Talk changes

I think the current enhancement makes sense. The only imrpovement should be a language filter. They create more problems than they solve if they sensure thought process.

Of course you do.

I'd also like to point out the likelihood that most of the "people" who complained to SE about CC & w67 were still more made-up usernames from the same person who handily made up hundreds of usernames to harass those two (and others) on the board -- the troll.

darn straight. he trolled me.

Al right, all right! Yellow card card for W67 for insulting a bull! You've been warned motherfukkaaaa!

free w67

bjw, you cant even come close to comparing the freakish and stalkish nature of the one true troll on this board to w67ths posts. not a matter of liking or disliking, i dont agree with lots of peeps who post here regularly and i use my own filter (brain) to regulate the usefullness of their posts. w67th has a style that some may take offense but cmon. that other idiot has multiple pesonas and is certifiable, a real crazy. getting rid of it is applaudable. to try and take down w67th in the same stroke is misguided at best. again, one of the most relevant posters here if you can BEAR it. sorry, couldnt help myself.

As far as I'm concerned w67 can be detrolled. I have him on ignore anyway, He's not a stalker.

Nice one rangey!

rangersfan, I'm not comparing. The troll is a different beast entirely. But I don't think SE's decision was a casual click without much thought. I don't claim to speak for them at all, but it seems like they're taking a stance against some of the nonsense that often gets posted here. It's not even about having a thick skin - most of the time it's just annoying to sift through it, and it's not a simple case of ignoring certain posters, since all kinds of people respond, and occasionally these very same people post some pretty valuable stuff. Like I said, it's not a comparison - it's more "play nice" or embrace the grey. Seems fair to me.

alan, maybe, but that seems like pure conjecture, and I believe SE can tell where the complaints are coming from, so why would they "count" them?

No, and this is something that you have repeatedly failed to understand: SE cannot tell where complaints are coming from. They CANNOT see past the username.

of course not. how can they see all the sleeper identities that the troll is still running?

play nice my arse - is arse now acceptable here? NYCRE board - play nice, PLAY NICE??? are you kidding me? i will take edgy comments any day of the week if i can translate them into sound business decisions. PLAY NICE, you ever been subject to high-pressure and quasi-ethical sales tactics? Seriously.

Look bjw, i think you actually are pretty level-headed in your previous posts and fair. even open-minded but you couldnt be more wrong on this one.

"No, and this is something that you have repeatedly failed to understand: SE cannot tell where complaints are coming from. They CANNOT see past the username."

And yet they remove comments from user names. If they have the user names of the troll (they do) and where the complaints are coming from (I assume they do, but how would they not?), well, you do the math. I think there's a lot of paranoia here about good-cop/bad-cop theories, hundreds of usernames, and god knows what else.

they remove the comments from the user names that the troll uses to thumb his/her nose at the site. do you really think that a creep who goes to all this trouble stops there?

I'm reminded of a description that a NY investment banker (1980s) gave when he began doing business in LA: "In NY, they're either nice or they'll just outright punch you in the face. In LA they'll give you a nice backrub, and drive a dagger into your back while they're at it."

Is that the kind of "nice" you want? Nasty attitude dressed up with a curse-free pleasantness, lots of "helping" to buy into a bubble?

Very very Sue Ann Nivens.

rangersfan, I'm all for edginess, but SE calls the shots around here and it seems they've received enough complaints to act as they have. I trust em rather than go along with the cheerleading. Besides, I suspect if he tones it down a notch he'll be back to full non-greyed status in no time. It doesn't take much effort to prove yourself on an internet message board.

Sorry for the delayed response(s); busy day:

LICComment -- It would take a long time to educate you on all the relevant laws (such as an aiding and abetting Internet libel), but the very fact that you have to ask what law is being violated (thereby questioning the premise) shows that it would be a huge waste of time.

Dwell -- You missed the point. I am not telling SE what to do now. I am telling them what they should have done long ago to prevent the abuse. It is not like moderating a forum is such a revolutionary idea. It is obvious they should have acted long ago.

Julia -- How am I harassing you by making fun of your mangled syntax? Asking you what the "best of tyranny" is was a joke about your use of the phrase "tyranny at its worst," which is a strange thing to write since I think we can agree that all tyranny is bad. I see you are trying to bait SE into going all W67th on me by saying I am harassing you. Just not the case. I correct you when you say stupid things, which seems to be a full-time occupation.

