Around the 'Shoe

lol

Glad you appreciate our sense of humor. :)

I don't understand where these comments come from. I've heard numerous people complain about trolls today and yesterday, but all the trolls were banned quickly. Apparently that doesn't stop people from complaining even 24 hours after the fact. I think some people miss the trolls.

It appears you might have been the first to qualify for banishment under your own rule...I think that would be a fairly good working example of the definition of irony.

Whether people put much credence in them or not, DVs impact your rating and your rating is how others judge you and perceive you as a knowledgeable and respected poster. Most won't know the history of why someone has 1 or 2 stars, just that he must be a hack. If a troll comes here and insults OSU, we have to defend ourselves. Short of banishment, which is a judgment call the mods need to make, DVs are the best way we can express our outrage. It's Bucknuts vigilantism.

The best example is Proud2BBlue, the scUM jagoff was who came here under the guise of congratulating us on a great recruiting class but ended his OP with insulting comments directed toward ItalianBuck. http://ohiostate.247sports.com/Board/122/Congrats-Buckeyes-7362665/1 That comment in and of itself may not have warranted banishment--I've seen Buckeye fans say worse things to other Buckeye fans--so it's unfair to expect the mods to censor dialogue so restrictively. It's a "free" board, after all, which means we can't stop the trolls from coming here and posting their drivel. But that doesn't mean we have to tolerate their abuse or look the other way. Proud2BBlue's up to 116 DVs that literally blew his rating out of the water. CavsFan could have easily locked the thread and whatever his reasons were for not locking it, I commend him--the troll came here asking for trouble and he got it. If he'd gotten banned after 10 DVs, instead of running back and bragging to his Blue buddies that he'd been banned, which is probably what he wanted and would have been a moral victory for him had he gotten it, he’s now down to 1 star and a hole he’ll never dig himself out of; he hasn't posted in over a week and the next time he does, if he ever does, they'll look at his 1-star rating and think he's a jerk. He’s probably opened a new account by now. No big deal there as it only takes a few seconds to open a new free account (although opening a new account’s not as simple if they’re a VIP) but the point is he came in here acting cocky and disrespectful and we got the last laugh. We showed him the door, put a boot up his ass and sent him crawling back to where he came from. We didn't have to rely on the mod to be the bad guy, like he's our mommy coming to our rescue because we have a bully picking on us.

If the OP's rule was in place, we would never have a chance to run these jerks off and ruin their “credibility,” even among their own kind. Even if they're banished, again, unless they're VIPs, they can always open a new account. DVs are one way we can defend ourselves, maybe the best way. It’s like we gang banged the troll and then sent him back into his hole battered and bruised with an infectious disease.

I left Hineygate a few years ago because every thread that started talking about football always became a hatred thread between OSU fans and other fans and even often became taken over by other schools fans debating each other. If you banned those trolls thats all that could be asked but I didn't see any indication that they were banned and action taken on those threads or I wouldn't have made this thread. I just don't want this to become Hineygate.

Iowa, great point about the 1 or 2 stars. It does matter when you first read a post from someone especially if your not familiar with their name. I tend to look at post count also. Noticed here latel a lot of folks posting with very low post counts. Trolls just coming on the board to stir trouble IMO.
Good post Iowa. You put a lot into your post. I enjoy them. U know UR shit.

So what you are saying is that you do not judge a poster by the content of his post. Instead you check the gold stars to see if they are a "knowledgeable and respected" poster?

Disagree, limits freedom to discuss topics that not everyone may agree on in fear of getting a ban.

WOW.......

That's an excellent idea.

There are people on here who are alleged five star posters who, in my opinion, have never made anything that resembles a meaningful post.

However, once you get 'labeled' something less than five stars, the casual/sheep posters flock to downvote that person, regardless of the opinion.

We're losing/going to lose some good posters over this system, and its really a shame.

On the old board, you knew who was a good poster and respected them from content. Now you're at the mercy of someone who says"I love Ohio State" and their down votes.

It makes me wonder whether his original post was written in jest.