3 Questions for Sam & the Infraction System

[scroobal]

Sam,

you owe everyone here who have contributed an explanation. Please see your message of 3 years ago below.

1. Why is the there anonymous zapping taking place.

2. How come SIFU was zapping people up to minus 34 in one go.

3. Why the initial pussyfooting about SIFU and stalking when you should have come right out and say that he was undermining the system. Are there more.

One look at the list of SIFU's and anyone with a borderline IQ can figure out that you have lost control.



16-07-2008 01:21 PM #2

Leongsam

Singlish Exterminator My Reputation: 295

<dl class="userstats"><dt>Join Date</dt><dd>Jul 2008</dd><dt>Posts</dt><dd>5,972</dd></dl> <dl class="user_rep"><dt>Rep Power</dt><dd id="reppower_2852_1">9</dd></dl>


[h=2]

Re: The user infraction system - No points involved. It's a tool for community modera[/h]

To start off with, any user who reaches 10 points will be banned for ONE DAY (24hours). There are no permanent bans.

The system shows who gave the infraction. There is no such thing as an anonymous infraction. Everything is transparent and open. :p

The points are not cumulative and they expire after the stated period. This is unlike the reputation system where seniors can end up with 1000s of points while newbies have to start with 10. In this forum, all are on an equal footing but you have to behave or the rest of the community can end up preventing you from posting for 24 hours.

Have fun. Let's see how it goes.
​

Reply Reply With Quote

 

[Rogue Trader]

Scroobal, allow me to answer the technical questions...

1. Zapping (giving negative rep points) was introduced last last year and it is different to the infraction/ban mechanism. That's the same time the (M) & (Inf) statuses appeared beside our nicks. (Also around this time our power points were reduced from hundreds to single digit values.)

So just like you can give someone's rep points anonymously, you could take away his rep points without leaving your name. That was definitely a loophole Sam did not address.

2. During March this year when the servers back up and restoration failed, many kiasu forummers complained that their rep points went missing. Sam restored our reputation and power points to the hundreds again. A person can zap his victim with half of his own power points. So Sifu's power must have been around 34*2 = 68 back then.

When the servers were finally restored, so did our rep/power point system.

 

[scroobal]

Thanks RT

that was helpful and informative. Never zapped anyone before and I never found it useful when you look at the rep points across the community. Might be time to reset the whole thing and come back with something that works.

Still want to know why the pussyfooting when he realised that the idiot was screwing everyone.

 

[Windsor]

It is over my head but old-timers should by now know there is a sort of cyberwar happening here? There was even a comment from a member that says, "Sifu is on our side." Does that not confirm it?

 

[Rogue Trader]

no problem.. only Sam can answer question 3.

In fact, I'm finding it absurd that the host decides to ban sifu but took no action on spam-troller Alan chen

 

[Alamaking]

no problem.. only Sam can answer question 3.

In fact, I'm finding it absurd that the host decides to ban sifu but took no action on spam-troller Alan chen

Ah Leong loves shit stirrer, LOL

 

[scroobal]

Ivebert is not the only mystery. The abuse, the graphics, vulgarities were constant and worse than SIFU but I suppose Ivebert did not have the brains to do this anonymously.

no problem.. only Sam can answer question 3.

In fact, I'm finding it absurd that the host decides to ban sifu but took no action on spam-troller Alan chen

 

[Rogue Trader]

It is over my head but old-timers should by now know there is a sort of cyberwar happening here? There was even a comment from a member that says, "Sifu is on our side." Does that not confirm it?

at first Sifu's (and everyone's) war was against tonychat. Then it stretched on to other undesirables like Leetahbar, Teekee, Alan chen ... until he finally became mad. I believe one of the reasons why Sifu's been wiped out now is because he was abusing Sam on a regular basis. It became personal.

 

[Rogue Trader]

Ivebert is not the only mystery. The abuse, the graphics, vulgarities were constant and worse than SIFU but I suppose Ivebert did not have the brains to do this anonymously.

if not for the vigilante action, he would still be posting shit today. imagine that....

 

[Windsor]

at first Sifu's (and everyone's) war was against tonychat. Then it stretched on to other undesirables like Leetahbar, Teekee, Alan chen ... until he finally became mad. I believe one of the reasons why Sifu's been wiped out now is because he was abusing Sam on a regular basis. It became personal.

