HairMetalAddict's Last.fm Journal

The Unofficial Warned Troll FAQ

Mon, 29 Jun 2009 23:37:40 +0000

Questions (yeah, most of these are almost word-for-word of some of the crap warned people PM me) frequently asked by warned/banned trolls.

Q 1: Why did you warn me, I didn't do anything!!!!!!!!!!!!

A: Obviously you did. You were told what, and you were told to read the Community Guidelines linked at the bottom of every page, which, if you're asking this, you obviously didn't. Again.

Q 2: You deleted my shout on (band X) page? It wasn't trolling!!!!!!

A: People who are heavily abusive/trolling/whatnot on shoutboxes get all their shouts deleted.

We have a choice here of either picking and choosing which shouts to delete which would take a massive amount of time, or deleting them all with a single click in under 1 second.

Those choices are between wasting the troller's time, or our own. Guess whose is going to get wasted.

Thus, heavy trollers get all shouts killed.

Don't like it? Don't troll.

Q 2a: But even after the warning and all my shouts got deleted, I posted some more shouts and all those got deleted too!!!!!!!!!

Consider that a not-so-subtle hint that you didn't read the rules, were found being abusive or trolling again, and had the stupidity (and all other shouts) deleted as a result.

Be happy it didn't come with your next warning, which it could very easily have.

Q 3: But (user Y) is posting all kinds of crap and you didn't go after him!!!!!!

A: As should have been taught to you before the age of 10, you are responsible for your own behavior. Any warnings received are about your behavior. Anything anyone else is doing is of absolutely no concern when it comes to your warning for your behavior.

The subject is your behavior, and only your behavior. What other users do is between us and them, not you. If they're problematic enough, they'll be dealt with eventually. But attempting to change the subject to someone else will not change anything concerning your warning, and we won't discuss dealings with other users with you.

And besides, since you do not have access to neither my (or the moderation in question's) PMs, nor to the PMs of "user Y", you have no clue if we're dealing with that person or not.

Q 4: I didn't even get a warning, I was just banned!!!!!!

You're a previously banned user, who got all the warnings you'll ever get. One rule violation = ban, period. If you've been repeatedly banned, we won't even wait that long and ban on sight.

That or your trolling and abuse was so extensive that an instant ban was deemed necessary.

Q 5: You abused your mod powers banning me!!!!!!

Staff ban, not moderators. A staff had to actually deem that there was enough done to warrant a ban, see that warnings were sent (with the exclusion of question 4 above), and decide that it wasn't worth the hassle to waste more time on you.

So while yes, I do submit you for ban when the time comes, and yes, 99% or more of all ban requests result in an actual ban, you actually had someone else at a higher level have to agree that you're not worth the effort anymore to get that ban.

Q 6: You just got something against me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'll never know you well enough to actually waste my time having something against you. There's millions of last.fm users, you're just yet another troll getting treated just like any other troll.

Q 7: Freedom of Speech!!!! Freedom of Speech!!!! Freedom of Speech!!!! Freedom of Speech!!!! Freedom of Speech!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (ad nauseum)

This is the Journal Entry you need to read

Q X: (Insert some random childish attempt to insult my music preferences here)

You're forgetting, you're a troll. If I don't give a rat's ass what a normal user thinks of what I listen to, and I don't, I care even less of your opinion. And btw, again, changing the subject doesn't change that your warning remains.

"Freedom of Speech" is not a right on Private Websites

Sun, 27 Jan 2008 15:35:13 +0000

There are apparently some people who have deluded themselves into thinking first-amendment rights, freedom of speech, or whatever you want to call it applies anywhere and everywhere. Funnily enough, they claim this to the detriment and ignoring of other laws, such as those about slander for example.

Freedom of Speech does not apply on private property.

Let's see some real world examples of this first. While the examples are U.S.-centric, so is the first amendment, but this applies regardless of what country you're coming from. The net is not limited by country boundaries.

