But if we are to look at SC from a point of view of its values, then I do not approve of TC's actions. Cawks shitty spam is not big enough to matter.
How big would you say is big enough? One page used to be "The Line" for most people.
Of course I will try to stop you. Part of the job.
This ^
Who are these most people? I missed that talk.
For real..?
It was years of this, often with people complaining about me "not doing enough".
I forget irrelevant information, i wasnt really asking, i dont really care, just thought it would make the post more complete
When you look at the entire context of the situation, it was a one time happening and it made people click one page away.
It was at least three times so far, and with Inquirer's contribution to handling the floods it might have been more. He's also shown little interest in stopping.
Only the first time counts, the others were not real floods. And the first time was irrelevant.
So as long as cawks flooding isn't all the time and doesn't span pages, I don't really care. Most of SC topics are spam by default.
So your limit is around two pages then?
Maybe even 3. Depends on who does it, why and how. If its dexter, then fuck him, thats all he does. Context matters. If its someone that gets the annoying vibe every once in a while, then its part of their quirk. SC values are about freedom right, so you should make excuses for peoples behaviors, until you can't.
Take for example when the anti-spam rule was added, Dexters spam. That was real spam/flood.
The only real difference between their approaches was initial repetition. Dexter'd post the same like... three videos for a while, but when he saw that people became accustomed to ignoring it he began doing the "Yashua" and "Mirrors" thing to offer more variety within it.
I remember seeing pages after pages after pages of topics. That was annoying, as they had no purpose and it was dexters entire character: useless. If you just let cawk flood one page once, or even twice, I am not sure he would continue.
If he did tho, maybe then. Depends on the time intervals and amount. And tbh spam content, maybe some of it isnt real spam.
The more useful a person is, the more leniency is good, as the more useful they are, the easier it is to talk to them instead of punishing them. Go and try to reason with Dexter for example. My use of the word 'useful' is not as you understand it, it means that a person is not a waste of time listening to. I actually read some of cawks posts, can't say the same for many others. Even tho i find his views on certain subjects reprehensible.
