bush_cheney2004 Posted August 20, 2015 Report Posted August 20, 2015 Why do the usual suspects insist that moderators enforce rules against "trolling" while repeatedly ignoring forum rules against personal attacks ? Personal attacks are also "trolling" as defined above as well as being thread drift. Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 20, 2015 Report Posted August 20, 2015 More likely it was locked because of the personal attacks and inflammatory language. Agreed.....my topical sarcasm did not lock the thread. Identical, moderated quips can be found in reader comments to the same CBC story. It was another member's (repeated) personal attacks in response to my post that locked the unfocused OP/thread. Economics trumps Virtue.
Bonam Posted August 20, 2015 Report Posted August 20, 2015 The purpose of trolling is to incite such things, so yeah, it was the trolling that got that topic shuttered. If certain posters continue to incite certain responses (and not because they are bringing anything new or challenging to the table), doesn't it make sense to excise that cancer? Are you saying the poster who replied to the relatively mild comment with a torrent of insults is simply unable to control himself? Sorry but if you think something is trolling, just ignore it rather than being riled up by it. It's most definitely the childish insults "idiot" and "trogdolyte" that got that thread locked, despite the moderator's very strange post that blamed kimmy for not trying hard enough to make a thread worthy of proper discussion.
Black Dog Posted August 20, 2015 Report Posted August 20, 2015 Since it seems some people need a refresher course on the rules: No Trolling/FlamingDo not post inflammatory remarks just to annoy people. If you are not bringing anything new to the argument, then do not say anything at all. Some messages are not so much offensive as simply nuisance value. An example would be a person who persistently creates conflict without contributing anything useful. I mean: come on. This is obviously distinct from personal attacks or insults. Point is this: rules against personal attacks are regularly and enthusiastically enforced, as they should be. Persistent trolling, however, appears to be is tolerated.
Bonam Posted August 20, 2015 Report Posted August 20, 2015 Something new was brought to the argument, hence it wasn't trolling in that instance.
Black Dog Posted August 20, 2015 Report Posted August 20, 2015 (edited) Are you saying the poster who replied to the relatively mild comment with a torrent of insults is simply unable to control himself? Sorry but if you think something is trolling, just ignore it rather than being riled up by it. See there's thing thing called "context"... It's most definitely the childish insults "idiot" and "trogdolyte" that got that thread locked, despite the moderator's very strange post that blamed kimmy for not trying hard enough to make a thread worthy of proper discussion. Be that as it may, perhaps ask yourself what would prompt such a sudden and visceral reaction. Something new was brought to the argument, hence it wasn't trolling in that instance. I am not talking about that particular instance, but a persistent pattern of behaviour. But since we're on the subject, the "something new" was completely off-topic and irrelevant. But sure, the response was the problem. Edited August 20, 2015 by Black Dog
Bonam Posted August 20, 2015 Report Posted August 20, 2015 Be that as it may, perhaps ask yourself what would prompt such a sudden and visceral reaction. Nothing should. When I see a poster make a remark that I find so fundamentally wrong or offensive that I would be tempted to reply in such a matter, I know that it's simply not worth it. For one, this is a forum that we all visit recreationally, and if something is getting your blood pressure up, just go do something else for a while. Secondly, you're not gonna help your argument any by hurling insults... only the true believers already on your side are gonna cheer you on, anyone who hasn't yet made up their mind or is on the other side is only gonna see your immaturity and evaluate your argument accordingly. So no, nothing should "prompt such a sudden and visceral reaction". It's an anonymous discussion forum which people visit on their free time. Relax and enjoy rather than being infuriated and insulting. I rarely bother getting really invested in arguments here anymore because it's simply not worth it. Post your opinion on a topic, maybe clarify it once or twice if necessary, but the multiple pages of quoting each other back and forth with a poster who thinks you're an idiot... no thanks, just not fun. In regards to the instance in question, the comment may have been somewhat tangential and a bit silly but it wasn't "completely off-topic".
GostHacked Posted August 20, 2015 Report Posted August 20, 2015 Even some of the best posters here do not have anything near 40,000 posts.
G Huxley Posted August 20, 2015 Report Posted August 20, 2015 Apparently I'm not allowed to use the word neocon (my posts keep getting deleted with the term in it) despite that it is an actual conservative movement:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism
cybercoma Posted August 20, 2015 Report Posted August 20, 2015 Burn it all down and dance on the ashes.
waldo Posted August 21, 2015 Report Posted August 21, 2015 Burn it all down and dance on the ashes. bullshyte thread!