PS "Free W67!"

bjw2103:

"If they have the user names of the troll (they do) and where the complaints are coming from (I assume they do, but how would they not?), well, you do the math."

That is precisely what you refuse to grasp. Registering for an SE username is as simple as (anonymously) creating a freemail account (gmail, hotmail, yahoo, thousands of others), then using that to create the SE account. Nothing else is required; nothing is verified besides the email address. No two usernames can in any way be linked back to the same person.

So you assume incorrectly.

Do you understand now?

alan, that's pretty funny, but do you honestly think any and all real estate discussion necessitates nastiness (whether back-stabbing or punching in the face)? And this has nada to do with "helping" to buy overpriced real estate, which is something you and I agree is not a sound idea. Or do you think it's certain posters' job to proselytize and spread the gospel of "rent/buy or you're stupid"?

"That is precisely what you refuse to grasp. Registering for an SE username is as simple as (anonymously) creating a freemail account (gmail, hotmail, yahoo, thousands of others), then using that to create the SE account. Nothing else is required; nothing is verified besides the email address. No two usernames can in any way be linked back to the same person."

alan, I don't think you understood my comment. I fully understand they can't link usernames to other usernames. But they almost certainly can link complaints to usernames. And if they ban a username, then what exactly is stopping they from discrediting a thumbs down or complaint from that same exact username?

"I'd also like to point out the likelihood that most of the "people" who complained to SE about CC & w67 were still more made-up usernames from the same person who handily made up hundreds of usernames to harass those two (and others) on the board -- the troll."

If this was indeed the case alanhart don't you think aboutready would also be grayed out?

JuiceMan, stop being smarter and way better at explaining things in a simple manner than I am, damn it.

haven't you figured out yet that the troll spends his/her full time here. its goal is to create confusion and sow doubt and anger. seems to have worked brilliantly.

for those of us who were here prior to the troll, the only thing that has changed is the troll.

okay, last comment on this. first, w67 does not need me to "cheerlead" on his behalf here. if you cannot see the obvious elephant in the room on this one, so be it. but when you suddenly get a whiff of the three foot dung pile in the corner, maybe worth taking a gander around the room before spouting off.

second, i tend to agree he will be back and i hope he doesnt change his approach nary a bit. this site needs one of him to offset all the other blabber from the thousand other ninnies he might have "offended".

"It would take a long time to educate you on all the relevant laws (such as an aiding and abetting Internet libel), but the very fact that you have to ask what law is being violated (thereby questioning the premise) shows that it would be a huge waste of time."

I don't think it was an unfair question. There are a lot of intelligent people on this board but not all are lawyers. Rather than dismissing it as a "huge waste of time" why don't you answer the question? What laws have been broken?

bjw2103: "And if they ban a username, then what exactly is stopping they from discrediting a thumbs down or complaint from that same exact username?"

alanhart: "most of the "people" who complained to SE about CC & w67 were still more made-up usernames from the same person who handily made up hundreds of usernames"

In other words, some were made up to be "bad cops", and some to be "good cop" newbies to the site.

rangersfan, fair enough. I wasn't specifically noting you when mentioning the cheerleading, for the record. And thanks for the earlier comment - feeling's mutual.

I have a hunch: The Troll is a Bull & is a conservative Republican!

Midtowner, just cite to a link or something to reference on this law that you claim streeteasy is breaking by hosting an internet forum the way it does. That shouldn't be too hard if you are so familiar with the topic.

alan, maybe I'm just naive or too far removed from the world of internet trolling or whatever, but this all strikes me as dubious conjecture and a bit of paranoia. If you feel this strongly, you guys should really arrange a tete-a-tete with some SE people. Or the cops if this is all actually illegal. But JuiceMan's question really puts a dent in your theory, no?

yes, you are too removed. no, there are no laws being broken. what is the point of the meeting with the SE people? what do you expect them to do? what does juiceman's comment have to do with this?

JuiceMan --

http://www.ehow.com/how_2040840_sue-someone-internet-libel.html

This one took me about 15 seconds to find and there are tons more so I suggest you look yourself. There clearly can be libel on the Internet and you host a forum that does nothing to stop the statements, you are assisting the libel. Pretty basic stuff.

But calling some a name doesn't do it. It has to be harmful to their reputation. Calling someone a whore or accusing them of engaging in unethical behavior or accusing their children of acting in an illegal way all count. I am not for a minute advocating censorship. If someone is being an asshole, they can (and should) be called an asshole. But when they cross the line, they -- and SE for allowing it -- are culpable.

