The birth of the mith: @rivasponda- –

Yes, here we talk about something concerning WikiToLearn, even if it’s hard to trust. Most of the potential of W2L (our abbreviation of WikiToLearn, which I will use in the following cases) is in its communication channels on Telegram: they are great tools through which people meet other developers, editors or interested persons who collaborate; I had some interesting debates with them, noone was banal.
Let me just say that there are too many f*cking Telegram groups. I use Telegram only for this project (my friends and contacts use other communication apps or devices) and I have joined in more than 10 group or channel linked to W2L. And when I say “I have joined” I mean “I was forced to join” in most of them (but my little revenge is that I am a crazy spammer).

Through these group we meet each other, and I am really happy to having met these people and guys, they are funny and nice people; the link with the topic of this post is that @rivasponda – – is a phenomenon born in these groups.

If you use Telegram you probably know the bots, created but some other users, which do different actions in order to the aim of their creation. One of W2L developers, Cristian Baldi, created a Telegram Bot, whose is “Factotum Bot”, and the actions he can do are many and different: you can set it to reply automatically at some carachters strings (one night a desperate Dario spent hours writing “aa” just for read the answer of the bot, who is always “bb”), you can search on the web or YouTube through it and you can also give karmapoints to other people. The link at the bot is this, if you want to use it 🙂 :
https://github.com/crisbal/Telegram-Bot-Node

Screenshot_20160301-201940
(This is the bot created by our fantastic Cristian)

But wait, what karmapoints are? They are a great idea of someone I don’t know who was (maybe and probably Cristian himself but I don’t know, when I joined they already were used) which consists in giving a karmapoint (as you can “like” something on Facebook) to some other users who said or did something interesting; the input to give the karma is the simple tag of the user followed by a ++. As you can give karmapoints, you can remove them, just writing @tag followed by – -. And here we are.

Screenshot_20160301-201710~2
(A classic example of a negative karma. As you can see, @rivasponda felt really down)

It was a cold and not-so-interesting 4th January when I saw Star Wars III and writed on our cafe group (the relax group in which we talk about everything which is stupid enough to attract us) my opinion about. Then, Riva answered me.

Screenshot_20160301-201634~2
(The first negative karma of @rivasponda)

What did @rivasponda say? He just said that “Star Wars is something nerd which i will never see, it is bad stuff”. Now, we have some rules in our groups: don’t be racist, don’t be offensive, be stupid everywhen you want because you will never find someone sane or smart but NEVER, NEVER, NEVER say something offensive against Star Wars. From that point it was a quick descend to the negative hell. It became a group’s rule: if you don’t want to have negative karmas just remove karmas to @rivasponda and NEVER give him some positive karmas (really, some crazy people wrote @rivasponda followed by two pluses (I can’t write it, it’s stronger than me) and they lost 7-8 karmapoints in just 4 seconds). As an example, desperate Dario, during his night fight with the bot, removed 10 or more (I don’t remember) karma-points to @rivasponda. Yes, maybe the storm started just because he said something offensive against Star Wars, but the problem is that he never repented about it. So, how deep we are with @rivasponda- -? Let’s ask the bot, through the command \karmachart:

Screenshot_20160301-201716
(Yes, it is true: -100132 karma)

Obviously we did not remove 100132 karmapoints; at a certain point, Cristian set the bot at -100k karma for @rivasponda. They are totally -179 but we would probably get -100k sooner or later.

Yes, W2L is something funny, really. @rivasponda- –

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “The birth of the mith: @rivasponda- –

  1. Just a quick reply.
    Cristian provided Factotum Bot with a very powerful command: /set.
    `/help set` gives:
    set
    Trigger bot responses whenever someone says a specific sentence.
    /set – to set a trigger. Whenever a message equal to will be sent the bot will answer with .
    /unset will delete the triger.

    Someone tested the /set command in our group with /set aa – bb, /set bb – aa, /set cc -dd, and /set dd – cc. During a night of intense study, danatakanz sent such a goodnight message:
    “Stacco, bb (dannato bot che adesso risponde aa)” (I go and sleep, bb.)
    Factotum Bot answer surprised me. “bb”, then “aa”. I started wondering about how the bot treats multiple occurrences, given that when dealing with karmas the current bot version does not care about them, just the first @alias ++/– triggers a response, all the others are ignored. The game started.
    Dario: aa bb cc dd
    Factotum Bot: bb
    FB: aa
    FB: cc
    FB: dd
    D: bb bb bb bb
    FB: aa
    D: aa bb aa
    FB: aa
    FB: bb
    D: dd cc bb aa
    FB: aa
    FB: bb
    FB: dd
    FB: cc
    Further tests (on my prvate chat with the bot) have been issued, and these are my suppositions: each message is read by the bot and digested through a switch-like action. Each trigger is implemented as a specific switch case, thus the order of the bot answers depends by their order inside the switch, which i think is chronological (every time /set command is sent, it adds a case ti the switch at the end). When a specifc trigger has multiple occurences, the bot answers only once. But the world is rarely so perfect, and it happens that the same message generates responses ordered differently. For example:
    DD: aa bb cc dd
    FB: bb
    FB: aa
    FB: cc
    FB: dd
    D: aa bb cc dd
    FB: bb
    FB: aa
    FB: dd
    FB: cc
    DD: aa bb cc dd
    FB: bb
    FB: aa
    FB: cc
    FB: dd
    The responses to my second message are kind of scrumbled. Maybe one day i’ll do a statistical study about the bot answers.
    i think that this is due to the small interval of time that separates the bot responses, which screws Telegram Bot API, but this is just speculation.

    I am NOT crazy. I was just studying quantum mechanics.

    Like

    1. Dear DD,
      I did nor say you are crazy. You are just desperate and maybe you just confirmed my supposition here. I hope things will go better for you, love you.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s