Big Guy Posted August 21, 2015 Report Posted August 21, 2015 No member knows this better than the one who enjoys classic passive aggressive behaviour as a way to attack other members, other nationals, and the actions/inactions of forum moderators. A classic example of what this poster does - and has done about 38,000 times. Everybody knows that this ...2004 is the target of the discussion about how the moderators deal with trolling, deviation and/or disruption or whatever. I do agree with him that the best defence is an offence. Because of my criticism of his approach and the lack of response by the moderators, he decides to label me as a "classic passive aggressive" and a whole bunch of other crap. Hello ...2004, I really do not care. If you have noticed I have ignored you for about a year because any interaction with you is a waste of time for me. You share nothing new and seem to enjoy fanning nationalistic flames by purporting to be an American jerk with an attitude who thrives on teasing Canadians. Hello! I saw/see that and have very little interest in what you do or why you do it. The only reason I commented here was that the administrators or this board are soliciting opinions - so I have given mine. I have no doubt that you will continue to give yours and attempt to rationalize the tone of your posts. Talk to you in another year if/when we are both still here. Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 21, 2015 Report Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) A classic example of what this poster does - and has done about 38,000 times. Everybody knows that this ...2004 is the target of the discussion about how the moderators deal with trolling, deviation and/or disruption or whatever......Talk to you in another year if/when we are both still here. Thank you for a very interesting post. I am sure that it helps to advance the discussion about "trolling" in a very positive, constructive way. As is the case with any member in good standing, we are free to respond or not respond to any other member's topics and posts within the framework defined by forum rules, not another member's biases, opinions, political persuasion, or childish aptitude for personal attacks. This forum is a free market for ideas and opinions, and if those were always the same it would be a most boring place indeed. No member is forced to read or post in any forum topic, so participation is explicitly and absolutely voluntary, as is the decision to leave the forum if it does not measure up to a member's impeccable standards and expectations for other members or moderator policies and practices. Edited August 21, 2015 by bush_cheney2004 Economics trumps Virtue.
waldo Posted August 21, 2015 Report Posted August 21, 2015 ...or childish aptitude for personal attacks. your ongoing attempt to shift the focus away from trolling to "personal attacks" is noted . This forum is a free market for ideas and opinions, and if those were always the same it would be a most boring place indeed. it's not a 'free market' for trolling no matter how hard you try to deflect . No member is forced to read or post in any forum topic, so participation is explicitly and absolutely voluntary, as is the decision to leave the forum if it does not measure up to a member's impeccable standards and expectations for other members or moderator policies and practices. your "no member is forced" does not give latitude to trolls to disrupt thread discussion/flow... to bury other member conscientious and researched posts, pages deep, with purposeful troll antics. .
waldo Posted August 21, 2015 Report Posted August 21, 2015 But "put to rest" is not a realistic scenario. I do not believe that the moderator has an obligation to justify these types of decisions, and I certainly do not believe that the issue would end with such an assertion. not "a realistic scenario"? Why not? There's clearly a member 'body of weight' that has focused attention on one single member. There is a collective subjectivity of that member 'body of weight' that has determined the "American" is a troll. There's an ongoing repetitive call asking the moderator to qualify his subjective interpretation of trolling, particularly in relation to the existing MLW rule against trolling. There are ongoing repetitive claims from members pointedly calling out the moderator... stating "he doesn't know what trolling is". So let him explain it... just what is trolling on MLW? The best way to do so, in the face of the member 'body of weight' subjective call, is for the moderator to explain his subjective determination of what constitutes trolling by pointedly stating why the "American" is not trolling... by using posting examples to that end. If this does not occur, it will only add fuel to the backchannel suggestions that the only reason nothing is being done is because the "moderator" and the "American"... are one and the same person! There can be no other explanation.
Bonam Posted August 21, 2015 Report Posted August 21, 2015 If I had to list the posters on this board from the most trollish to the least trollish, I don't think BC_2004 would even be in the top 5.
