General Discussion

MADem

(135,425 posts)

82. Now, the question is, why don't they implement such a fix?

Mon Aug 11, 2014, 05:28 PM

Aug 2014

Either limiting the ability to post gifs until one is a "trusted" commenter, or eliminating the ability to do it altogether (which, if you read the comments following the article, was not a popular proposed solution--those gifs are popular on that site).

I wonder --as I have said elsewhere-- if the "problem" hasn't reached the tipping point yet. Right now, the controversy is driving people to the site, where they are being exposed to it and getting a chance to try it on for size. Some people will return as a consequence, and become regular readers. If the trollery reaches a point where it impacts every visit to the site, it might start to drive traffic away, but my sense is that hasn't happened and isn't even close to happening.

There is a way to complain about the posts and get them removed (send complaint to their HELP email) but that's not obvious to a lot of posters, apparently.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

107 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Feminist website Jezebel gets deluged with rape porn gifs. [View all] sufrommich Aug 2014 OP

Why don't they just moderate their comments, i.e., no one's comments get posted immediately. MADem Aug 2014 #1

Depends on how large a staff they have and how many comments they get. el_bryanto Aug 2014 #4

You're answer is here - Hell Hath No Fury Aug 2014 #5

So, they'll let their readers look at it because they don't have the stomach for it? MADem Aug 2014 #16

Apply the same to DU Blue_Adept Aug 2014 #53

Disable graphics then, for new posters. MADem Aug 2014 #69

Don't even know what to say. TDale313 Aug 2014 #2

Sexism and Racism are close cousins MuttLikeMe Aug 2014 #3

Homophobia is another close cousin as well. K&R. bullwinkle428 Aug 2014 #11

I think misogyny is at the root of homophobia too Skittles Aug 2014 #81

It isn't really about hating Feminism De Leonist Aug 2014 #21

Oh bull. Of course it's about attacking a feminist site. sufrommich Aug 2014 #24

Are they doing it because it's a Feminist Site, yes but... De Leonist Aug 2014 #26

I guessed it was 4chan /b/ doing before I even clicked on the thread. VScott Aug 2014 #31

"The fun is in offending people..." I think you're right. MADem Aug 2014 #44

I believe AgingAmerican Aug 2014 #60

Yes, and I think that the way to deal with them in many cases is to confront them. MADem Aug 2014 #65

"The fun is in offending people..." Gormy Cuss Aug 2014 #45

Yeah... I'd say that could pretty much describe a good portion of 4chan VScott Aug 2014 #66

I highly doubt it. eggplant Aug 2014 #34

Whether it is conscious and spoken or not, it is about misogyny Cal Carpenter Aug 2014 #52

Thank you. These same people wouldn't dream of dismissing racist or homophobic attacks this way redqueen Aug 2014 #57

Well put. Thank you. n/t TDale313 Aug 2014 #61

I could not disagree more. TDale313 Aug 2014 #72

Lets make something clear here.... De Leonist Aug 2014 #87

Your prerogative. TDale313 Aug 2014 #93

I AM NOT CALLING THEM HARMLESS PRANKSTERS! De Leonist Aug 2014 #100

I'd argue that the one's targeting feminists TDale313 Aug 2014 #102

Can't the site admins turn off image support? I am not able to follow the link Romulox Aug 2014 #6

Is Jezebel tied to that platform? cui bono Aug 2014 #7

I hate when that happens LittleBlue Aug 2014 #8

This tactic is sadly not new. Misogynists have used porn as a weapon for years. redqueen Aug 2014 #9

Sounds like time to change platforms blackspade Aug 2014 #10

DING DING DING! Blackspade, you're our grand prize winner! rocktivity Aug 2014 #37

I think Gawker either likes, or owns a piece of, Kinja. The Jezebel staffers commented MADem Aug 2014 #49

Perhaps Gawker's advertisers needs to hear from Skidmore Aug 2014 #62

Gawker Media owns a lot of sites. MADem Aug 2014 #71

Don't you just love how most of these commens are about how to avoid the situation redqueen Aug 2014 #12

Yep, was just thinking the same thing. nt sufrommich Aug 2014 #13

Same shit, different day. redqueen Aug 2014 #15

Studied avoidance of the actual issues, yup. Scootaloo Aug 2014 #14

Gawker likely not only doesn't give a shit, but they find the situation drives viewers to the site. MADem Aug 2014 #17

What a facile reading of the situation. redqueen Aug 2014 #19

I read the entire piece at the Jezebel site, AND at least half of the 1000 plus replies. MADem Aug 2014 #27

Once again you're all about treating symptoms. redqueen Aug 2014 #32

And ONCE AGAIN, YOU're all about making this PERSONAL. How entirely unnecessary. MADem Aug 2014 #38

exactly. Tuesday Afternoon Aug 2014 #42

The focus is how to deal with misogynists, and not how to prevent misogynists from using the site redqueen Aug 2014 #46

