Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8

Author Topic: Et Tu, Sean Johnson?  (Read 5540 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Matthew

  • Mod
Re: Et Tu, Sean Johnson?
« Reply #30 on: June 10, 2018, 06:24:02 PM »

Quote
The usage of "jump the shark" has subsequently broadened beyond television, indicating the moment when a brand, design, franchise, or creative effort's evolution declines, or when it changes notably in style into something unwelcome.
To answer your original question: Yes, Sean Johnson has jumped the shark.
Logged

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: Et Tu, Sean Johnson?
« Reply #31 on: June 10, 2018, 07:06:12 PM »
Quote
I'm surprised, though, that you don't list any who have gone full-blown Novus Ordo
Most of the families of the millenials in my “data” were VERY traditional, I’d say “cream of the crop” as far as the sacrifices their grandparents went thru to get mass during the 70s-80s, with many of the grandparents having started chapels on their own.  

So, the grandchildren leaving the TLM for the indult is scandalous enough.  Many of them have told me they have occasionally gone to the novus ordo (but only when the indult isn’t available, as if that’s an excuse) but they have not embraced it wholeheartedly.  I think deep down they know it’s not catholic and they don’t want to cross that imaginary line - a sign that their conscience still bothers them about their abandoning of the True Faith.  

On the other hand, they go on and on about how they love the indult priests (“They’re SO conservative”, they say) yet these priests, who proclaim a love for tradition, turn around a few hours/days later and say the novus ordo in all its empty and humanistic glory.  Oh, what a hypocrisy!

All in all, the Millenials downfall and their spiritual Achilles heel is peer pressure.  They all want to “fit in” and be part of the “jolly old gang”.  Their biggest fear is to be different, which is proven by the popularity of social media and the endless need to be “liked” and to be funny.  Sean’s need for “upvotes” is a symptom of this social and spiritual sickness.  

I don’t like to quote Abraham Lincoln but his point is applicable here to Millenials, who still haven’t grown up from the high-school popularity, childish mindset.

Everyman is born an original, but sadly most die as copies.
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Et Tu, Sean Johnson?
« Reply #32 on: June 10, 2018, 08:03:32 PM »
Quote from: Smedley Butler on June 10, 2018, 07:23:49 PM
Let me be clear: IMO the ability to up or downvote any individual post is NOT a problem. It means someone didn't agree with what you wrote.

If only that were the case.  Some people go on vendettas and downvote everything you post if you've crossed them in the past.  I've had completely innocuous uncontroversial posts get 3 automatic downvotes simply because there were people out to get back at me ... and obviously unrelated to the particular post.  With that said, I could hardly care less about my online Reputation.
Logged

Offline Nick

Re: Et Tu, Sean Johnson?
« Reply #33 on: June 10, 2018, 08:59:19 PM »
Quote from: Matthew on June 10, 2018, 06:24:02 PM
To answer your original question: Yes, Sean Johnson has jumped the shark.
Thanks Mate  :cheers:
Logged

Offline Matthew

  • Mod
Re: Et Tu, Sean Johnson?
« Reply #34 on: June 10, 2018, 09:24:18 PM »
The Reputation score is mostly worthless, but is only useful in a broad-brush, vague context. It is a measure of How Well a User Fits In On CathInfo, it could be their Trad Orthodoxy Score, Good Poster Score, or some combination of those things.

A few downvotes aren't going to change the big picture. Just the fact that you got 7000 upvotes says a lot about your glorious past posting history. Even if someone managed to downvote you to 7,000 downvotes, I'm not going to look into banning you or something. I'm not stupid.

If I connected the downvote system to automatic warnings/temporary bans/posting privileges or other computer/software-based moderation then I would FULLY agree with your objections.

But they are just a guideline for the Moderator when he looks into a given user. When someone has 10 upvotes and 120 downvotes, I take notice and look at his posting history. And guess what? Those numbers almost NEVER LIE. Usually when someone is thus lopsided the person is very rough around the edges at best, heretical at worst, etc.

And I want to remind everyone again: the more participation in the voting system, the better and more accurate everyone's score is. Because guess what? The troublemakers and loudmouths certainly don't hold back on voting. If you leave all the voting to them, the forum's posts and Rep scores will reflect only THEIR tastes! Don't let that happen.

And I should also remind everyone (again) that part of the reason the system "works" is because I restrict how much "inflating" or "damage" you can give someone's score. Mary is only allowed to be 16% of John's downvotes. Once she hits that limit, she will get an error message until enough people downvote John so she can downvote him (1) more time. And so on.

If John has 100 downvotes, Mary can only be 16 of them. But if John gets up to 200 downvotes, then Mary's total 16 downvotes is only 8% instead of 16% of John's total, so she is allowed to downvote him again.

When a user is a real jerk, or a total misfit here, the downvote limits don't really limit anybody since enough OTHER people are also downvoting him.

But it makes it harder to gang up on someone and damage his score.

Logged
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8
« previous next »