from: MrPhil on April 16, 2013, 11:20:59 AM
That's EXACTLY what I said to do. You can put "Read Only" (to the general population) boards up at the very top, because there's no danger of the ignorant masses posting into them. The first boards that the general population are allowed to post into must come before more specialized boards such as SMF Feedback.

If the whole point is to allow comments, and feedback though, making them read only is counter productive.  The only way that would work, would be to split site comments and feedback into a different category, and just have announcements (team members would the only ones with posting privileges I take it?) as the first category.

Quote from: Arantor on April 16, 2013, 11:22:31 AM
Why do we even need an SMF Feedback board?

To receive positive comments, and constructive criticism, about SMF?  (That's not a rhetorical question by the way).

I presume it's intended for general comments and suggestions related to improving SMF (not specific features, and certainly not user problems). It's fine (as is Site Comments) if they are relocated way down the page, near the bottom.

Oka-a-a-a-ay. Here's the PhD thesis. I was hoping I wouldn't have to do this, but since no one is "getting" it...

SMF News (restricted posting)
  NPO News and Updates
  News and Updates
SMF Support
  SMF 1.x Support (including a spam child board)
  SMF 2.x Support (including a spam child board)
  Server Performance and Configuration
  Language-Specific Support
Getting Started with SMF
  SMF Online Manual
  Install and Upgrade Help
  Converting TO SMF
General Community
  Chit Chat
  Building Your Community and Other Forum Advice
  Hosts, Hosting, and Commercial Services
  Showcase
  Help Wanted (Not for Support)
  Test Board
SMF Documentation
  SMF Documentation Help
SMF Development
  Development (private area)
  Localization and Translation
  Feature Requests
  Bug Reports
  Big Forum Discussion
Customizing SMF
  SMF Coding Discussion
  Forks Discussion
  Portals, Bridges, and Integrations
  Modifications and Packages
     child board Mod Development (moved from Community Helpers)
  Graphics and Templates
  Tips and Tricks
  Scripting Help (not SMF related)
SMF Friends
  SMF Friends
  Questionable Content
Charter Members Only
  Charter Member News
  General Chat
  1.x Support Concerns
  2.x Support Concerns
  Coding and Mods
SMF General Discussion
  Site Comments
  SMF Feedback and Discussion
Simple Machines Blogs
  SMF Team Blog
  Developers' Blog
Archived Boards and Threads...
  Archived Boards

That's a start, anyway. There might be some further consolidation or movement between categories, but the end result should look something like that.

Mr Phil.


Not necessary.   I have already done a breakdown and a re-order suggestion and the team is currently discussing the few questions I had on the purpose of some of the boards.

/me bangs the drum about transparency again.

You know, you could actually put out what the suggestion was and what the arguments for/against are. More voices are better than one lone voice, especially if they're all in agreement.

You make the powers that be sound like governmental types: all talk, no do.

transparency, shmaparency...

We've gone over the agruments for and against the spam specific board right here in this thread... how much more transparent do you want it?

As for discussion on the order of the boards, I don't see how making that discussion public would help a damned thing. As a matter of fact, I can see that making that discussion public would basically make it useless to actually accomplish anything.

I said it's in discussion. I even noted the state of the discussion....
Like most things... it will happen when it happens.

I see this Spam board having two problems.

If we have it, it'll soon get tedious, because it'll be "Same old-Same old" very quickly. If people used their intelligence, they'd think "I have problems with Spam. I'll read that!", which would be a positive for us having it. But, as we all know, "Common sense" is an oxymoron.

For the same reason, it'll also get ignored, coz people will still post in the support boards, anyway.

As I said, originally, I believe that it might be worth trying. Problem, there, is that if we decide it's not working, we'd have to move all the damned posts, elsewhere, when we dump it.

As I'm somebody who believes a person should put their money where their mouth is, I'd volunteer to move any new posts to the Spam Advisory board (if given the ability to do so) from this point forward, and also to move older spam related posts to the new board as I can on my own time.

If the board doesn't work out, all I have to do is move all the posts to the 2.x support board. Even if the person had a 1.x forum it would be OK because spam isn't an issue specific to 1.x or 2.x. If they use search to find solutions, the answers will pop up no matter where the posts are located. But how many people use search here to find answers anyway?

So, in effect you have nothing to lose because I'll do all the work, the posts won't get lost, and nobody else will lose any support time.

