Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Steve Sill on March 18, 2009 at 12:10pm

I actually did not read Agastus's blog till after I heard about "the bad guys" from Maureen on Twitter, yesterday morning (PDT). While I have no issues regarding flaming someone who wants to interject an ad into another person's post, this concept of organized "name calling", does not feel right. Also Agastus's blog was not the only one listed, there is a also link to a blog posted on "Fist Full of Talent", which appears to be more of an opinion peace.

If organized attacks like this continue on RBC I feel that it will have long term implications on its growth. People who are just starting to blog (of which I am one, and not a regular one at that :)) may fear such attacks on their well meaning blog.

Steve Levy said:

Steve et. al.

I'll ask the question that others have not asked...why did this start?

We were having another one of our ubiquitous BountyJobs discussions when Agastus elected to toss in a tangential, highly-canned comment abou... - it smacked of bait-and-switchness.

You will eventually come to recognize that these types of posts take place frequently on RBC; read the original BountyJobs post. Jason can't be everywhere and relies on members of the community to point out these "ad attacks."

As his his right, Agastus then took the same content of his comment and created a blog post. But in the time frame that it was posted - so shortly after the BountyJobs thread - I viewed it...I suppose right or wrong depending upon how much time you've put into this community...as him thumbing his nose at me - and others in this community.

I've pointed out other blatant ads to Jason and accounts have been removed; if no one other than Jason took ownership of spammers we'd be overrun in a matter of weeks. RBC lives and dies by the content; honest discussions of RPO are great - whether they work any better than in-house is a great debate.

But this one was over the top; and I won't apologize for being a Badboy if in the long run the community thrives...

Steve Sill said:

This is just mean spirited. I think that anyone who reads a blog can make decisions for them selves. You obviously have far too much time on your hands.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Maureen Sharib on March 18, 2009 at 12:38pm

SS raises an interesting point. Do we lose when newbie bloggers are reticent to post because they're afraid they're not posting "correctly" and run the risk of being crucified? Is any attention (good/bad) really all good in the 'sphere? Is there another kinder, gentler way besides this baptism by fire to learn the ropes online? Is it fair to others who are, as Animal declared, "recruitosphere patriots, concerned citizens spending their own time turning postings that are made out of pablum into a discussion of real issues" to go back over the same thing time and time again? "Here, honey, let me show you how it's done..."

Have we become insensitive and jaded? Or is this the natural way in an ecosystem like this - as systems develop participation requirements accelerate? What say you?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jerry Albright on March 18, 2009 at 12:48pm

Just for the record - I am not in any way interested in crucifying, attacking or flaming anyone.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Slouch on March 18, 2009 at 12:56pm

Steve, I agree with you and what I see here seems like nothing more than a mutual jack off session because obviously, there is a lot of time on a lot of peoples hands. This has really been an eye opener for me and it's these things that make it difficult for people to feel good about contributing content and ideas. It's the disasters that force change and I thank you all for this particular disaster.

Steve Sill said:

I actually did not read Agastus's blog till after I heard about "the bad guys" from Maureen on Twitter, yesterday morning (PDT). While I have no issues regarding flaming someone who wants to interject an ad into another person's post, this concept of organized "name calling", does not feel right. Also Agastus's blog was not the only one listed, there is a also link to a blog posted on "Fist Full of Talent", which appears to be more of an opinion peace.

If organized attacks like this continue on RBC I feel that it will have long term implications on its growth. People who are just starting to blog (of which I am one, and not a regular one at that :)) may fear such attacks on their well meaning blog.

Steve Levy said:

Steve et. al.

I'll ask the question that others have not asked...why did this start?

We were having another one of our ubiquitous BountyJobs discussions when Agastus elected to toss in a tangential, highly-canned comment abou... - it smacked of bait-and-switchness.

You will eventually come to recognize that these types of posts take place frequently on RBC; read the original BountyJobs post. Jason can't be everywhere and relies on members of the community to point out these "ad attacks."