Why doesn't that website get juries and a MIRT? (nt) Nye Bevan Aug 2014 #18

Huh? Warpy Aug 2014 #25

They used to have moderators and a three tiered system of letting commenters into the pool. MADem Aug 2014 #29

Hasn't done much for the sexism problem here. LeftyMom Aug 2014 #55

Sounds to me like Kinja is a lousy blog platform. MineralMan Aug 2014 #20

I think the blog is a wholely owned subsidiary of the parent. MADem Aug 2014 #30

Yes. So it seems. MineralMan Aug 2014 #35

How can they move if they're owned by Gawker, the platform provider? MADem Aug 2014 #40

You could be right. It's a big problem, anyhow, I think. MineralMan Aug 2014 #41

I think it's a tightrope situation for GAWKER. MADem Aug 2014 #43

It seems to be a function of the entire Internet MineralMan Aug 2014 #47

Yes--one of the JEZEBEL commenters had a good idea about that. MADem Aug 2014 #50

Identifying trolls would require capturing an IP address. redqueen Aug 2014 #51

It can take quite a lot of work to unmask dedicated trolls. MineralMan Aug 2014 #54

Not if you confront them directly. Make it a news story. MADem Aug 2014 #58

That works if you know who the person is. MineralMan Aug 2014 #64

Piece of cake--give them a blog to go to. MADem Aug 2014 #68

Wasn't there the ability to disable picture posts for a little while? Xyzse Aug 2014 #22

Kinja sucks so, so bad. Brickbat Aug 2014 #23

You think Gawker WOULDN'T step up rocktivity Aug 2014 #39

It is happening to Gawker itself. Brickbat Aug 2014 #56

I'll re-phrase the question, your honor rocktivity Aug 2014 #63

"Men's Rights Advocates" (MRA) and Bro-country fans. Dawson Leery Aug 2014 #28

Thank you for noticing the problem and commenting on it! nt redqueen Aug 2014 #33

That's sick! NealK Aug 2014 #36

Some people (MRAs) have nothing better to with their time ZombieHorde Aug 2014 #48

Why not just place a call to Anonymous? derby378 Aug 2014 #59

That would be like calling the police on the police. VScott Aug 2014 #67

Seems to me the quickest technical fix would be to disable graphics in the comments Warren DeMontague Aug 2014 #70

I'm surprised that the comments allowed graphics in the first place. JVS Aug 2014 #74

It's way easier to disable animated gifs than to maintain and constantly update a list of 4chan Warren DeMontague Aug 2014 #75

I can't argue with that. I do think they like the good gifs, though--it's just the bad ones that MADem Aug 2014 #77

Having done many terms on MIRT with our own particularly nasty troll(s) Warren DeMontague Aug 2014 #78

Now, the question is, why don't they implement such a fix? MADem Aug 2014 #82

Maybe they feel that losing the ability to respond with the tina fey eyeroll Warren DeMontague Aug 2014 #84

The pushback against eliminating gifs was pretty strong, I noticed. MADem Aug 2014 #88

I agree. Warren DeMontague Aug 2014 #98

Heh. I am not at any Chan at all, except maybe Charlie--I used to watch those old blatantly MADem Aug 2014 #99

shake the hand, that shook the hand Warren DeMontague Aug 2014 #104

It's for the amusing kittie gifs, and things like that.... MADem Aug 2014 #76

This is at a minimum cyberharassment and as such ought to be prosecuted. hlthe2b Aug 2014 #73

Not defending them, but the trolls would call it "free speech" and it is a private site, so the MADem Aug 2014 #79

There is a line beyond which even our rudimentary cyber laws would consider stalking behavior.... hlthe2b Aug 2014 #80

I think it is rude and offensive conduct, but I wouldn't call posting trash on a comment board MADem Aug 2014 #86

Have you seen what they are posting? I'd saying it is walking close to a hate crime hlthe2b Aug 2014 #89

The goal is upset. It has nothing to do with "hate" against a MADem Aug 2014 #91

Do you know the people doing this? I presume not, boston bean Aug 2014 #101

This was discussed upthread. nt MADem Aug 2014 #103

Agreed. From what I remember of cyberstalking laws, this qualifies. stevenleser Aug 2014 #83

Posting rude crap on a discussion board qualifies as cyberstalking? MADem Aug 2014 #90

It definitely can be, particularly obscene content. The key is the intent and repeated nature. stevenleser Aug 2014 #92

It's technically not "repeated." MADem Aug 2014 #95

It's repeated if at least two of the posters are connected in some way. stevenleser Aug 2014 #105

Bit of a grey area, Steve. chrisa Aug 2014 #96

The target was the individuals that use the website. I can find examples that show you how this stevenleser Aug 2014 #106

The problem is, that argument could be used for any type of trolling. chrisa Aug 2014 #107

Nasty shit, man. AverageJoe90 Aug 2014 #85

I hate trolls and hope there is a special place in hell for them. Rex Aug 2014 #94

... nomorenomore08 Aug 2014 #97