Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias?
by awobbly, Thu May 15, 2008 at 10:27:30 AM EDT
I am one of the many (dozens? hundreds?) who recently had their ability to rate comments and recommend diaries revoked. Like the others, I have no clue as to why this happened, although I agree with other diaries that last week's Bob Johnson diary is the common thread.
I have not been around here long. I was somewhat surprised, frankly, that I had privileges so soon after registering. So when my privileges disappeared, I wasn't surprised.(I was somewhat puzzled by the fact that I could still read hidden comments, however.) I assumed that such things were determined by a logarithm of some sort, which used a formula to weigh your cumulative 'mojo' to decide your 'trustworthiness', for lack of a better word. I had received a 'hide' rating from some right wing troll the day before, so I naturally assumed my 'mojo' was temporarily out of wack, and it would correct itself after a few days. I am not generally a conspiracy theory type of guy.
Then the diaries started. I was not alone.
As more stories accumulate, the anecdotal evidence overwhelmingly points toward mass punishment. I have looked through the comment histories of many of the people who, like me, have lost their privileges. I have found no evidence of trollish behavior, abusive language or other violations. I encourage people to read through my brief history here, and if they feel I have engaged others in an unfair manner to show me where.
After looking through my comments, try this experiment;
Go read the hidden comments. Click through a few pages to see which members routinely have their comments hidden. Read the comments to decide if they are supporters of Senator Clinton or Senator Obama. Now click through to their page to see if they still have the ability to rate.
I did this experiment last night. At that time, the first five hidden comments were all written by prominent pro-Clinton voices. All five posters clearly were engaging in abusive language, and deserved to have their comments hidden. And all five still had the ability to rate comments. One those five has never, in their entire history, given anything other than a troll rating. Ever. How does that not qualify for rating abuse? Why haven't they had their ability to rate revoked?
I did the experiment again before writing this diary. At that time, hidden comments 13,14,15 and 16 were attributed to the same poster, a prominent and strident pro-Clinton voice. They are still able to rate comments, despite the fact that they are routinely on the hidden comment page. At that time, Comments 1-3 were authored by pro-Clinton posters. All have the ability to rate comments. Comment number 4 was from a pro-Obama poster - no ratings. Comment 5 was by a Clinton supporter- rating history enabled.
Does anyone else see a pattern here? Again, this is all anecdotal evidence. But it sure points strongly to an unpleasant conclusion.