This seems the right place to draw your attention to the: ionnalee EVERYONE AFRAID TO BE FORGOTTEN
Can we get rid of some of the bots who threw 100’s at this album
This seems the right place to draw your attention to the: ionnalee EVERYONE AFRAID TO BE FORGOTTEN
Can we get rid of some of the bots who threw 100’s at this album
How can there be so many pop queens? I think Grace VanderWaal is all we need.
So Let me get this straight,Just in my own head. If you (A random ordinary user) don’t like the way someone else chooses to rate things you can have them banned??
And then Rob bans them without, as far as I can tell, giving them any right to reply or any reason for why they have been banned - Just because 2/3 users are bending his ear about it. EMF suggested on another thread someone should be banned for racial abuse, forgive me for being old fashioned but I think thats probably a better reason than “This guys given a Prince Album zero”.
I have seen a lot of abuse and threats of getting people banned on here lately that seem to revolve heavily around “new users”, and this toxic atmosphere could be damaging the growth of a very decent site.I mean someone needs to grow a backbone at AOTY and create an enviroment that gives us genuine userscores, rather than userscores that other people dont moan about!! There’s isn’t anything wrong with having a contrary opinion and there isn’t anything wrong with being a new user either.
If someone rates 800 Album at 100 each, What exactly is wrong with that (AllMusic have rated over 800 Albums at 100 - Should they get banned?), What if new users already have a list of 5000 Albums that they are transferring to this site and they’ve started with the highest first? or lowest for that matter! Why should they have that effort eviscerated and why should anyone else care (IMDB users dont)
MY IDEA would be to let users “Follow” other users. You know the ones that they trust and then see what scores the people they… oh wait you can already do that … so again what does it matter what some idiot you dont like scores it anyway. Why get them banned? Just because Rob is a bit weak? Just because you can? Just because you want your favourites at the top? No!! Thats not how it should work!!
What makes you think you’ve got the right to tell people how to rate things anyway. Chimecha hasn’t rated an Album in the green (Over 70) thats been released in the last 5 years!! That not a system that I have any repect for whatsoever, But if he wants to do it that way, fair enough.
A system that could work (IMDB again as an example) is have user scores weighted by how many things they have rated and on here you could even utilize how many followers they have into it. So if a load of “bot” accounts rated 1 Album 100 and have 0 follows it would have little effect anyway. Surely anything is a better system than letting a couple of users with barely 100 followers between them dictate which Albums are allowed to be rated low and which aren’t just because they are the ones doing the most moaning.
Janelle Monae (30), Grimes (30), Car seat headrest (40) LCD Soundsystem, Arctic Monkeys, Radiohead… I could go on. They are all critically acclaimed albums with high user scores too that Chimecha has scored low… So maybe he should be banned for having a contrary opinion. Or maybe we shouldn’t ban anyone based on their personal ratings however silly anyone else thinks they are.
Users aren’t banned based on their ratings. 99% of bans are for having multiple accounts. The 1% are those who use the site to troll and abuse users.
This thread was made because buddy boy Floydolini has 800+ albums rated 100—do you seriously not see how that could be considered questionable? Even if they are transferring 5000+ albums this thread is almost a year old and they still have the same amount of scores, so I highly doubt they’re being objective about their ratings.
Where have you seen users demanding the banning of other users exactly because I’ve only seen people complain about the influx of spammers? I’m not questioning it doesn’t happened but it’s not really something I’ve seen unless they’re very obviously spammers like those we lost in the the bloody Grace VanderWaal attack of '17.
Also I’m pretty sure how that’s roughly how the weighting works on the site.
Having all 100s is not the same as being a contrarian. You’re making an awful analogy. I’m not rating for the sake of throttling scores. This thread was never about people having scores that I disagree with because of their taste, are you dense? As for FloFlo, I just felt bad that it didn’t seem like he gets much enjoyment out of music in general. But did I call for a ban? No. You don’t see me going “WAAAA Space Vacation doesn’t like Residents, ban him”.