Charles Anthony Posted August 21, 2015 Report Posted August 21, 2015 Apparently I'm not allowed to use the word neocon (my posts keep getting deleted with the term in it) despite that it is an actual conservative movement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism Oh, you can use the term neocon but not if you use it to label/target/insult somebody. Unless somebody says "I am a neocon." then calling that person a neocon is either an insult and or a personal attack and or thread drift -- at best, it adds nothing but confusion. MOD BIAS: I used to call myself a neocon but now, I can see quite clearly how it can be perceived-with-reason as a grave insult. That says nothing to whether or not I ever was a neocon or whether I actually am no longer. We do not have time for a meeting of the flat earth society. << Où sont mes amis ? Ils sont ici, ils sont ici... >>
Smallc Posted August 21, 2015 Report Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) If I had to list the posters on this board from the most trollish to the least trollish, I don't think BC_2004 would even be in the top 5. I would agree with you. In the past I wouldn't have. Edited August 21, 2015 by Smallc
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 21, 2015 Report Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) Far worse than any perceived or actual forum trolling are the attempts by some members to silence other members with personal attacks, nasty private messages, and coordinated pleas to forum moderators. Focusing their collective malice on a single "American" member only highlights a deep seated, personal animus. Edited August 21, 2015 by bush_cheney2004 Economics trumps Virtue.
Black Dog Posted August 21, 2015 Report Posted August 21, 2015 Yeah, a bunch of people (mostly long term users) are fed up with a persistent and self-confessed troll who has been allowed free reign to disrupt discussion on these boards for far too long. Go figure.
Black Dog Posted August 21, 2015 Report Posted August 21, 2015 Nothing should. When I see a poster make a remark that I find so fundamentally wrong or offensive that I would be tempted to reply in such a matter, I know that it's simply not worth it. Well, I guess you're just a better person. It's an anonymous discussion forum which people visit on their free time. Relax and enjoy rather than being infuriated and insulting. You're missing the point. Trolling is against the rules, disrupts the discussion and makes time spent here less worthwhile and enjoyable. I have been a member here since 2003 so I feel invested and would like to continue to be so. The direction the board has taken of late and the selective enforcement of site rules by the moderator(s) has me questioning whether its worth my time.
cybercoma Posted August 21, 2015 Report Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) I'm disgusted with the free-speech crowd's deliberate attempt to stifle my free expression and trample on my free speech rights. Edited August 21, 2015 by cybercoma
Big Guy Posted August 21, 2015 Report Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) Thank you for a very interesting post. I am sure that it helps to advance the discussion about "trolling" in a very positive, constructive way. As is the case with any member in good standing, we are free to respond or not respond to any other member's topics and posts within the framework defined by forum rules, not another member's biases, opinions, political persuasion, or childish aptitude for personal attacks. This forum is a free market for ideas and opinions, and if those were always the same it would be a most boring place indeed. No member is forced to read or post in any forum topic, so participation is explicitly and absolutely voluntary, as is the decision to leave the forum if it does not measure up to a member's impeccable standards and expectations for other members or moderator policies and practices. Changed my mind and will try again. Thank you for your response. I have no doubt that you have realized that you are the main focus of this topic. A large number of posters feel that you do nothing but agitate, tease and attempt to create confrontations. Of course it is legal and obviously allowed on this board. But - that you know you are considered a pariah by most posters here, why do you continue? You will probably come back with some witty "because I can" or other but why are you enjoying irritating other people? I assume your participation on this board is a pleasurable experience or you would not be voluntarily spending your time. Is it healthy to gain pleasure from others displeasure especially when you are the cause of the displeasure? You are apparently an intelligent person because you appear to have no problems communicating your wishes. Congratulations on your 38,000 plus posts. I am not sure if that is a good thing or a bad thing. I have only read what has transpired over my period of participation but it is obvious that your posts lead to negativity and thread drift. I assume that after 38,000 posts that you have realized this a while ago - yet - you continue. Why? Edited August 21, 2015 by Big Guy Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Moonlight Graham Posted August 21, 2015 Report Posted August 21, 2015 Oh, you can use the term neocon but not if you use it to label/target/insult somebody. Unless somebody says "I am a neocon." then calling that person a neocon is either an insult and or a personal attack and or thread drift -- at best, it adds nothing but confusion. MOD BIAS: I used to call myself a neocon but now, I can see quite clearly how it can be perceived-with-reason as a grave insult. That says nothing to whether or not I ever was a neocon or whether I actually am no longer. But you're either a neocon, or have a neocon beliefs, or not. What if you call someone a neocon but the label is pretty accurate to their beliefs? "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
Argus Posted August 21, 2015 Author Report Posted August 21, 2015 No member knows this better than the one who enjoys classic passive aggressive behaviour as a way to attack other members, other nationals, and the actions/inactions of forum moderators. Now who could you be referring to, one wonders? I was hoping that by now you would have realized that I have no interest in your opinion or in debating you. I will repeat - I am not interested in your opinion nor in debating you. "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Recommended Posts