"tyranny at its worst," which is a strange thing to write since I think we can agree that all tyranny is bad." WE can all agree. That's a typical banal comment. I'm not surprised. Is all tyranny the same? For example, is living under the obama regime better or worse than living under the chavez regime?

Plus, are you guys complete unfamilair with recent cases where people have been able to subpoena service providers in order to obtain information about posters who are harassing others. Even if SE is not legally culpable, they open themselves us to such subpoenas. And, more importantly, it is just irresponsible to have a non-moderated forum. Most sites act prudently and it is incredible that it took SE so long to act.

What makes you believe Chavez is a tyran? He has done more for his people than any US president has ever done!
You're highly misinformed but somewhat when i read your posts i can't help myself thinking that you're the kind of woman that watch Foxnews all day so i'm not surprised but really sorry for yourself.

Julia --

I lost my gibberish to English dictionary. Can you translate that last post for me?

midtowner, your cite didn't speak to the question. The state of the law is not settled, but most likely for a forum provider to be liable for defamation, they would have had to have known that whatever statements were made were defamatory.

You shouldn't be throwing around accusations of people breaking laws so cavalierly. That is a pretty serious accusation. Could be defamatory . . .

Most Venezualans hate Chavez. Defending him shows where your political views lie.

Cut your "you're with us or against us bullshit" LIC... That's where the real tyrany is!

and...

FREE W67!

Excelsior!

LICComment --

I am going to assume that you have been on the board longer than I have. But just trawling (not trolling) through some recent comments reveals things that are very close to being libelous (for example, attacking people's family, calling their daughters "whores," accusing others of criminal behavior) while others consist of outright threats to posters. You'd have to be an idiot of a forum poster not to recognize that the posts go beyond the pale. However, before you try to bait me into being greyed out by SE, I have not accused them or anyone of breaking the law; I am saying that SE is not acing in a way that a responsible business should.

Also, is the Venezuelan comment aimed at me? How is asking Julia what the hell she is talking about the same as defending Chavez? I seriously have no idea what Julia was saying because it makes sense. I would say that your defense of Julia speaks volumes about you.

Sorry, typing too fast -- what Julia was saying makes "no" sense.

LICComment --

My bad; I think your line about Venezuela was aimed at someone else.

midtowner, the Venezuela comment was not aimed at you.

Whenever I see the types of comments you gave as examples, I ignore them and move on, so I'm not so familiar with them. They may be defamatory, but the liability would be on the one making the statement, not the forum provider unless the forum provider knew they were defamatory, which would mean the forum provider knew the statements were false. The statements also have to be of facts and not opinion.

I am not debating your opinon on what is the responsible way to conduct a forum. But I thought you did say after I asked that you thought streeteasy was breaking the law. Sorry if I misunderstood.

Despite what some post about me, I never make personal attacks on anyone. And I never initiate any insults, I'll just respond to them. I may respond to someone's insult by saying their comment is dumb, but I don't personally insult them (although I admit that when it comes to steve, I get close to the line). And I never use profane language. Point is, I don't care at all for the personal attacks and obscenities and I wouldn't mind some moderation of them, but streeteasy shouldn't be legally liable unless it instigated or knew of some defamatory statement.

"My bad" What an awful expression...

"For example, is living under the obama regime better or worse than living under the chavez regime?"

... TOTALLY and completely unrelated to NYC residential real estate ... troll with freeper agenda ... and a perfect example of why your username should be permatrolled way way way before w67th's or CC's.

alanhart=midtownereast

the troll is midtowner east.

Not at all clear to me how you can libel an anonymous internet name.

I don't read even half his posts but I don't see the basis for calling for Riversider to be banned. If people don't like him put it on ignore.

I think you should be automatically suspended if you use "lic" in a comment more than five times a week......just kidding.

another variant of the troll sleeper identity

I vote to free W67.
Free him from the grey.
I love a bad boy & boy, he can be bad. But, let us not forget, he called 500psf.
Viva W67! Free him, free him now, Oh lawd, free W67

dwell=alanhart

Don't tempt me alan. I think yer pretty cute!!!!!!!!!!!

dwell=alanhart=nycdreamer

are you cute nycdreamer?

omg columbia, I agree. Excelsior?