(1) Public schools are prohibited from promoting a specific religious belief, prayer in schools, etc. If you attempt to walk in a public school and teach Christianity, you'll be escorted off the property, most likely by police. You do not have the right to "freedom of speech" in that situation because other rules prohibit it.

(2) You cannot enter a private business and talk to employees trying to recruit them for your business instead. Again, you'll be escorted off the premises by security. You do not have that "right to freedom of speech" in that situation because it's private property. The owners of that property decide what's allowed.

(3) You cannot enter a Baptist church on a Sunday morning, take over the pulpit and teach the virtues of Scientology. It's private property as well.

Ooops, and that's just the tip of the iceberg. What's in common? They're all "not your property", and as such what you can do and even say on that property is limited to the rules or what the owner allows on that property.

The same thing applies to internet "private property".

You, as an individual, can create your own website, and do or write as you wish on it. It's your site. The law will deal with you if you should violate a law during your "free speech". (Remember, kids, slander of other people is not protected by freedom of speech in any country.)

When you create that site, it's your "private property". You have the right to block anyone and everyone from posting on it. You can delete anything you disagree with. It's your site, those posters are guests, and as such they are limited to what you allow on your site.

As that applies to you on your privately-owned website, so it applies to privately-owned websites that are not yours.

And every site is privately owned. Be it by a person, a university, or a corporation, it's still privately owned. What can and can't be done on that privately owned site is determined solely by the owner.

Which is why almost every website has some form of rules, or Terms of Service, which you are required to read and agree to before attempting to post anything on said site.

In the case of last.fm, you click a checkbox stating you have read and agreed to follow last.fm's Terms of Service. If you choose to violate that agreement, last.fm has the right to delete your offense, or even delete your account. You're a guest in last.fm's house, you respect the house rules.

And in the case of last.fm's house rules, last.fm allows you freedom of speech in general. Shoutbox banter, forum posts, as well as groups about all kinds of completely irrelevant-to-music subjects prove this.

However, there are limitations to that freedom. Those limitations are stated in the manner of Terms of Service, as well as rules. Just like most any other site.

Cries of "Freedom of Speech" or "They censored me!" are both wrong and a waste of energy when the "censored" material is in violation of rules you said you would follow when you joined.

Attacking/harassing another user on this site? You don't have that right. It's a violation of the rules you agreed to follow. Being detrimental to someone else's enjoyment and usage of this site is not and never will be within your rights. That's pretty much a given on any website worth wasting time on.

Abusing the services of last.fm? (Spam-scrobbling, wiki defacement, uploading offensive images for artist images, etc.) You don't have that right either.

You're on last.fm's private property. Last.fm gives you the right to freedom of speech (even the right to complain about last.fm when not done in an obnoxious manner), but ONLY within what is permitted by the rules of the site.

If you fail to follow the rules of this or any site, you subject yourself to removal. Noone is to blame but you, yourself. "Freedom of Speech" does not and never will override what are the house rules of a privately-owned website.

If you don't believe this, when you get banned you're hereby challenged to take it to court. Make sure we know you're doing this, because watching judges laugh at plaintiffs is funny in itself. And we all like a good laugh.

P.S. Subscribing changes nothing. Being a subscriber gives access to some extra functions on the site, all of which are documented on the Subscribe page for you to read before you even subscribe. None of those extra features include the right to violate any site rule. Subscribers who do repeatedly violate site rules risk account loss like any other user, and are given no preferential treatment in such matters.

The Holy Book of Last.fm - The Sinner Who Shoutboxed

Sun, 25 Nov 2007 14:34:08 +0000

Yea, children, heed my words, for I shall read from the most holy Last.fm Bible, the words upon which nations were built, and scrobbles were given to the people.

Chapter 30

3. And so it came to pass that I played my music, and it scrobbled. And I saw the scrobble.

4. I clickedeth upon that which was the artist page of my music, and I saweth that 'twas barren. So I puncheth my keys and laid forth text upon that of the shoutbox realm.

