4 ms·

Like I posted on that Github issue, they've been editing opposing opinions to call themselves "trolls." It's known that abusive repos get removed from trending/

by Operyl 8y ago

Like I posted on that Github issue, they've been editing opposing opinions to call themselves "trolls." It's known that abusive repos get removed from trending/explore, and that's as clear cut as abuse as you can get. EDIT: 2. Content Restrictions You agree that you will not under any circumstances upload, post, host, or transmit any content that: 1. is unlawful or promotes unlawful activities; 2. is or contains sexually obscene content; 3. is libelous, defamatory, or fraudulent; 4. is discriminatory or abusive toward any individual or group; 5. contains or installs any active malware or exploits, or uses our platform for exploit delivery (such as part of a command and control system); or 6. infringes on any proprietary right of any party, including patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright, right of publicity, or other rights.

hmyr0 8y ago
I agree that editing other people's comments isn't the best thing to do, but the README clearly states that those types of comments weren't welcome. In addition, serious opinions like issue #60 weren't edited, only issues like #77, which literally said: "Dear Beef, Beef. Thanks, Beef" -- https://github.com/upend/IF_MS_BUYS_GITHUB_IMMA_OUT/issues/77 https://github.com/upend/IF_MS_BUYS_GITHUB_IMMA_OUT/issues/7... EDIT: ... and IMO calling an obvious troll a "troll" isn't defamatory. What GitHub is doing is clearly censorship, nothing short of it.
- Operyl 8y ago
  Perhaps. Close them and lock the issue, don't join the same "trolling" fashion.
- matheusmoreira 8y ago
  Wait a second. Repository owners can edit people's comments on their issue tracker? That's insane.
  - kingosticks 8y ago
    Yes, normally to fix the formatting when they post long sections of code/logs which are otherwise very difficult to read. And not just repo owners either.
  - Operyl 8y ago
    It's usually not abused, and when it is the moderation team will step in like shown here. It works pretty well.
  - ayekat 8y ago
    Posts that have been modified are well visibly labeled as "Edited", together with a history of changes, so there is no "sneak-editing".
merinowool 8y ago
How that repo fits any of those points?
- Operyl 8y ago
  He's editing issues that he's closed to read "im a troll." against the original issue writer's initial content. That falls under 4.
  - shawn 8y ago
    I don't think that counts as abuse or discrimination. That would diminish the power of those terms.
bderiso 8y ago
> 3. is libelous, defamatory, or fraudulent; > 4. is discriminatory or abusive toward any individual or group; Nailed it. To close an issue, even to edit the title might be fine. Changing the person's words so it seems like they are admitting to being a troll is insane and a clear attempt to discredit that individual. Considering that some people use GitHub as a resume, the owner of that repo deserves far worse punishment that just being dropped from "tending, IMHO.

by Operyl 8y ago

hmyr0 8y ago

I agree that editing other people's comments isn't the best thing to do, but the README clearly states that those types of comments weren't welcome. In addition, serious opinions like issue #60 weren't edited, only issues like #77, which literally said: "Dear Beef, Beef. Thanks, Beef" -- https://github.com/upend/IF_MS_BUYS_GITHUB_IMMA_OUT/issues/77 https://github.com/upend/IF_MS_BUYS_GITHUB_IMMA_OUT/issues/7... EDIT: ... and IMO calling an obvious troll a "troll" isn't defamatory. What GitHub is doing is clearly censorship, nothing short of it.

Operyl 8y ago
Perhaps. Close them and lock the issue, don't join the same "trolling" fashion.
matheusmoreira 8y ago
Wait a second. Repository owners can edit people's comments on their issue tracker? That's insane.
- kingosticks 8y ago
  Yes, normally to fix the formatting when they post long sections of code/logs which are otherwise very difficult to read. And not just repo owners either.
- Operyl 8y ago
  It's usually not abused, and when it is the moderation team will step in like shown here. It works pretty well.
- ayekat 8y ago
  Posts that have been modified are well visibly labeled as "Edited", together with a history of changes, so there is no "sneak-editing".

merinowool 8y ago

How that repo fits any of those points?

Operyl 8y ago
He's editing issues that he's closed to read "im a troll." against the original issue writer's initial content. That falls under 4.
- shawn 8y ago
  I don't think that counts as abuse or discrimination. That would diminish the power of those terms.

bderiso 8y ago

> 3. is libelous, defamatory, or fraudulent; > 4. is discriminatory or abusive toward any individual or group; Nailed it. To close an issue, even to edit the title might be fine. Changing the person's words so it seems like they are admitting to being a troll is insane and a clear attempt to discredit that individual. Considering that some people use GitHub as a resume, the owner of that repo deserves far worse punishment that just being dropped from "tending, IMHO.