A Prayer to the Banhammer God

Submitted by dmccoy on April 15th, 2009 at 11:38 AM

There are many reasons I can think of for banning someone from this site. Inflammatory remarks about race or sexual orientation, "trolls" from rival teams just stirring up trouble, annoying and persistent pictures of felines, posting pictures of obscene or disturbing images of corpses, etc. etc. etc.

I would like to propose another reason. Mental retardation.

Not the type of mental illness which only people in bad taste can make fun of. I mean the type of retardation of individuals that make ridiculous assertions, arguments, and questions that cause those unfortunate enough to read them to have a significant drop in his or her intelligence quotient as a direct result. Sometimes, the stupidity can be so high as to cause a dramatic spike in blood pressure, endangering the lives of some of the readership at risk of heart attack or stroke.

Maybe the Banhammer is too severe. However, some type of warning would be nice before reading a post by a complete moron. The pure lunacy/idiocy of the post requires a response, and oftentimes one would choose not to read a post by a suspected idiot, if only one had noticed the author of the post before reading it.



April 15th, 2009 at 12:08 PM ^

Ignoring never works because the frustration with having to parse idiocy from not idiocy builds up and eventually boils over. I plan on implementing a technical solution sometime before next football season.


April 15th, 2009 at 12:34 PM ^

but you know how YouTube has the thumbs up / thumbs down option for comments, and if a comment receives a certain number of thumbs down(s), it is hidden from view completely? If such a feature were implemented on MGoBoard for forum topics (or perhaps even individual users), I think it definitely would help reduce the number of "retarded" posts.


April 15th, 2009 at 12:42 PM ^

Sportingnews.com does it too. Users get a star ranking bsed off the percentage approval, plus fantasy scores and other factors. Basically, if a 1* guy says something dumb, it's easy to see and ignore. If a 5* guy says something, there's a better chance there's some merit behind it. Might work on mgoblog.

BTW, the post was generally supposed to make fun of one person in particular (**cough, McFarlin, cough**) and not to complain about the site, which kicks an enormous amount of ass. Keep up the good work Brian.


April 15th, 2009 at 1:38 PM ^

is if brian elected a group of highly regarded posters to assign preliminary ratings to posters. then, those posters who attain certain ratings are the only ones allowed to "rank" based on star rating. that way, random idiots couldn't just walk in and give negative star ratings for no reason. i mean, if someone is a retard, they're probably going to give negative ratings to smart arguments.

david from wyoming

April 15th, 2009 at 1:54 PM ^

My vote would be for slashdot style comment ranking system. Until I read a slashdot article on a science field I know inside and out, then it hits me that stupid people will say stupid things and stupid people will rank them up so the comments are visible.

I don't think there is a perfect way to handle comments online, just some that are better then others.


April 15th, 2009 at 12:09 PM ^

We all grow up and save the word retard and ignore these people. Believe it or not, calling someone a retard wasn't even funny when you were 12.

I am not opposed to holding folks accountable but how you do it could be offensive. I'm just sayin'.


April 15th, 2009 at 12:26 PM ^

However, you're quote seems incorrect. If I remember correctly, Walter tells Smokey "this isn't Nam, there are rules," just before he pulls a .45 automatic and threatens "a world of pain" unless Smokey marks the frame a zero.


April 15th, 2009 at 12:36 PM ^

There should be a +1/-1 or like/dislike that people can click on next to a post that will let others know whether its worth your time reading the post. You can have the "score" next to the title in the recent posts feed.


April 15th, 2009 at 1:13 PM ^

stupid or not.. I've led some of the most derogatory comments about McFarlin, but think he should have the right to post here. Unless he's proved to be a troll, I'd rather have the combined weight of the community police him.


April 15th, 2009 at 1:53 PM ^

At sportingnews.com, where I do a majority of posting, comments are routinely thumbed down by opposing fans, despite the quality of the post.

When the vast majority of people here are Michigan fans, they is not likely to be a problem with that. I think you'd find more people agree with you than people who dislike you enough to "thumb down" any comment you make. +1 + (-1) = 0 after all. It would cancel out.

Unless you're going out of your way to piss people off, you'd be fine.


April 15th, 2009 at 2:11 PM ^

Track McFarlin's posts. Nobody can match his RElaTive Average Responses and Discussion (RETARD) quotient.

No but seriously, he's the guy we love to hate. If you ban him somebody else will show up. And he creates interesting threads that at least 50 people feel the need to respond to.


April 16th, 2009 at 10:40 AM ^

Sorry, but this sounds like a bunch of teenagers asking the teacher if they can decide who gets to be in the class and who doesn't. A forum or message board is supposedly a place where people exchange ideas; there is already more than enough derision of others for the "heinous crime" of having a divergent opinion. Maybe some of those who want to ban others for being "offensive" need to look in the mirror.

I think trolls deserve all they get, but it is obvious who is trolling and who isn't. A UM fan with an honest opinion should not be banned from a UM board for having it, no matter how clumsy or artless he may appear to be.

The real enemy isn't "retards;" it is argument ad hominem. And all wonderfully intelligent UM fans know that argument ad hominem is a fallacy. Fallacy in the name of intellect is still fallacy.

Why not try being friendly to fellow UM fans, regardless of your perception of their intellect?

Terminate Carr

April 16th, 2009 at 11:34 AM ^

I like Ad Hominem attacks. People who use the term to make them sound smart should be mocked. People who make dumb statements should be mocked. Stupid people should be mocked.

Taterrific, I REALLY wish you'd take your preaching back to MLive. You're the definition of a douche nozzle. Who uses YahooGroups anyways? Do you use Prodigy and connect via AOL too?