Suggestion How to deal with "drive by" reports.

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

OP
-JD-

-JD-

Eclecticist
ScubaBoard Supporter
Messages
2,743
Reaction score
3,005
Location
Greater Philadelphia, PA
# of dives
100 - 199
[NOTE - Mods: Since I'm not exactly advocating for an exact course of action subject to a up or down vote, please feel free to move or tweak the thread to best effect.]


Prompted by this thread: https://scubaboard.com/community/th...rife-diving-academy-divemaster-course.656286/

and specifically:
Personally I think that “Thumbs Down” posts from new SB’ers who are “One and Done” should have the entire thread deleted. Unfortunately, there have been a number of similar threads.

If the OP can’t show up to respond then the original post and thread shouldn’t be allowed to stay to sully the reputation of legitimate businesses.

Thank you for your opinion

I though it might make sense to open a discussion to see the board's collective thoughts on what if any action should be taken on threads by drive-by posters, often just leaving some form of rant.



@Umuntu 's suggestion of simply deleting the thread is certainly one. It eliminates the search result of a potential hit-job. On the downside, it would eliminate a significant venue for discussion and presentation of "the other side of the story" as had occurred in this instance and others.

My initial reaction to the nuking concept was to instead consider the potential for adding a neutral disclaimer notice so that a viewer, especially someone following a search link who is unfamiliar with SB, has better context to understand the situation.

Spitballing ...
This posting was made by a new or low-post count user who has not continued to contribute to this discussion. It is suggested that you read the additional responses to the thread to be more fully informed before reaching conclusions.

What think you all?
 
In that case, anyone/everyone could be an idiot and/or a$$hole....stop trying to sort out the chaff and just live your life. Kind of like the The Chairman's "dive and let dive" mantra. One has the choice to scroll on by. One has the choice to evaluate someone's post count and decide for themselves if they are going to assign it any veracity and pay it any attention, or dismiss it and move on.

Just as in real life, one can't rule and regulate the idiots and a$$holes away....there are just too many of them, and they are really good at garnering attention and sucking up peoples' energy.

I recently attended a celebration of life for a truly great person. During one of the speaches given, the speaker reminded me of one of the deceased's mantras: "Be effective by not being affected." I think that hits directly home with the scenario of seagull posters/drive-by reports.

-Z
I’m not trying to sort any thing out. You asked ‘why can’t folks just be adults’, I was just offering up a possible reason why.
I personally don’t have a problem with ‘seagull posters’ or ‘one and done posters’. It’s all entertainment to me.
 
From what I read a lot of us don't mind the one time drive by reports. I read them in a similar way as I write my own reports: trying to find (or to input ) the reasons why it's good or bad. Not just "Mike was terrible" but "Mike never checked the gear/ never followed the plan/ could not read his computer" etc. Not everyone is interested in having an active presence, but still read a lot until they think it might be worth writing up one more important thing at some point. I rapidly see on this board that a few members have a high post count with a low content quality and vice versa...
 
Back
Top Bottom