5. But I felt nothing. The joy of my music was lost, as there was no real joy. But I scrobbled away, hoping the joy would cometh forth. "Kvlt, Trve!" I cried. "That is my music! Kvlt and Trve! All else is not!"

6. But my cries were in vain, as no person was near to heareth them. And the cries sounded stupid even to mine own ears.

7. I failed to let that persuadeth me, and I toiled on. Somehow, I must showeth the world that my music was of the Kvlt and Trve, and that of others was forever falseth.

8. I knew that my words upon my own artists shoutbox, praising my music, would forever wasteth away as noone would see the trve and kvlt words I had written.

9. "My words are unheeded, and lie dormant!" I cried. "I must take my words elsewhere, to pages where people will actually vieweth the words instead of my own artist which noone visiteth!"

10. And so it came to pass that I would visit the page of an artist which wath of high visits, and whom I could not listen as they were popular, and thus not Kvlt or Trve.

11. I cared not that this site of last.fm was of the nature of openness to all who listened to music, nor did I think of how I would feel should others abuseth my artists.

12. Without such thought, I punchedeth the keys again, and I postedeth my vile and Trve and Kvlt words that spoketh poorly of popular artists upon their shoutbox, as I was of a weak mind and couldst not find better things to do with my time. Nor did I understand how my words would make mine own artists look even worse to those who read my vile.

13. "There!" I shouted. "My words are trve and kvlt, and are spreadeth upon the pages of the untrve and unkvlt! I shalt be seen as a savior, and I shalt convert all who listen to the popular to listeneth instead to the trve and kvlt!"

14. And it came to pass that upon my next visit to my trve and kvlt band page, that those of the untrve and unkvlt had spreadeth defamatory words upon my trve and kvlt shoutbox. "Oh my," I yelled. "They doth insult my artists back. This does not work. I must attack them instead."

15. And so I didst attack those untrve and unkvlt users with vile and vitriole, spewing my hatred forth, as I had never felt love from those who bore me.

16. And uponst mine return, a message appeared to me in my inbox stating that I hadst violated site rules in my tirade upon the unkvlt users, and that I could lose my account should I continue my vile and vitriole uponst the other users.

17. But I gave no heed to this, for it was beyond my understandings to spendeth more time enjoying mine own kvlt and trve music than to wasteth it spewing vile and making mine own favorites look bad.

18. So I continued my vile, attackething all who dareth not listen to that which I listened. And behold, another message appeared before me in mine inbox, which saith that it was a final warning.

19. Still I paid no heed. And contined my childish attacks upon the other users.

20. And lo, though came the day where I screamed, "Why can'st I not loggeth in!"

Yea, children, let the words of the Holy Last.fm Bible ring true to your hearts, and your music machines.

Previous Readings from the Holy Book:
The Holy Book of Last.fm - The Sinner Who Edited the Wiki - Ch. 14, V. 12-29
The Holy Book of Last.fm - The Sinner Who Scrobbled - Ch. 2, V. 23-32

The New Artist Picture Flagging "for abuse" System

Sun, 9 Sep 2007 12:22:51 +0000

With the new image voting system has also come the ability to flag abusive images. Here is a brief explanation of this flagging system, appropriate use for it, and how we deal with flagged images.

Flagging, and how to do it

When you are looking at an individual artist picture (go to the artist's pictures page, then click on an individual picture), you now have the ability to give the image a thumbs up/down, discuss the image, as well as flag the image as abuse.

This flagging system was heavily requested by us moderators, as few people seemed to know how to report abusive/offensive uploaded pictures. This allows a quick and easy way to do so.

If you see an image that is abusive in nature (read below on what defines "abusive"), you can now easily flag the image, telling us what the problem is.