Garshk!

fur gawd sakes, alan, don't spit on me. A simple Cole Porter lyric will do.

please free w67. Hurts my eyes to read his posts. I'll have to up my prescription.

Streeteasy.com seems now to have a certificate authentication problem with my browser. Odd

I had to up my prescription...

up yours!

LICC trolls stevejhx religiously---it's a complete obsession for him and he offers nothing but insult---now i think steve is mildly entertained by it, but for LICC to be here pontificating about trolling is quite absurd---of course i cant resist a dig or two given LICC's obvious intelligence, his fox-scripted politics, and his incredible knowledge of real estate investment, both in theory, and as practiced in the boom-boom market that LIC is---ask him about it.

streeteasy has likely begun to collect (as it can easily) the IP addresses from which undesirables post, whatever names they use--and these undesirables can move around physically, but there are only so many IP's they can come up with--they can use proxy servers, but those IP's will likely be unique to them--not sure if they can be sorted from among other 3G users of ipads, bberries etc, but i bet they can based on a sortable identifier--guarantee my tech partner could find a way--

troll management seems to be working and my guess is that se has installed an IP sniffer--for anyone who wants to be really naughty, they should be aware that IP's can be traced by SE and can be gotten at by hackers of SE's servers--and my guess is that SE hasnt had a fortune to spend on security

there is the nasty little matter of the unfair persecution of one of this site's finest assets--gray or not he is a must read for me--in fact the site's popularity may increase based on the graying of six seven--se may judge that the keeping alive of the free six seven movement is good for business

from the bowels of LIC I say.........excelsior...the new movement!!!

Well that pretty much confirms what I said months ago, w67th = nopigsorshrimp

Muchos gracious. Compadres. El federalez ez after me. I must go now to juggs. My soft nipply hideout till the heat diez down. Via con dios.

No, jm, I'm no pigs. Really.

You're ph41.

Julialg is happyrenter.

We're all one, no?

I thought Riversider long ago confessed to being nopigsorshrimp.

Wouldn't Riversider be grayed out then?

I don't know, this is all too much. Back to real estate.

nopigsorshrimp is a troll, he must be terminated!

AR - I don't know why you think that everybody who is not a member of the AAS (as sidelinesitter so aptly named the aboutready admiration society) on SE is me under some other name - paranoid much?

W67,
are you in one of them pot tunnels under san diego? Git in yer submarine & head for the hudson.
nopigsorshrimp = kosher wine, which gives me a terrible hangover.

talk about paranoid. you can buy a penthouse in midtown, but you can't buy a sense of humor or irony. you have more identities than i have digits, westelle, but i certainly don't really think you're JM.

dwell, yes, bad grapes fortified. nasty.

yeah, bleh!!!!
I rejoice that the troll has been slain, Hallelujah!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXh7JR9oKVE

The food court is such an American phenom

it's actually Niagra Falls, Canada, but agree food ct is US phenom
Hallelujah!!

i think this might have been in canada?

but there are food courts in many european cities now. the food is better, granted, but.

Hallelujah

security!!!!!!!!

Free W67th.

The problem with the troll was that s/he created numerous identities, would hijack threads, and would bump old threads / start spurious threads. So that when you went to the talk page, it was hard to get to actually interesting posts.

I can understand alanhart's issue with Riversider -- he creates a ton of threads that are only tangentially related to real estate. I don't love these threads (or SteveFs for that matter) but its easy enough to avoid these threads and he doesn't create so many that he crowds out all the other threads.

As for W67th -- I don't recall him starting many, if any threads. I also don't recall him bumping, if any, dormant threads. I also don't recall him making pointed personal attacks against poster's spouses, children, etc. The only thing he can be accused of is his use "inappropriate" language.

Now, Streeteasy already had a very easy way to deal with this -- each individual can simply press ignore this person.

Please restore W67th -- the permanent gray hurts my eyes.

SE, i have a small idea. and i know i've been a bit of a problem child for you, but think about this.

we've had a horrible experience with trolls. awful. it has made many of us uncomfortable and some of us defensive.

could we try reinstating the greyed out ones and see what happens when you also institute crowd control?

btw, cc, i think you're over the top and out of your mind regarding some troll identities. and even if you're right, wtf? who cares if "hidden" trolls are being supportive. direct your energy.

julialg seems more like a man but actually the most conservative are the Maryln Quayles, Lynn Cheyen, Sarah Palin, and Sharon Angle. All women!

no, the large one definitely appreciated socialized medicine when it was necessary for her young daughter, who suffered from leukemia.