Well first of all. That definitely isn’t how the scores are weighted there are plenty of album with 1 user score and that albums overall score is 100, those users often don’t have any followers or maybe a small handful and have rated about 10 things and review nothing. Yet it still gets full marks. If your that “dense” maybe buy a calculator.
I’m not constantly refreshing the page to see if my favourite album of 2017 is at the top (It never will be) so the grace vanfarwell scandal I am blissfully unaware of, but I presume none of those users (if there were bots) had any followers or had rated more than a handful of releases, so how did that cause such a problem if there isn’t a fault with the overall rating system?
And I feel it’s only fair to ask what exactly I’m suppose to make of the conversation
“User 456ydbffghy is a douche rated somethings 0 and some things 80”
“Deleted”
“Love you loads honeybunch!”
Are you telling me that user is one of the 99% of spammers or does that count as 1% of abusers (100% that adds up to doesn’t it, for those of you without calculators) because from where I’m standing it looks suspiciously like one of your friends told you to ban someone they didn’t like and then you did it.
And I’m more than a little worried that as I use the site more and more I’m increasing that I might upset and then have everything erased. It actually took me a couple of times to sign in and I thought you’d got rid of me for my earlier post. No-one should have there account deleted just made irrelevant if they’ve got multiple and suspended for a period of time if they are abusing others (like calling them dense for instance). It just seems quite amateurish to go around deleting accounts without some sort of process or t&c’s as guidelines. So is there a list of things you can get banned for? Is 71 zeros ok? Would I receive a message/email explaining the decision? Or would it happen 30 seconds after one of the forum users calls me a douche or dense or whatever?
I just wanted to see how you would respond, and what you would focus on in my response. No surprise at all.
So you call me a name to get a rise out of me. OK. I’d like your response to be a definition of trolling.
I feel like you’re missing a lot of context and making a lot of assumptions about how things work around here. I’ve never seen anybody banned unless they’re being abusive or obviously trying to game the system; for example rating every Grace VanderWaal LP, EP and single 100 while giving all yearly top-rated albums on the charts a 0. As for 4jgbb2kelf I vaguely remember him being a troll hence the whole douche comment, but hey—you clearly know everything that’s goin’ on here with crystal clear vision, after all, you seem to understand all of the circumstances of these banned users from a year old thread.
Why are you complaining about an albums average being 100 if only one user has rated? It’s only one user, the weight determines how much of an affect it has on the average, not the actual score so that’s why it’s still 100. It’s not like albums with sub 25 ratings appear in the charts, so it doesn’t matter in the first place.
If you want my unsolicited advice on how to be taken seriously around here, maybe don’t hide behind an anonymous account and attack users like Chimecha because all you’ve accomplished is coming across as a salty user who recently had his spam accounts deleted.
This is the type of dumb drama people do not want on the site.
Well I came across this thread because it was at the top. I am trying to point out the blatant hypocrisy of users trying to get other users banned or whatever the opening messages intent is (surely you don’t think I was live and let live do you). Banning or devaluing users scores and then claiming 100% of bans are for trolling or multiple accounts when the only user mentioned in this thread that is banned was banned for “being a douche”! If someone calls you a douche are you not allowed to call them a douche back. Plus there’s no mention of him being a troll just 72 zeros and 21 80s, surely that nit a good president to be setting, is it?
And yes I can see why you’d assume I was one of these users but I’m not here to defend or attack anyone (I only chose to highlight chlamydia’s ratings because he’s at the top - I’m probably having more of a go at mark and Rob if anything). The only thing I’m trying to defend is the integrity of what could be a magnificent website. I was appalled, shocked and saddened to find users brow beating the administration into deleting accounts that they thought weren’t using the site properly.
Now a question for you, does calling people a douche or dense fit the 100% of banned users Rob outlined for us early more or less than giving 72 zeros and 21 80s in your ratings?
Don’t get me wrong, I agree with the sentiment of your post but I think you’re missing a lot of critical information about how banning works around here. I think it’s safe to say an audit was performed on the accused which ultimately resulted in the banning. The weighting determination likely has some sort of hopper system that includes various conditions like the number of ratings the user has; the user’s rating average; among others that Rob probably doesn’t want to be made public in case of possible researching into loopholes to game the system.
well Actually we should not really interfere in people’s choice.
