On Sun, 23 Mar 2008 20:07:42 -0700, Tim Smith wrote:
> In article <lMBFj.13802$%15.3162@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> Linonut <linonut@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Note that the only person who has ever (as far as I've seen) mentioned
>>> that page here is Roy. It's also interesting that whenever he has
>>> mentioned it before, it was right near a time when someone obviously
>>> systematically modded down all comments critical of Roy and modded up
>>> all Roy comments. Coincidence?
>>>
>>> Roy noticed the page is gone because Roy regularly uses that page.
>>
>> I think you're nuts, Tim.
>
> Could be, but right around the time he first posted that, all my
> comments on the first couple of pages of results there went down by one,
> including ones in threads that were long past getting any activity. So,
> it sure looks like someone suddenly discovered a tool for mass
> moderating. It could have been someone who read the link Roy posted, of
> course. Or it could just be a coincidence.
Roy's friends have been digging him up for a while now but recently it has
become ridiculous and something is going on.
He will post a story and within minutes it will go to 6 Digs.
Almost always, just to 6 Diggs.
Not 2 Diggs, not 3 Diggs, but 6 Diggs.
And within minutes and just about every time.
People other than myself have noticed this as well.
> As far as using that page goes, note that if you are just interested in
> keeping up with someone's comments in Digg, there are more useful ways
> to do it.
>
> 1. Make them a "friend" on Digg. You can then easily check them, and
> all your other friends.
>
> 2. Look at the comments page under their profile. Here's all my Digg
> comments, for example:
>
> <http://digg.com/users/harlowsmonkeys/history/comments>
>
> You can get the comments, and the net moderation, with working links
> back to the comment itself.
>
> 3. This tool shows you all the recent comments of a given person:
>
> <http://garycarstensen.googlepages.com/comments7.html>
>
> and, unlike the comments section on their profile page, gives you the
> separate totals for up votes and down votes, and gives some statistics
> on the comments. (It also provides a link back to the comments, but
> that is not reliable. #2 is best for actually keeping up with someone,
> friend or foe. The main use of #3 is stats and the details on
> moderation).
I just look at his history and comment.
I digg Roy up on occasion as well, when he posts something useful.
> The page Roy linked to was really only useful for mass moderating
> someone comments. Those not interesting in mass moderating someone
> else, when told about it, would most likely visit it once, see that it
> isn't useful for legitimate purposes, and leave. I didn't even save a
> bookmark to it, as I could see no reason to ever use it.
it was colorful, that is about it.
> Yet Roy, who should have no reason to use it if he's not mass
> moderating, finds out it is gone? And no, it's not because he suddenly
> noticed his Digg comments aren't being modded down, because he mostly
> stopped commenting on Digg. He did recently post a couple, and one
> promptly went to -4, just like they used to. The other one was on-topic
> and useful, so did not go down (just like his rare on-topic and useful
> comments did not before).
Yea, he blames everyone under the Sun for his getting buried.
It never occurred to him that maybe people are sick and tired of his games
and they are on to him.
Plus, when he comments, anyone can get a quick and dirty survey of what
people on digg think of him and as you can see by his rating it's not good.
By just posting stories and his usual SPAM flood, there is no real way of
gauging what people think because just like in COLA, Roy's posts get very,
very few comments.
The only people who care about ratings are people who have an agenda and
can't afford to look bad.
--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
|
|