As his his right, Agastus then took the same content of his comment and created a blog post. But in the time frame that it was posted - so shortly after the BountyJobs thread - I viewed it...I suppose right or wrong depending upon how much time you've put into this community...as him thumbing his nose at me - and others in this community.

I've pointed out other blatant ads to Jason and accounts have been removed; if no one other than Jason took ownership of spammers we'd be overrun in a matter of weeks. RBC lives and dies by the content; honest discussions of RPO are great - whether they work any better than in-house is a great debate.

But this one was over the top; and I won't apologize for being a Badboy if in the long run the community thrives...

Steve Sill said:

This is just mean spirited. I think that anyone who reads a blog can make decisions for them selves. You obviously have far too much time on your hands.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Levy on March 18, 2009 at 12:56pm

Not a new question...and no, we haven't become insensitive or jaded - we've actually become more caring about the community. The only things we're obliged to offer are (a) telling newbies that we were all new once, (b) one must be prepared to back up what you write, and (c) the community is protective and you too will one day be protective.

Without standards we're left with Yahoo groups...

Maureen Sharib said:

SS raises an interesting point. Do we lose when newbie bloggers are reticent to post because they're afraid they're not posting "correctly" and run the risk of being crucified? Is any attention (good/bad) really all good in the 'sphere? Is there another kinder, gentler way besides this baptism by fire to learn the ropes online? Is it fair to others who are, as Animal declared, "recruitosphere patriots, concerned citizens spending their own time turning postings that are made out of pablum into a discussion of real issues" to go back over the same thing time and time again? "Here, honey, let me show you how it's done..."

Have we become insensitive and jaded? Or is this the natural way in an ecosystem like this - as systems develop participation requirements accelerate? What say you?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Recruiting Animal on March 18, 2009 at 1:05pm

Steve Sill, you misunderstand.

What you call "organized name-calling" is merely an organization promoting dialogue by identifying (for interested parties) blog postings that require comment.

If bloggers don't want comments, maybe they shouldn't post.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Recruiting Animal on March 18, 2009 at 1:06pm

Maureen worries about bloggers who need Prozac when someone points out an error.

But you know that Aggie is not a blogger. He's a spammer.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Recruiting Animal on March 18, 2009 at 1:14pm

I suggest that there be no rough talk (sexual references) in this session. Especially from the Bad Guys.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Delaney on March 18, 2009 at 4:54pm

Uh, where do I sing up for the free love and nickel beer?

Sandra’s right, comments belong to the individual not “Bad Guys”. Can RecruitingBlogs ban individuals from challenging blogs? That would be a slap in the face of social networking. The future would look pretty bleak if they started a “Speak No Evil” policy. Readers and writers will disappear in droves. A policy like that would more destructive than Bad Guys – by far.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Recruiting Animal on March 18, 2009 at 5:15pm

The Comment Club - http://cli.gs/ty56LM

I already got a nasty reply from a non-member

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dan Nuroo on March 18, 2009 at 8:39pm

So much for my discussion point the other day about a drop on activity on RBC huh.... nothing like a little controversy.

As long as things aren't personal, rude, disrespectful, defamitory, sexist, ageist.. or any other ist's it fine I think, whilst the torches and pitchfork approach may be a little overkill the idea that people need to have some depth in what they are saying is solid.

I will admit though that I think the reaction to Agastus blog went into overdrive and hyperbole, and I'll admit I got in early (but my comment got deleted!).

I think (my opinion) a lot of people People take things that are written down (anywhere) as truth. There is a danger with this, esp in Social media where barriers to entry are virtually non existent, people need to be held accountable and be able to debate points if required.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Recruiting Animal on March 18, 2009 at 8:48pm

I didn't see the comment that was deleted. I told Maureen, "Dan Nuroo is such a nice guy. I can't believe he said anything that awful."

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page