(1) Click "Flag for Abuse" next to the image on that individual image's page
(2) In the text area that appears, explain the reason for the flag. (Not all abuse is obvious, be sure to explain thoroughly when it's not.)
(3) Submit.

That's it! The image is flagged, which means it's been sent to us moderators to look at and deal with as needed.

What Constitutes Abuse?

Like most things, artist pictures have rules to follow. You can see these rules on the actual upload page. (Click to upload a picture for an artist, you'll see them on the right side of the upload page.)

Things that are abuse/violation of artist picture rules which should be flagged include:
- Images that are not of the actual artist (random pictures)
- Album covers (not permitted as an artist picture, for any reason)
- Logos (unless the "artist" has no real pictures whatsoever, only allowed in extenuating circumstances)
- Wrong artist picture
- Any picture submitted to a non-artist page (incorrectly spelled artist names and such)
- Any picture which portrays nudity or is otherwise sexually explicit (not permitted even if that's "part of the artist's persona)
- Pictures obviously uploaded by "haters" intended to mock the artist in some way (Photoshopped/GIMPed, added text, etc.)
- Magazine covers/pages, pics with those stupid "do not remove this bar! (website url)", etc.
- Duplicate images may also be flagged (not technically abuse, but we'll handle those as well. Preferably with a link to the image it's a dupe of if there's more than 1 page of images)

What Does NOT Constitute Abuse?

Most of these come from "reasons" that have already been attempted by flaggers.

- Images of "another" artist of the same name (where several artists have the exact same name). Until they can be separated, all artists with the same name equally share the same page. Having images of one you don't happen to listen to is not abuse.
- "I don't like this picture, it's ugly!" - Vote it down, but your opinion is not a reason to flag.
- The "keep stats clean" images uploaded to incorrectly spelled artist pages are not abuse, and will not be deleted.
- Valid artist pictures of "nazi/nsbm" bands are not going to be deleted as "racist" when it's a picture of the actual band. (Random racist symbols and such are a different story, and violate image rules for other reasons anyway so don't need to be specified.)

It Gets Flagged. What happens next?

- If it's a valid flag, the image will be deleted. If it's an intentionally abusive image, the uploader will be warned.
- It it's an invalid flag, the flag will be ignored.

Karma's a bitch

You will be notified if you keep flagging non-abuse images. Continuing to flag non-abusive images, wasting our time, can in itself be treated as abuse.

(And yes, we can tell the diff between an "honest mistake" wrong report and intentionally reporting proper images as abuse.)

That's it. That's how it works, that's the details, that's a wrap.

OFF-TOPIC RESPONSES ARE DELETED WITHOUT RESPONSE.

Last.fm to Kill Off Dead Artists

Sun, 1 Apr 2007 13:40:45 +0000

The amount of space required to store the data for an unlimited number of artists is staggering to say the least. The line needed to be drawn somewhere.

In order to make more room for new artists, last.fm will be purging the site of any artists who are no longer alive, or who disbanded upon the death of a member. This will save a HUGE amount of space, making room for all the latest 1-hit wonders.

This unfortunately means your scrobbles of such artists will disappear. In order to fully appreciate the services of this site in the future, you should consider only listening to artists which are still alive.

Examples of artists who will no longer be handled, due to their no longer being alive:

Elvis Presley
Jimi Hendrix
The Doors
Nirvana / Kurt Cobain
Paul Anka
James Brown

Remember, life is for the living!

This may be seen as a temporary discomfort, but you'll see the end result is much better, and the latest 1-hit-wonders will really appreciate (and desperately need) your listens!

The Holy Book of Last.fm - The Sinner Who Edited the Wiki

Tue, 6 Feb 2007 19:12:24 +0000

The Holy Book of Last.fm - The Sinner Who Edited the Wiki

Yea, children, heed my words, for I shall read from the most holy Last.fm Bible, the words upon which nations were built, and scrobbles were given to the people.

