- Joined
- Sep 14, 2007
- Messages
- 1,538
Troll is a relative term, as relative as respect.
Not necessarily.Wouldn't that just be the moderator nine cases out of ten?
They shouldn't be. There's a difference between satire/sarcasm/a good joke, and trolling. The intent of a troll is to upset people, the intent of someone who is funny, is to make people laugh.Just shooting in that trolls can be respected as well.
Yes, but most trolls should not be respected, because, quoting HINDYHat, «some of the trolling that goes on around here really is in bad taste»; the oldschool troll that actually gave you a laughter is long gone. Nowadays, most people get off at making others feel like crap.
EDIT: And what's most astounding is that this kind of people will actually get the award.
This is exactly what I mean, there are no decent trolls here. And funnily enough, I haven't seen any of them say a single thing since this came up.
You are aware that Mr. Bob started this tread?
Then don't give them the award in the first place, or optionally just strip them of it. I don't see how this is grounds for collective punishment.Yes, but most trolls should not be respected, because, quoting HINDYHat, «some of the trolling that goes on around here really is in bad taste»;
I say the general impression changed. People have been assholes since time immemorial, it's only quite recently that everyone, whether they expressed some seriously stupid and bigoted opinion or said "fuck" a few times too many in one sentence, were bundled together and tailored the term "trolls".the oldschool troll that actually gave you a laughter is long gone. Nowadays, most people get off at making others feel like crap.
I'd just like to quote this for emphasis.<snip>
if they don't have it in them to earn a Respected User Award, they won't earn it. It's not like the general populace of disrespectful users would bring the standards of the award down. Regardless, this isn't about having the reward or not, it's about removing them and not telling anybody why.
That's implicative. It also speaks volumes as to why the award didn't require a supermajority.Yeah, but not everybody will be respected by everybody.
Depends on the criteria. Are you looking to show dedicated users some courtesy, or by a plenary vote crown the next superman? I really don't think that expressing gratitude should have to be done so formally. Especially not by the results of a public vote.And since it's a community award it would be very hard to find someone that is respected enough by a majority of active users who know something about hive (been here a while).
That's a peculiar way to put it.There's a difference between satire/sarcasm/a good joke, and trolling. The intent of a troll is to upset people, the intent of someone who is funny, is to make people laugh.
I don't see how, actually. It's all very dependant on how you define "deserve" - or rather who defines it.no matter what new kind of awards we have for 'deserving/respected/whatever' users are, some people who don't deserve them will always end up having them.
Satire uses wit to make a point, albeit by ridiculing; while trolls use tired out memes and general annoyance to cause an emotional response from others. The only goal is their own amusement. We've digressed though, I apologize.Ideally satire is held up to shame and ridicule the target audience into some inclination of regression. It's by default intended to be provocative. In satire, sarcasm (irony) is militant. Do I really have to account for the part humor inherently plays in satire? I say trolling can be held up correspondingly, in all three regards.
Depends on the criteria. Are you looking to show dedicated users some courtesy, or by a plenary vote crown the next superman? I really don't think that expressing gratitude should have to be done so formally. Especially not by the results of a public vote.
How would you chose who deserve the award? It's not fair that only a handful of people (admins) decide who gets it, because then its worthless.
Again.
Because some people are just generally considred as absolutely awesome, and everyone(e.g a majority) respects them.
Examples: VGsatomi, Wolverabid, Kimberly, Frankster.
I never talked to Vg and wolv so I don't know em, I wouldn't agree on kimbo, only agree on frankster.
I've said at least 5 times now, TAKE MY AWARD AWAY FROM ME. That isn't the point of this thread. I really couldn't give a shit if I have one or not. My problem is that you used that to justify taking it away from everyone else.
"Waah, my award! Where for are my award!"
Was this decision made by one person, or the staff as a whole? The only problem I see is that very few staff knew what was going on.It was deemed that the award in its current form made no sense (was given away prety randomly) and thus it was removed.
It might come back in the future if its allocation gets revised but that still means many people who used to have it might not get it back.
I am here. Why do you need me for?I agree, where's MH when you need him?!
Hmmm...so what you're saying is Mr.Bob is the only one complaining? Interesting. Very interesting.They haven't because everyone would find them 'arrogant'.
No one wants to be picky about a removed award :/ You can see how a lot of people have reacted towards Bob's thread, thinking that he just wants his award back, when he actually doesn't.
Hmmm...so what you're saying is Mr.Bob is the only one complaining? Interesting. Very interesting.
Hmmm...so what you're saying is Mr.Bob is the only one complaining? Interesting. Very interesting.
Actually, take a look around, Mr.Bob's pals have been supporting him. Only I have seen beyond the clouds as of yet.You can see how a lot of people have reacted towards Bob's thread, thinking that he just wants his award back, when he actually doesn't.