Win-win all the way.

QuoteWe've gone over the agruments for and against the spam specific board right here in this thread... how much more transparent do you want it?

So you're telling me that your entire proposal was for the new board and even that's being debated... why?

QuoteAs for discussion on the order of the boards, I don't see how making that discussion public would help a damned thing. As a matter of fact, I can see that making that discussion public would basically make it useless to actually accomplish anything.

I guess the word accountability is not in the team lexicon.

QuoteLike most things... it will happen when it happens.

And this is why this project is ultimately doomed.

This is something which requires 5 minutes of time investment to implement, nothing more. 10, if you're going to grant more people the ability to move things in/out of said board. Every person who has posted in this thread has taken more time to talk about it, than it would have taken to implement it.

There are people here who are more than willing to put the time in to managing this stuff, as evidenced. There are people who are more than willing to make a go of it. And all because someone isn't prepared to spend 5-10 minutes in the server admin panel, we have to keep shouting louder.

actually no... there needs to be some discussion over the combining of boards (because it can't be undone)
and no...   the board reorg proposal is only tangentially involved with the spam board proposal.

And how does that have anything to do with "accountability"?

and the project is not doomed. I really wish you would stop spouting that crap.
Just because you don't agree with things, does not mean that those things are wrong (any more than my disagreement with you makes your way wrong) There are many ways to accomplish things.

and yes... the final movement and merging of board may take 15 mins... but before we do something which can't be undone, we need ot make sure that we're doing it right the first time.

Quoteand the project is not doomed. I really wish you would stop spouting that crap.

Then give me a *REASON*. Don't just tell me it's all peaches and cream. Give me something to cling on to. Something a bit more real than 'I'm not dead yet'.

I'm just amazed that this needs 'this level of discussion'. There were already solutions proposed that required precisely zero extra effort or things that 'could not be undone'. Doubly so for a trial basis.

Just take your SMF hat off and look at things for a moment. We have a TEN PAGE discussion, almost 200 posts, discussing the creation of a single board. DID IT REALLY NEED THIS? Any rational person would say no, but I'm long convinced there's not a lot of rationale behind most of what I see around here.

well, please note that at leats 5 pages of that are probably off-topic stuff...

and yes, apparently it did need it since *I* still disagree with the need for such a board. (however, as I said, *I* am not the one making decisions, I am just the one presenting the reasoning against it.)


And once again...   the creation of the cpam board (or not) is just one factor in the board reorg that we are actually discussing.

In some cases just voting is helpful (not in all!). Especial if it is the positions are near 50/50 and not issues with real heavy results for many. Just a recommendation, of cause this could be not reasonable for some who like to have their position be real. So its need a big step forward for everyone.
The developers of SMF gave so many tools for discussions and solution finding.

(http://sangham.net/Smileys/sadhu_sangham.gif)

Quote from: Johann B on April 17, 2013, 06:40:18 AM
In some cases just voting is helpful (not in all!). Especial if it is the positions are near 50/50 and not issues with real heavy results for many.

You mean we could take a poll?

Why Johann - you do have your moments.  :)

Quote from: MrPhil on April 16, 2013, 12:15:02 PM
Oka-a-a-a-ay. Here's the PhD thesis. I was hoping I wouldn't have to do this, but since no one is "getting" it...

What you've written is nothing resembling a PhD thesis.  For a start, it's comprehensible ;).  More seriously, I'd agree with the repositioning of the SMF support boards, as I said earlier, and I'd also go with the spam child board solution, but that proposal didn't seem to gather much support, so I doubt that it will be done like this.

Anyway, I think that we should just wait now, and see what changes are made.  Further discussion of the subject doesn't seem as though it's going to be all that useful, in my opinion.

Quote from: Irisado on April 17, 2013, 10:04:36 AM
What you've written is nothing resembling a PhD thesis.  For a start, it's comprehensible ;).

Why thank you, lovely lady :) . Actually, you might like reading my real PhD thesis: Dick and Jane, an Ontological Study in Preadolescent Gender Relationships. Just kidding!

I'm not going to hold my breath that either a spam board/child board ever appears, or that this forum will ever be rearranged to reduce mispostings. Judging from the NIH arguments against such improvements, I don't think that TPTB will ever do anything that they didn't dream up themselves.