Chapter 14

12. And lo, a child of the MySpace people came to the last.fm site, and he saw that his name was among those loosely referred to as artists.

13. "My heavens," saith the child. "Here I findeth the three people who hath listened to my files. And I knoweth all three."

14. And from the corner of his eye, the child saweth the bio of his name that was loosely referred to as an artist. And he saw that it was empty.

15. "This is unacceptable," saith the child. "I must addeth my MySpace text to the bio, for it is good and l0lz0rs."

16. And so it was that the child added his MySpace text, filled with prattle of how outstanding he was, filled with words such as "I" and "me", filled with nonsense which not even others of his MySpace breed would surely understand. And as he added, he ignored the text which appeared between where he entered his words and the Save Changes button, which were the words of the rules which all wiki text must follow.

17. The next day, the same child visited the bio page of his name that was loosely referred to as an artist. And he saw that it was empty.

18. "This is unacceptable," saith the child, ignoring the orange icon of the one who removed it, and ignoring the "view older versions" link which showed the reason it was deleted. "I must add it again!"

19. And so the child added the same text again. To ensureth that his text would not be removed, the child added yet another line to the text, on which he wrote that his text should not be made blank again.

20. The next day, the same child once again visited the bio page of his name that was loosely referred to as an artist. And he saw that it was once again without words.

21. "ZOMG! L0LZ0RZ! SUX0RZ! N00B PWNED! h4x w4r3z h3y PWNED PWNED PWNED ZOMG!" said the child, who after which felt confused as he failed to understand even his own words which he had uttered.

22. And as before, the child failed to understand that the text was deleted with reason, and added the same words again.

23. So it came to pass that on the next day, the child found that not just was his pageth empty, but that he was also no longer of the ability to add the words again. The damning words of "page not editable by you" were all that showed to him as he clicketh the edit link.

24. And he finally looked, and saw who it was who removeth his text, which had an orange icon beside the name.

25. And he saw the "view older versions" link, and clicked on the link. And he saw the reason that the orange icon user had deleted the text, multiple times.

26. And he saw how the person with the orange icon had locked the bio page of his name that was loosely referred to as an artist.

27. And the text with the lock said that he must PM a description which followeth the rules he ignored, and that he could not longer editeth the page himself.

28. And the child of the MySpace breed wept, for his page was empty, and he could not write a factual, unbiased artist description for he knew not such words. Nor could he write English, only non-words like ZOMG and N00B.

29. And so his page remained without words. Forever and ever, amen.

Yea, children, let the words of the Holy Last.fm Bible ring true to your hearts, and your music machines.

Previous Writings:
The Holy Book of Last.fm - The Sinner Who Scrobbled

The Holy Book of Last.fm - The Sinner Who Scrobbled

Mon, 15 Jan 2007 22:36:28 +0000

Yea, children, heed my words, for I shall read from the most holy Last.fm Bible, the words upon which nations were built, and scrobbles were given to the people.

Chapter 2

23. And lo, a scrobble appeared before my eyes, and a voice from the heavens said, "This is your scrobble. It is now Recently Played. Regret not that which you listen to, but scrobble freely and willingly.

24. "And do not ask from whence the Track Deletion function cometh from, for it is of use only to the infidel who who fears the opinion of others should they see the infidel's poor taste and wishes to hide said poor taste."

25. And I looked upon the scrobble. And I looked upon the Recent Tracks. And I saw that it was good. And I did not delete the track.

26. And it was so good, that I scrobbled again. And I left my musical machine on without fail for a fortnight, creating one scrobble upon another, so I had an untold number of scrobbles.

27. Then the winds began to blow. The sky grew dark. And a voice like thunder boomed in anger. "Thou hast abused the scrobble, creating the scrobble even while thou dost sleepeth!"

28. And I got on my knees, and I cried. "But I love the scrobble, I must have more scrobbles than my neighbor, and my neighbor's wife (whom I covet), and my neighbor's ass, so that I might be of the Top Listeners for lo one week."

