Disney is planning to develop several limited series for their upcoming streaming service based on popular MCU characters, and obviously the big news here is that we’re talking movie characters and actors being involved. The two names thrown around so far are Tom Hiddleston and Elizabeth Olsen.
For anyone who’s followed the behind the scenes drama of Disney’s past Marvel TV efforts, this detail is probably even more important than the actors:
Marvel Studios will produce the shows and Kevin Feige, the guru of all things MCU, is expected to take a hands-on role in their development.
That’s our best hope for TV shows that in any way integrate with the films.
Just give me scenes with the AoS characters interacting with the bigs, pls. It’s ending anyway, pull them out of Marvel TV’s wheelhouse and give them the love they truly deserve.
Probably DiveDiveDive or someone else paranoid. DiveDiveDive has a shoot first and never ask questions, guilty until proven innocent approach to any new account. He’s probably not the only one, I just remember someone calling him on it recently and he didn’t really back down.
I’m certainly skeptical when someone bumps an old topic without any news, just a reaction. But what’s the harm in waiting until a potential spammer actually spams?
edit: Okay, the cover song post looks even less legit, but still.
What we’ve seen are that spam factories will use bots, yes…but they’ll also use services like Fiverr or Mechanical Turk to pay people (a pittance, usually) to actually post on forums 5-20 times, and then post the spam link. And depending on how long the spam link stays up and active, your site goes onto their list of “sites where we at least were able to keep our link up on an active site for 15 minutes.” that ends up going to the next worker.
There are a lot of reasons people join online communities instead of just lurking at one to read posts. Bumping a year-old post to say not much is typically fairly far down that list.
The cover song post is definitely odd and perhaps bot like… this one was odd. I don’t see the harm in someone keeping an eye on posts like that. At least no one like… jumped on them like that last one. Keeping an eye on someone and like calling them out are a little different.
You might be right, but then, you might not be. There isn’t any way for you to be sure. As @Nesrie wrote while I was typing this, there isn’t any harm in taking a wait and see approach, but there might be harm to the potential growth of the community (if that’s something we care about here) by shooting first and asking questions later. And I see this wild-west approach constantly lately, and the last several times the new poster has proven to not be a bot (this guy alone replied above). Not everyone is great with language skills and writing, but they still want to find a corner of the web to hang their hat and feel like they are part of something.
LOL. Being able to reply to this thread got him/her closer to whatever 3-10 post limit the HIT he’s working on required. :)
We did a pretty big project with Turkers and Fiverr workers on the gig economy last year, and these kinds of paid tasks (and the platforms’ respective slowness to crack down on them) was a frequently mentioned issue that legit workers were most concerned with. (Also, sadly, apparently the folks who put tasks and HITs out there like this one tend to reject work after its done and don’t even pay their own spammers.) I think AMT at least has tried to get rid of them; not sure about other gig sites.
I don’t think we should jump the gun, but lately we’ve had some… interesting folks join, like with names clearly meant to cause strife, some other person like defending underage sex or something and now this questionable one…
Isn’t the most appropriate approach to flag it. I mean that was the original concern right? If your’e not sure, shouldn’t we get the post flag but maybe avoid all the accusations flying around approach? The last one that got banned was clearly not a bot and only got themselves in trouble after engagement.
I guess that’s a long way of asking, if flagging potential posts isn’t the answer to questionable arrivals, what is? I’m thinking flagging is the least aggressive approach as opposed to the pointing and shouting that happened with some of the others.
It’s an honest question though. If someone thinks another person is a bot or spam, what approach would you prefer be taken?
Was it just too soon because it was the first one, and it was more of a likely problem but maybe not 100%. Like wait for post 3 or 5 in those scenarios?
I think we should be flagging posts that are actually worth flagging, not poorly written ones that are just expressing an opinion like “I wonder if this Disney service will be worth looking at” or when someone mistakenly bumps an old thread not realizing it, like what happened in the Katie Holmes stroke thread - those types of things.
If someone posts something racist, or obnoxious, or an obvious drive-by troll (or someone promoting their own web sites or content as the first post, for example) - sure, flag them. I also feel like the post should maybe only be hidden when like… more than 1 person flags it, because everyone is triggered by different things. Maybe that is how it works, and multiple people did flag this, but if it’s just one that’s odd to me. And it seems like it only takes one.
These don’t show hidden to me. Maybe I misunderstand the flagging system, but I never got the show the post the community says is bad post visual que. The only reason I knew it was flagged is you said it was.
It still just looks like an ordinary post to me right now.
