Why are some allowed to spam this forum with polls?

[Cerridwen]

Poll question: Why are some allowed to spam this forum with polls?

edit because software didn't like my html.

Another edit: oh, geez. This is my very first poll. :D

Yet, another edit to add numbers to poll choices to aid in discussion (in case there is one). Hey, I said it was my first poll. :hi:

[Orrex]

1. kind of a combination of 1 and 3

And it isn't confined to the Women's Rights group, alas.

[Cerridwen]

2. I'd call it #1, #2, #3 & #4. But, that's just me.

Yeah, I've seen it in R/T and GD way more than is comfortable for me.

Don't we have enough liberal baiters in the real world; do we have to deal with them on this board, too? (rhetorical. no reply required, but welcome if you'd care.)

[Orrex]

3. Well, 2 makes sense, of course. Let me add that to my answer

Not quite sure what 4 means, though. From the top? :shrug:

[Cerridwen]

4. #4 - sh)*!#$ flows downhill.

That's about all I can say without getting deleted or banned.

Many companies have a culture as defined and promoted by their management. I once worked for a xtian (as opposed to a Christian) "conservative" whose policies "informed" the day-to-day operations and overall "theme" of the company. Wanna guess how women faired in said company? AA/Blacks? Non-xtians?

edit: typo

[Orrex]

5. Ah! Got it, now. Add 4 to mine.

My last employer promoted women very well, to a certain level but seldom any higher. So a quick glance at middle-management would give the appearance of a nicely balanced workplace, in terms of gender and opportunity. But from that level on up, it was a boys' club.

But hey! At least they make sure that women know their place, right? :sarcasm:

[Cerridwen]

6. The truly "fun" part is when they put the business in the wife's name

so it can appear to be a "female owned" business and get all the "perks" that go with that.

BTW, the xtian I once worked for...craig smith. Google that with swiftboaters. Yeah, he is and was real slime. I took a temp job and trained my replacement as quickly as I could. Old craigy boy is a fucking piece of work. Expected his daughter to go to work the same day she had surgery for "female problems" because he'd never been sick a day in his life; except for the time he got stinking drunk and found jaaaaysus.

[Boojatta]

13. "But from that level on up, it was a boys' club."

Most workplaces aren't online, so unfortunately a variety of information that could be a basis for discrimination is automatically disclosed. For example, gender, skin color, approximate age, height, physical attractiveness or lack thereof, et cetera are automatically disclosed.

Online communication provides us with an excellent opportunity to focus on each message on its own merits rather than in connection with characteristics of the messenger.

[valerief]

7. Thank you for your spam concern. nt

[Cerridwen]

8. You bettcha. My spam equates to 1 post in the last...

how long?

Yeah, that equates to spam.

How do you define spam?

edit to add: valerie...why do you equate one post in many months as spam? Why are you trying to equate my one post in many months with spam? Please, do answer.

[valerief]

9. Whoa! Just playing, dude! Thought you were, too.

:hi:

[Cerridwen]

10. I don't respond well to "dude". But thanks, glad you're willing to play.

:hi:

I guess we're cool. :D

[valerief]

11. Dude is such a ridiculous form of address that I consider it the height of silliness.

No offense meant. I was just being silly.

I mean, Palin calls her husband "the First Dude." That should totally take "dude" off any list of acceptable forms of address. Ick!

I'll go read the Bailout Plan now and weep.

:cry:

[Cerridwen]

12. I figured. It's right up there with "you guys." I made many of my

college professors nauseous with that phrase. :evilgrin:

[Boojatta]

14. My choice is/was: "6. Other - please post reply below."

The word "spam" is most frequently used to refer to a kind of email message. Now, that doesn't imply that we must use the word only in that narrow context. However, an important aspect of email spam is that there is a large number of recipients who did nothing other than open an email account that could possibly be interpreted as consent to receive the email spam.

It's difficult to block spam that is sent from some list of email addresses because the senders apparently don't encounter any significant cost or inconvenience in creating new email accounts to use to send spam.

Now, if there are some flavors of message content that some people agree to call "spam-like" then, regardless of the particular format of those messages (such as poll format or other format), then it should be possible for those people to work together to classify every newly posted message as "spam-like" or non-"spam-like." It should then be possible to add a new feature to the message board software that gives members of the board an opportunity to choose the ignore option for all allegedly spam-like posts anywhere on the message board or for all allegedly spam-like posts in particular sub-forums.

[omega minimo]

22. no matter how you slice and dice and dress up and serve up offal

it's still awful
:puke:

[Boojatta]

15. If there are to be no special groups of post evaluators...

and if all ordinary DU members are to be considered able to evaluate for themselves whether or not a given post is spam, then we could use a rating system.

It could be similar to the recently tried rating system, except that among the ratings would be not just Disruptive, Skip It, Average, Recommend, and Must Read, but also Spam.

[Book Lover]

16. I have found that

the Ignore button removed the vast majority of irritating polls from my DU experience. Works here and in the R&T forum.

[Boojatta]

17. Are you assuming that the OP merely wants to control the OP's own DU experience?

What if the goal is instead to control the experiences of other members of DU?

[Book Lover]

18. To the author of post #17

Sorry, friend, I don't log out of DU to read ignored posts.

[MountainLaurel]

19. Same here n/t

[Lydia Leftcoast]

20. Some people are attention junkies?

:shrug:

[omega minimo]

21. same reason "some are allowed to spam this forum" with lots of things

didn't see it in the poll, tho.