SYNAPSE CIRCUIT ANTISOCIAL NETWORKING THE SPAM SCHISM OF G PLUS

Above: The Invasion of the Spam Accusers (on G+).

SYNAPSE CIRCUIT
ANTISOCIAL NETWORKING: THE SPAM SCHISM OF G+

Goodhour, Synapse Circuit Readers! It’s great to see you as always! Are you sitting comfortably in the warmth of your wonderful abode! Are you due for an upgrade soon? Will it be the Galaxy S6 or the One M9?

Yes, this is the follow-up to the ‘ANTISOCIAL NETWORKING: THE IMMATURITY OF G+& THE HELLISH SCHIZOID AUTOMATONS’ article... Read on!

#Google #G+ #GooglePlus #GeePlus #Spam #Trolls #BrownNosing

LET’S RECAP
I joined a Google Plus “community” some time ago – maybe some 18 months ago or more. The community specialized in technology.

I thought I had made a friend with, Duke Carico, who appeared to be the owner / lead moderator of the “community” who said that he enjoyed my articles. Posting my articles wasn’t a problem in the beginning. Further down the line... ...much, much further I posted an article that probably got flagged up as “possible spam” by Google Plus. As a result of that (possible) flag one of the 16 moderators removed the link. I challenged the moderator’s decision and I was banned. I contacted Carico, told him what had happened and I was unbanned. That was the first time I asked to be unbanned.

The second time was when, after a long while, I went to post another article and discovered that I was banned again. I spoke to Carcio about it for the second and final time despite Carico’s exaggerations. I then posted up a reintroduction to myself as Blue Gene and Synapse Circuit. I also posted a review of the Google Nexus 6. Within minutes the reintroduction was removed. So, I posted up 2 more reintroductions and they were also removed but the article remained. Typically, I was confronted with a moderator regarding my reintroduction. I told this moderator that I had done nothing wrong which then prompted Carico to go nuts...

“Wow . . .This is Duke I didn't write the last reply, but just saw this!  I'm goint to reply and then end this!

BG - Simply because Duke got it wrong and he won't admit that.

YOU DON'T HAVE A CLUE AS TO WHAT i ADMITED AND DIDN'T ADMIT. NOT ALL CONVERSATIONS ABOUT YOU TAKE PLACE IN YOUR SPAMMY THREADS. I EXPLAINED TO THE  MODS HANGOUT THAT I DID INDEED THINK YOU WERE REFERRING TO ME BECAUSE I DELETED THE FIRST POST. IT WAS A GLOAT. NOT BECAUSE YOU REFERRED TO A TROLL . . .  BUT BECAUSE YOU SAID YOU WEREN'T A SPAMMER.

Oh, I could say so much more, but there is no need. BECAUSE YOU ARE THE ONE WHO CAN'T ACCEPT THE CONSQUENCES. AND I'M TIRED OF ARGUING. YOU CAN'T BE GRACIOUS! YOU MUST HAVE THE LAST WORD. MODS, I AM BLOCKING THIS TROUBLE MAKER!  i HAVE BENT OVER BACKWARDS TO HELP HER AND PROMOTE HER AND ALL SHE WISHES TO DO IS WIN SOME TRIVIAL ARGUMENT.

At least this time, you can blame someone in the T&C community for being banned and be right about it!  YOU WIN! HA!?”

DO YOU SEE THE BIZARRE CONTRADICTIONS?

1. He thought that I was “gloating” in at least one of the reintroductions of the 3 I had made; what was wrong with the other 2? There is no rule to say that you can’t reintroduce yourself to new members.

2. If my posts were “spammy” why did he “bend over backwards to help and promote” me? I had every right to challenge the nonexistent rule about posting a reintroduction and being called a “spammer” when I am nothing of the sort!

Did you see the spelling mistakes and grammatical errors? And this Carico guy is telling me that I should learn to write? LMAO! Okay, let’s look at the “rules” that I have been constantly referred to...

THE RULES

“Spam -- There are a few definitions of what spam is. In our community we identify spam by the following criteria.  -- A post that is simply a link with no accompanying text to explain the contents found at the link. -- The same post is made to more than two communities. If we are unable to identify how many posts have been made because the poster's profile is private the we will err toward spam. -- A post that links to the poster's personal blog or article. If we feel that the link is posted to generated hits, views, or income for the poster than it will likely be considered spam...”

First of all they have decided to make their own definitions (as and when it pleases). But the bottom line is that they do not want to help writers generate their readership. However, Carico had no problem with my articles.



Above: Oh, look! Links to articles. But I thought... Never mind...