Seeing kids with cancer is so devastating.

Ok. MidtownerEast is acting like a troll. Please stop doing so. If you continue your trollish ways, I hope you are banned.

If I'm reading through this last page it seems both MidtownEast and Wbottom have the same bias.

We are all the same poster, manifested as different personalities within the very warped mind of a middling Manhattan real estate broker. Hopefully he is writing a novel or screenplay so the real world can enjoy this just as much.

I admit it. I am W67 and Julialg. Please put me on hide.

Stop it. Can't you guys just stop it? You're all like gerbils. Tasteless gerbils pawing at each other incessently. It isn't funny. It isn't witty. And you, yes you, are all ruining this for everyone. If you have something meaningful to say about RE, fine. But no one gives a damn about what ph41 thinks of aboutready or vise verse. Why you all feel this compulsion to post these stupid things and seem bereft of any impulse control is a mystery. But seriously. Just stop it.

Aboutready wrote: "no, the large one definitely appreciated socialized medicine when it was necessary for her young daughter, who suffered from leukemia."
Clack wrote: "Seeing kids with cancer is so devastating."

It's digusting what you guys do on these threads. Just in this one tasteless example above, is it worth writing such disgusting things just to snipe at each other? Other people on here who read for RE info come across that and may actually have a child who is sick and your dumb comments just make them feel worse for no reason. I work with kids, many of whom do die from injuries or illnesses. It isn't funny. It shouldn't be the stuff of moronic banter to amuse yourself on a public forum. Sarah Silverman who jokes about EVERYTHING doesn't joke about someone's kid dying or being sick. There is something wrong with you all. Seriously wrong. Instead of just typing yet another witness post back attacking me, take a second and at least try to engage in some self-reflection and ask if what you write on these threads reflects the kind of person you consider yourself to be or whom you at least aspire to be.

Honestly, I'm sick of sifting through all your drivel. Trolls are one thing. But what you guys do is just as bad.

who said i was joking, kw? i was serious. there was no joke intended.

i think health care, unemployment benefits, etc., are very serious things. and i don't mind paying taxes for them.

the other one constantly posts about how the "leader of the regime" is destroying america and how shared sacrifice is the most horrible phrase on earth. to me health insurance is shared sacrifice. you can disagree with me, and you can not like what i post, but to say that i am making fun of sick children is simply incorrect.

kylewest -- Don't be so holier than thou. I withdraw my comment on the other thread about generally agreeing with you; I did so because I thought you were trying to stop the personal attacks. Now you are just being sanctimonious and ridiculous. Plus, is your time so precious you can't just skim over or ignore what you don't like so you can get to your vaunted "RE"? Gimme a break.

Aboutready - My dear, you are truly the temptress in the teacup.

I believe the self righteous undercurrent that permeates much of what you write discourages open civil dialog, and encourages much of the BS we now see here. Some have found a way to deal with it by mostly ignoring what you say, or steering clear of confrontation -except for those who feel they must get down into the viper pit with you - the trolls, the newbies etc.. Lighten up a little, and learn to let it ride. It's a talk forum garnering 3% of the hits on the SE website, 50% of which seems to be you (again.) Try being more encouraging, see if we can up the hits and get some new, corruptible, blood.

In a spirit of reconciliation, and out of respect for the clinical condition of one poster in particular, may we suggest that all posters henceforth post using the first person plural (especially Riversider).

At some point if grandpa thinks every bird or plane going over is a UFO, it is better to nod in agreement and say, "look, grandpa, there goes another one."

We hope this is appreciated.

oh spin, you rogue you. no, i'm not even close to 50% these days.

lighten up? i think you misdirected that comment, but i always welcome your commentary, even when i disagree with it.

new blood seems to spurt quite regularly, despite claims to the contrary.

Spinnaker -- I think you are not half as clever as you think you are and, in reality, are full of shit. But I say that in the most encouraging way.

I love chatting with you AR. You remind me of the natural selection talks I used to have with my born again Christian aunt.

AR: this is beyond the pale:

aboutready
about 13 hours ago
no, the large one definitely appreciated socialized medicine when it was necessary for her young daughter, who suffered from leukemia.

Have to agree with spinnaker's comment

se, julialg doesn't think the poor should receive tax-payer assisted health insurance. my apologies if the comment appeared crass, as i realize it may have because it is not apparent the context in which it was intended to be meant.