I was much amused by the frothing at the mouth and the venom of his posts. You said he went mad, and I tend to agree.

 

[eatshitndie]

on my profile i've only been infracted by queen seok duck 5 times for up to -10 points total. this is mainly because i've been rude to her for calling her a 'cheapskate'. yup, quibbling and whining over a few renminbi is the hallmark of a cheapskate. other than the usual cb f*ck u message from sifu, there is no other infractions. but of course my rep points got zapped, and didn't even notice it until now and when sam posted the sifu zap list. wow. wasn't aware of sewage level warfare going on.

 

[scroobal]

Frankly if I was Sam I would have taken someone like that out much earlier. If you had a dog, you would not allow it to climb over your head. Look at Cooleo, if it was my forum, he would be attending obedience school and then a school to cover manners. If the host cannot control, the next step is abusing others in his cohort. These are not special or peculiar behaviours. These are basic in human dynamics. I remember during NS when a regular Sgt became a bitch of the NS gangster recruit, until another Sgt put him in his place.

at first Sifu's (and everyone's) war was against tonychat. Then it stretched on to other undesirables like Leetahbar, Teekee, Alan chen ... until he finally became mad. I believe one of the reasons why Sifu's been wiped out now is because he was abusing Sam on a regular basis. It became personal.

 

[cooleo]

Ivebert is not the only mystery. The abuse, the graphics, vulgarities were constant and worse than SIFU but I suppose Ivebert did not have the brains to do this anonymously.

Ivebert is highly intelligent and witty. If he does not spam and display his amateurish photoshop skills, he can be quite entertaining.

 

[scroobal]

Agree.........

if not for the vigilante action, he would still be posting shit today. imagine that....

 

[scroobal]

I was surprised too by the numbers

on my profile i've only been infracted by queen seok duck 5 times for up to -10 points total. this is mainly because i've been rude to her for calling her a 'cheapskate'. yup, quibbling and whining over a few renminbi is the hallmark of a cheapskate. other than the usual cb f*ck u message from sifu, there is no other infractions. but of course my rep points got zapped, and didn't even notice it until now and when sam posted the sifu zap list. wow. wasn't aware of sewage level warfare going on.

 

[Rogue Trader]

Frankly if I was Sam I would have taken someone like that out much earlier. If you had a dog, you would not allow it to climb over your head. Look at Cooleo, if it was my forum, he would be attending obedience school and then a school to cover manners. If the host cannot control, the next step is abusing others in his cohort. These are not special or peculiar behaviours. These are basic in human dynamics. I remember during NS when a regular Sgt became a bitch of the NS gangster recruit, until another Sgt put him in his place.

i would have taken out tonychat the index case instead of sifu. in the early days sifu was a sensible poster like everyone else before he went rabid.

maybe I don't see the big picture of things.. or maybe Sam just likes the traffic. let's wait for his answer to question 3..

 

[cooleo]

Frankly if I was Sam I would have taken someone like that out much earlier. If you had a dog, you would not allow it to climb over your head. Look at Cooleo, if it was my forum, he would be attending obedience school and then a school to cover manners. If the host cannot control, the next step is abusing others in his cohort. These are not special or peculiar behaviours. These are basic in human dynamics. I remember during NS when a regular Sgt became a bitch of the NS gangster recruit, until another Sgt put him in his place.

Oh put me in obedience school. Maybe i will, after u stop wearing a tampon. How does that sound?

 

[scroobal]

Tonychat and Sam have been an item from the old days. Don't ask me where the love and connection comes in. Sam I suspect works on a template where spamming is cut and paste. So TC does not make the cut even though the message is the same and has not value whatsoever. TC also begins to write in sentences and paragraphs every time he is mentioned. Watch, he will not spam for a while. He also accords Sam alot of respect. He accuses Singaporeans of being losers but watch this guy suck up to Sam.

i would have taken out tonychat the index case instead of sifu. in the early days sifu was a sensible poster like everyone else before he went rabid. maybe I don't see the big picture of things.. or maybe Sam just likes the traffic. let's wait for his answer to question 3..

 

[eatshitndie]

they both have something in common - they share the same flat in toa payoh.

 

[scroobal]

When I began moderating and started a thread seeking opinions on Tonychat, Sam came out real quick and gave the spiel on free speech. I was wondering what free speech he was talking about.

they both have something in common - they share the same flat in toa payoh.