I wrote a PhD thesis -

"Spam Discussion Boards and Forum Support Communities: Effects, Implementations, and Execution"

Quote from: xrunner on April 17, 2013, 08:06:40 AM

Quote from: Johann B on April 17, 2013, 06:40:18 AM
In some cases just voting is helpful (not in all!). Especial if it is the positions are near 50/50 and not issues with real heavy results for many.

You mean we could take a poll?

Why Johann - you do have your moments.  :)

Yes, the light version could look like this:

Does the SMF Forum Need A Board for Spam only Discussions/Help?

* Yes
* No
* I have a opinion, but I don't like to be responsible
* I like to be responsible, but I am not sure what would be good
* A Redirecting board to Spamsheaven would be enough

-Time for voting 2 weeks
-Voters can change their votes
-Show vote after having voted

The bare majority of the result is authoritative to take action.
The result can be arraigned within 2 days by sending 300 emails to the board main administrator.
With not deleting the pool within the first 5 votes the administrator declares his acceptance of the result and will execute the result it as authoritative.
-----------------
The more advanced pool would need some preparatory work, which could cost even a whole period of the residence of the legislative committee and its opposition, as it would integrate such things like "if the board is ...there and like this...then yes" (http://sangham.net/Smileys/well_sangham_sw.gif)

2 or 3 works like the "PhD thesis" would be better I guess. So it takes away the "power" of the people who just say "I am against it" but do not present anything.

(http://sangham.net/Smileys/smile_sangham_sw.gif)

The problem with polls is that you would need a representative number of votes for the result to have any meaning whatsoever.  Polls can also be easily skewed by people voting without being in possession of all the necessary information required to make an informed decision.

I've always taken the view on any forum that members are entitled to make suggestions, but it's up to the staff who run the forum to decide whether, and how, they are going to be implemented.

Quote from: Irisado on April 17, 2013, 12:32:10 PM
The problem with polls is that you would need a representative number of votes for the result to have any meaning whatsoever.  Polls can also be easily skewed by people voting without being in possession of all the necessary information required to make an informed decision.

So in effect it's no worse that the election system of the United States, with which we elect individuals who control nuclear weapons.

How about having a poll, to decide if we should have a poll? ;)

Quote from: K@ on April 17, 2013, 12:47:50 PM
How about having a poll, to decide if we should have a poll? ;)

(http://www.atheistthinktank.net/HAL/threadbombs/hmmm.jpg)

I'll take that as a "Maybe"... ;)

Quote from: xrunner on April 17, 2013, 12:43:25 PM
So in effect it's no worse that the election system of the United States, with which we elect individuals who control nuclear weapons.

I never said it was any better or any worse than a country's electoral system.  All I'm saying is that I don't think that it's the right way to go in this case.

Quote from: Irisado on April 17, 2013, 01:03:48 PM

Quote from: xrunner on April 17, 2013, 12:43:25 PM
So in effect it's no worse that the election system of the United States, with which we elect individuals who control nuclear weapons.

I never said it was any better or any worse than a country's electoral system.  All I'm saying is that I don't think that it's the right way to go in this case.

Well that's a valid opinion.  :)

Cleaned up some spam in this topic... Please at least try to keep it clean. :)

If they (meaning the powers that be) would just use a little political skill they could have their cake and eat it too, so to speak.

All they have to do is post a poll and say "We're talking behind the scenes about the spam board and we'd like your input. We can't guarantee what we'll decide, but we'd like your input in this poll.

Let's say they don't really want the spam board, and let's say for the sake of argument that it's going to be ~50% split in the poll. Well, they got at least a 50% chance of the poll indicating what they already want. So there's no downside to the poll in that case, it will just show what they already want to do and at the same time let everybody vote.

If the poll shows a majority do want the spam board, they already have an out as indicated in the opening statement. There were no guarantees given, and due to extenuating circumstances blah, blah, blah we decided against it.

This way they give the community a way to participate, but yet hold on to the reins.

Now, if you want any more advice on the politics of forums I stand ready, willing, and able to advise in any capacity.  :)

Quote from: CoreISP on April 18, 2013, 07:24:35 PM
Cleaned up some spam in this topic... Please at least try to keep it clean. :)

I was just joking, and now you put me on post restriction? can i please have my posting abilites back?

I'll reply to you in a PM as this topic isn't a "why did I get a warning" thread either. :)

Hi everybody!