29. "Thou art a fool!" The voice from the heavens boomed. "Thou hast seen the scrobble, and thou hast coveted it even more than thou hast coveted thy neighbor's wife (whom I also covet)."

30. "Thou hast coveted the 'Top' of Top Listeners, yet thou art the fool who hath faileth to look up the 'Listeners' of Top Listeners in thine dictionary!"

31. "Thou hast not listened to thine scrobbles, so thou art deemed an outcast! Go forth from this place, never to return."

32. And I left the place which had been my scrobble home, unable to ever return for my greed remained there forever as a reminder for all to see of my unlistened scrobbles.

Yea, children, let the words of the Holy Last.fm Bible ring true to your hearts, and your music machines.

Oh Come All Ye Twisted, Cuz We're Not Gonna Take It!

Thu, 16 Nov 2006 07:36:10 +0000

Twisted Sister has released their new video for "Oh Come All Ye Faithful" off their new "A Twisted Christmas" album.

Sweet, memories of Stay Hungry videos return...

Mostly offline the past two weeks

Mon, 13 Nov 2006 10:56:43 +0000

Besides an occasional check, I've been offline the past approx. two weeks. No music scrobbled, almost no moderating, etc.

Got a motherload of catching up to do. PMs, group new member handling, moderation issues, etc.

If you contacted me for something, or you signed up for one of my groups that requires approval, and I haven't gotten to it, that's why.

Gonna take a while to catch up, so... patience. I'll get to whatever it is as soon as I can. This ain't the only place I gotta catch up. ;-)

Remasters of first 3 Poison albums, must-have for Poison fans

Sun, 24 Sep 2006 11:09:13 +0000

Finally got hold of the newly released (well, August 1, 2006) remasters of the first 3 Poison albums, "Look What the Cat Dragged In", "Open Up and Say... Ahh!", and "Flesh & Blood".

And gotta say... they are definitely a must for fans!

The Remaster Sound

All 3 albums sound INCREDIBLY better! The instruments all sound clearer, with a sound quality like they were just recorded yesterday.

More importantly, the volume of the recording. If you play the original "Open Up" CD between some new releases, you almost have to double the volume to get it up to the level of the newer releases. That's definitely resolved in these releases.

Every single track shines as if brand new, yet nothing has been done to change the original sound, just improving the quality.

Bonus Tracks

All 3 discs come with bonus tracks. A quick look at them:

"Look What the Cat Dragged In"
1- "I Want Action (7" single remix)" - The single version is similar to the album version, but the mix is changed so that the vocals are more prominent.

2- "I Won't Forget You (7" single remix)" - Mix similar to the I Want Action single version.

3- "Don't Mess Around With Jim (demo)" - A demo from the LWTCDI days. Very different from anything that ended up on the album. A fun listen, though, with a slight southern rock tint.

"Open Up and Say... Ahh!"

1- "Livin' for the Minute" - This track first appeared as the b-side to the "Nothin' But a Good Time" single. A bit more of a rockin' sound than "Open Up" tracks. Good tune.

2- "World Premiere Interview" - Something you'll probably only listen to once, but it's a very interesting look into the recording of what would be Poison's biggest-selling album. Talk about the album cover, the recording process, band history, and so on. All 4 members are included.

"Flesh & Blood"

1- "Something to Believe In (acoustic version)" - This sounds like the acoustic version on "Best of Ballads & Blues", complete with the different lyrics. It's been given a remaster treatment though, and as such sounds better than the "Best Of" version.

2- "God Save the Queen (instrumental demo)" - Instrumental of the Sex Pistols song. This is completely out of left field, sounding nothing like anything they've done on this or any previous album. Pretty rockin', interesting to hear, but in the end forgettable.

Anyway, if you've got those old CDs, these remasters are definitely worth the upgrade for the sound alone. The bonus tracks are... a bonus. ;-)