I have a friend whose account here was removed because he only rated 100s or 0s to the albums. but thats his character. he does not have a mixed feelings for an album or an artist. if he loves an artist, he loves her to the hell. when he hates, he hates forever. i dont get why people do not understand that
I don’t really understand the point of joining a website dedicated to ratings albums and refuse to put any critical thinking into it; seems like a huge waste of time and hampers the websites purpose. That said I think it’s fine to leave those users be since the weighting system keeps their scores from ruining things. Mistakes get made, it’s a small website and few admins. Spam influx has been a huge problem since the mobile update resulting in all this drama.
The sites never gonna grow if you ban people for using it in a different way to how you think they should. But I do find it incredible that a handful of users on here seem to think they can get rid of others for that reason. My story is being told by a certain user that they had robs personal email and they would come and break me, I thought it was a funny joke and that Rob was the angry looking one in the particular death metal band I’d given a low score to but no it turns out it’s the administration.
On another point about 1 user score album ratings. I think the fact they don’t show up, give’s incentive to gracie van nieustadt fans to create 24 other accounts and just give it 100 so it shows up. If there was a proper weighting system it should work for albums with 1 review as well as 200. The same can be said for cities but I think users instinctively know which publications they trust anyway.
The sites rating system isn’t binary, not acknowledging how the system works is a problem on the user end. Rob is the only admin here, and the reason I still use this website after 4-5 years is that he takes feedback seriously and is usually quick to act if reasonable. He’s recently mentioned the possibility of introducing a like/heart feature (among others) that would help users like Kazim_Alper’s friend who are not interested in using the full rating system which would let them have a say without ignoring a key feature of the site.
There’s only so much a single person can do and I feel like this website may have outgrown its humble vision, resulting in a lot of key features that have yet to be implemented but I’m sure they will in due time; development takes time especially for a complex website like this.
I’m sorry that it looks like 4jgbb2kelf was banned because Mark requested it, but that’s not the case. There are some unwritten rules for how to behave in a community that don’t necessarily need to be pointed out. Giving every album that is rated higher than your favorite album a 0 and never returning to the site is one of them. It’s common sense that this type of user adds no value to the site.
I think the main issue you have is that your 4 or 5 extra accounts have been removed. Why do you deserve 4 or 5 times the say in the average overall score? I let you keep you original accounts (and possibly a second), so what’s the problem? Yes, older albums aren’t rated as often so they don’t make it into the user chart, but creating multiple accounts is not the way to solve this problem.
I am the only one running things behind the scenes so I do take input from the community here. They may point out things that I don’t see right away so that I can act on it. It’s not playing favorites, it’s just that there is a smaller group of people who are invested in the site so they speak out more.
I’d be curious if you could elaborate on this part some more. This sounds made up.
A mistake could have been made here, but did your friend happen to hate a lot more albums than they loved? If you have the username, I could possibly look into it.
not really actually. he probably hated 8-10 albums. and 20 super loved albums.
i will ask the nickname of him.
thanks for your care
If it’s unwritten, maybe it should be written down rather than made up after the event based on whether you’re pals with anyone or not, that doesn’t seem fair to anyone. I’ve already said several times I’m neither of these users so if you want to ban 6/7 or 25 users I dont really care.
I have to commend you on making the trolls on here actually look resonable with you’re attitude towards a couple of people flagging up concerns on here. There’s no wonder there’s so many trolls on here.
The reason I gave a vague account of the incident you think is a lie, is because I thought it would be a little hypocritical to name names and imply bans when I’ve been saying all thought this thread that I think banning users shouldn’t be a first response. But I can sense your itchy trigger finger is getting twitchy and I suppose you’re going to delete me and justify it by saying I’m one of the gray-z van wolfswinkel crew.
The only thing I’d like to add is that if you give power and influence to the ones who are shouting the loudest and most often you won’t have anyone but yourself to blame if you spend all day being shouted at by everyone.
Thanks for the hostility, really welcoming place this. I presume I’ll be banned the next time I try and log in