OK, What I am suggesting would not foster mindless reporting.
I think you are jumping off of the deep end here. Instead of trying to
understand what I am suggesting you are sticking with the erroneous
assumption that this is a bad suggestion because it would foster mindless
reporting. It would in no way foster mindless anything if it is
implemented correctly.
Please try to read and understand my suggestion. It is really a good idea.
Paul Coleman
"Argyle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Paul Coleman wrote:
> > would not allow any mindless SPAM reporting.
>
> Please note that I said *foster* mindless reporting, not "allow."
>
> The system already allows plenty of mindless reporting. No more is
> needed at this time. :-)
>
> This is not about abuse of the system because it's also wide open to
> abuse for those so inclined. User integrity is part of the deal.
>
> "Mindless Reporting" is an ongoing problem. It's a real problem, not
> imaginary.
>
> It's why only subscribers can appeal issues. Because if we let the
> masses submit appeals, the system would be flooded with appeals about
> innocent bystanders like whitehous.gov, senate.gov, financial reporting
> sites, the environmental defense sites, health and wellness sites, etc
> ad nauseum.
>
> Giving users more protection from making mistakes in their reports will
> only serve to make them more complacent. If they *think* they can
> safely click every box in sight, they will.
>
> Don't forget that there is a significant level of experience operating
> here. Julian and the deputies didn't jump on this bandwagon yesterday.
>
> > >
> > > I think I can say with a reasonable degree of certainty that Julian
will
> > > take a dim view of the idea because, as Dollface said, it will foster
> > > even more mindless spam reporting.
>
> - Don D'Minion -
_______________________________________________
SpamCop-Help mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.spamcop.net/mailman/listinfo/spamcop-help