EXPOSED
In the first article I used a fake name as I didn’t want to out the person. However, as he has responded to the article he has let himself known, Duke Carico.



Such a nice guy! Add him at your peril. LMAO!


Some comments to the article were hidden as Google says they are "probably spam". It was just hateful comments. Too bad Google doesn't employ an algorithm to spot abuse / bullying.  
WHAT WAS THE AIM OF THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE?
The aim of the ‘ANTISOCIAL NETWORKING: THE IMMATURITY OF G+ & THE HELLISH SCHIZOID AUTOMATONS...’ was to show how Google Plus’ policy on “possible” spam can induce nastiness in people. The article also goes to show that some people, as a result of Google Plus’ “spam” policy aren’t able to think for themselves.

This idea that posting a one article in different communities is simply idiotic because let’s say that you or I wrote a review on, let’s say a Samsung phone. As you know Samsung handsets are mostly Android based so therefore the article is relevant in an Android community and another for general tech. So, that’s why Google Plus’ attitude towards spam is immature.

I think that the response from Carico, moderators and some “community” members demonstrates the above. Some have even stated that I am not actually a “spammer” but then become punctuation Nazis and start to find fault with the articles. They think that this behaviour is “community” oriented. They think that knowingly making false accusations and personal attacks is “community”.

The purpose of the article was never to “win” but to capture spitefulness and the sheeple that join in the personal attacks for no other reason that I can think of other than to brownnose. It’s a study in what I call “Antisocial Networking Hive Behaviour”.

I find it fascinating that some people can’t understand when one of their friends treats someone else in an unfriendly manner for no reason and attacks that someone else for demonstrating his or her discontent with the unfriendly friend. Do you follow? It’s like someone saying to a Jewish person, “Well, Hitler was nice to me because I am German...” Not that I am comparing Carico to Hitler. The analogy is just to show just how blind people can be defending their friend.

It’s spam... Well, actually it’s not spam... It’s the writing... It’s the writer... LMAO! You can’t please everybody!



Above: Notice that nobody says anything to what System Circuitry has stated. System Circuitry was banned from the "community" for having a different point of view. 

DELETED
Wouldn’t it be nice if we could, in real life, delete people we disagreed with? “I thought the Lord of the Rings movies were great!” Deleted! Problem solved. “Being a Vegan is the only way to live!” Deleted! Great! “Good morning!” There is nothing good about mornings! Deleted! There! Ha! “This iPhone is better than Android!” Deleted! You get the picture! I guess some would say that this happens in real life as I am sure you could say that John. F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Robert Kennedy, Karen Silkwood got deleted for standing for what they believed in.

This is how many people behave when someone disagrees with some odd decision making in some of these “communities”. All you have to do is disagree with the inconsistencies in their argument(s) and you are ostracised from the “community”. Instead of conversing and resolving issues some of these people get a strange pleasure from ostracizing others. And these are not teenagers doing their best to be obnoxious as we know teenagers can be. No! These are adults! If they are blessed to have a child or children one has to wonder what kind of values they are instilling.

I guess that’s how some people are. It’s a shame that some people aren’t able to resolve matters in an adult manner. Anyway, I wish Carico and his community all the best.



HOPE
I do hope that G Plus (Gee Plus, Google Plus) revises its policy on “spam” as I believe that it will foster a positive attitude in its clientele.

It’s true, some communities have banned me for the same reasons as Carcio pointed out, Google Plus flags posts as possible spam if one article is shared with multiple communities. By the same token my articles have been accepted by other communities. When Google Plus communities work it is such a good feeling; it’s nice to make connections with others.

At some point I would like to create a community whereby people can relate to each other, have discussions and that writers can share their work without the fear of being labelled a “spammer”. I would be very proud if I could help a writer grow his or her readership. I’ve got no time for petty minded people. Share the love is what I say! Technology is supposed to bring people together!

I reckon that a good community does not require a moderator let alone 16! Moderators in general have a tendency to be power mad and corrupt communities and forums with their heavy and clumsy handling of people with another viewpoint. I don’t want to have a community based on virtual clones! I want people to enjoy expressing themselves and exchanging with others. I am hopeful!

Thank you so much for reading SynapseCircuit!

Expect more reviews, news, opinions, competitions and more from Synapse Circuit!

Please check out the Synapse Circuit site here: Synapse Circuit.com

Synapse Circuit for tech news, opinions, articles, reviews and competitions. You will find interactive PDF magazines, videos and links to free legal software! Check it out at Synapse Circuit dot com

A NEW SYNAPSE CIRCUIT WEBSITE IS ON THE WAY!