I've come to these boards looking for help with a spamming problem. I even did the undoable (search "spam") and this topic came up second.  After reading 11 pages of "anything and everything" a question popped into my mind: should I keep using the SEARCH facility and keep bumping into meaningless off-topic or should I just pick a random board and post, leaving it to the moderators to bother finding a suitable board to move my topic to?

That being said, here's my question.
Is there any way I could make the registration page offer two options:
1. for native (romanian-speaking) users (99% of our user base), with normal automatic registration (Captcha, questions and e-mail activation)
2. for foreign (english-speaking) users, with moderated registration?

And here's the second question: how do I activate moderated registration?

I hope I haven' been too harsh in my opening paragraph, but spam trouble usually bears some urgency (automated spamming can stink up a forum quite fast...).

Finally on-topic :): From a user-desperately-looking-for-answers' standpoint, YES, a board/child board dedicated to spam problems would be a godsend (especially if properly advertised).

Thank you all!

You really need to start a new topic about your problems, Hugbear. They'll just get swamped amongst all the... er... Spam, in this topic.

(http://www.katzy.dsl.pipex.com/SMF/welcome.gif)

Now that I've cooled off a bit, I suppose I should have started by thanking all the contributors for this great piece of software that they've gracefully let everybody use for free. And the helpful support bunch, too! Thank you all!

Oh, and scratch that second question, that was dumb!

I'll try to find a suitable board for my quest...

Sadhu!

(http://sangham.net/Smileys/thumb_sangham.gif)

(http://www.katzy.dsl.pipex.com/Smileys/hathello.gif)

Quote from: hugbear on April 21, 2013, 06:51:37 AM
Now that I've cooled off a bit, I suppose I should have started by thanking all the contributors for this great piece of software that they've gracefully let everybody use for free. And the helpful support bunch, too! Thank you all!

Oh, and scratch that second question, that was dumb!

I'll try to find a suitable board for my quest...

(http://swblog.spaweek.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/bear_hug.jpg)

When I see a new spam method I take note.  I must admit there is one spam software program out there that I figured out and just did not have the time to write the code to add it to my firewall.  If it actually drove up some bandwidth I would have taken care of it but as it runs now my software blocks 90% of the attempts which usually send the operator elsewhere.  By the end of the year it will block 100%.

A spam board I dunno the use of it.  I need to gather data in order to correctly stop the bad guys.  I need to see what they are doing and pinpoint their weakness.  A spam board will most likely list spammers that are known and blocked by some existing SMF method and will probably cause more harm than good giving the impression SMF is vulnerable when it is not.

You're missing the whole point of the discussion. The question is whether to separate out questions and answers about fighting spam (mods, methods) from the rest of the 1.1.x and 2.0.x discussions. A huge amount of the talk on the general support boards deals with spam topics, burying non-spam topics and making it harder to find them. That's why it would be good to isolate spam-related talk into its own board or child boards.

How about implementing the ideas being canvassing on this thread for six month to test its efficiency. And we reverse to old order if it fails to serve its purpose. It is just my humble idea. Mrphil, thanks for ur help in the other thread.

actually, no... that is the one thing that is not actually a reasonable suggestion.

it either goes in or it doesn't. It will be a MASSIVE effort to move spam stuff from the support boards, and then trying to move it back after 6 months on a failure would be an unreasonable amount of work.

Or you don't move everything, and just start from fresh in the new board.

Quote from: somewhere hidden in the "Kindred sayings" (grouped Discourses)"It is just as if a man, traveling along a wilderness track, were to see an ancient path, an ancient road, traveled by people of former times. He would follow it. Following it, he would see an ancient city, an ancient capital inhabited by people of former times, complete with parks, groves, & ponds, walled, delightful. He would go to address the king or the king's minister, saying, 'Sire, you should know that while traveling along a wilderness track I saw an ancient path... I followed it... I saw an ancient city, an ancient capital... complete with parks, groves, & ponds, walled, delightful. Sire, rebuild that city!' The king or king's minister would rebuild the city, so that at a later date the city would become powerful, rich, & well-populated, fully grown & prosperous...

ok...   and now we have descended back into weird platitudes...
(which I disagree with, actually)

Just do it or not, and don't waste time with "Should I?" "What if?" "But..." ... prophecy and assuming... and running in wheels. Only when done, you will know. If you need help, there have been already people who offered such for this work.

Is that to descended Kindred?


Without joy no progress and without progress no joy! (http://sangham.net/Smileys/happy_sangham.gif)