cybercoma Posted June 11, 2015 Report Posted June 11, 2015 Any internet forum will always have trolls on itEspecially when they keep making new accounts and using proxies to get around bans.
cybercoma Posted June 11, 2015 Report Posted June 11, 2015 (edited) If there was an actual survey, I'm sure you'd find the forum much less unanimous about it than you think. Just because the clique of people you agree with has identified someone as a troll, doesn't mean that others agree.There's people who disagree with a troll being someone who intentionally and repeatedly derails threads with off-topic non sequiturs and calls it a "game"? Edited June 11, 2015 by cybercoma
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 11, 2015 Report Posted June 11, 2015 Not to be confused with other people who derail threads with incessant whining about "trolls". Economics trumps Virtue.
waldo Posted June 11, 2015 Report Posted June 11, 2015 Not to be confused with other people who derail threads with incessant whining about "trolls". not to be confused with that guy here who used to quite regularly tout his board trolling shtick... wore it as a badge of honor and a testament to his prolific board presence! I'm sure you know that guy, right?
waldo Posted June 11, 2015 Report Posted June 11, 2015 (edited) Would you two like to PM each other and nominate somebody for us to look at again ? by MLW Rules: "We define "trolling" as a message that serves no constructive purpose and is likely to cause offence or arguments." can you please advise what constructive purpose is realized by the ongoing, purposeful and overt denigration of Canada/Canadians by one particular MLW member here? Or by incessantly, "out-of-the-blue", without any contextual association to the discussion at hand, make a reference to Canada/Kyoto... or to the government "controlled" CBC... or to the falsely perpetuated "Denier Nation" labeling of the U.S. ... or to, quite literally, another dozen+ examples that reflect upon nothing more than long established discussions and points of disagreement. Yes, of course, disagreements can... and will exist. However, drawing attention to them, out of context and off-topic, is not a constructive purpose; rather, it is simply an attempt to inflame. Lay it out for me brother! Edited June 11, 2015 by waldo
Michael Hardner Posted June 11, 2015 Report Posted June 11, 2015 can you please advise what constructive purpose is realized by the ongoing, purposeful and overt denigration of Canada/Canadians by one particular MLW member here? The posts I am thinking about are usually well-crafted to provide context and relevance to the subject at hand. Criticizing another country is easy, of course, but posters here do it about the USA regularly, so why not allow discussion in the other direction? There are posters who are not as good at this tactic, and their posts are sometimes flagged as being off-topic. But if you feel otherwise, report it and we will have a look. Charles and I have spoken at length on this topic so we think about this a lot. When it comes to other topics, though, people seem to take the decisions on it as evidence of some kind of bias. Charles and I are very different politically, from each other and from many of you too. At least you must realize that this approach to these posts isn't about some anti-Canadian "bias" we have. Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Smallc Posted June 11, 2015 Report Posted June 11, 2015 Is accusing other posters of bigotry and genocidal tendencies over and over again okay? If we all know who someone is talking about but they don't directly say the name, is it okay then?
GostHacked Posted June 11, 2015 Report Posted June 11, 2015 The posts I am thinking about are usually well-crafted to provide context and relevance to the subject at hand. Criticizing another country is easy, of course, but posters here do it about the USA regularly, so why not allow discussion in the other direction? There are posters who are not as good at this tactic, and their posts are sometimes flagged as being off-topic. But if you feel otherwise, report it and we will have a look. Charles and I have spoken at length on this topic so we think about this a lot. When it comes to other topics, though, people seem to take the decisions on it as evidence of some kind of bias. Charles and I are very different politically, from each other and from many of you too. At least you must realize that this approach to these posts isn't about some anti-Canadian "bias" we have. The poster who brings up Canada all the time is not doing it for balance MH.
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 12, 2015 Report Posted June 12, 2015 (edited) The posts I am thinking about are usually well-crafted to provide context and relevance to the subject at hand. Criticizing another country is easy, of course, but posters here do it about the USA regularly, so why not allow discussion in the other direction? Indeed...turnabout is fair play, no? Yet some choose to pitch quite the fit, constantly complaining about "trolling" when confronted with observations and sarcasm that pointedly highlights a one-way tunnel vision "south of the border" to 'murica and reliance on 'merkin references to define positions, even subjects only concerning Canada. Others understand this rhetorical method without losing their cool or resorting to personal attacks. I will do my best to reward such an imbalanced obsession with the United States with an equal measure of "Oh, Canada"...it's a Canadian forum, right ? Edited June 12, 2015 by bush_cheney2004 Economics trumps Virtue.
Bob Macadoo Posted June 12, 2015 Report Posted June 12, 2015 (edited) .....what was that about a badge of honour? I truly hope CA just clone's his IP for this schtick and doesn't recruit individuals for this contrarianism. Edited June 12, 2015 by Bob Macadoo
On Guard for Thee Posted June 12, 2015 Report Posted June 12, 2015 not to be confused with that guy here who used to quite regularly tout his board trolling shtick... wore it as a badge of honor and a testament to his prolific board presence! I'm sure you know that guy, right? Im sure he does, as you do, I do, most of us do. How come no penalty minutes I wonder.
waldo Posted June 12, 2015 Report Posted June 12, 2015 Indeed...turnabout is fair play, no? Yet some choose to pitch quite the fit, constantly complaining about "trolling" when confronted with observations and sarcasm that pointedly highlights a one-way tunnel vision "south of the border" to 'murica and reliance on 'merkin references to define positions, even subjects only concerning Canada. Others understand this rhetorical method without losing their cool or resorting to personal attacks. I will do my best to reward such an imbalanced obsession with the United States with an equal measure of "Oh, Canada"...it's a Canadian forum, right ? your described "rhetorical method"... presuming to deal with, as you state, "an imbalanced obsession with the United States", is nothing more than you trolling, particularly when you do it by drawing a reference to something completely unrelated to any ongoing discussion... particularly when you do it repeatedly, on and on, month-over-month, year-over-year, ad nauseum! It's the same people here... your point's been made a brazillion times over! Again, when is your mission... accomplished? as an example, when you drop a one-liner about Canada/Kyoto (completely out of context to the discussion at hand), how does that relate directly to your perception of, "an imbalanced obsession with the United States"? that's right, as you say, American references are drawn upon... a lot. Do you have some unhealthy super-sensitivity to that being done... to the point you make it your focus to, with adding nothing to a thread's actual topic/discussion, drop a post with one of your curt one-liners about using American references? How many hundred's of posts do you have like this? Of course, several members have risen to your bait and actually given a rationale to their use of an American reference... like, for example, being the easily first accessible within a Google ranking. Oh wait... how many times to you feel the need to identify that Google is American? For what its worth, many times the American source being applied in a discussion about Canada (or other non-American world-events) has no bearing on the use of info/data within that American source; that is to say, the source info/data applies. So what if NOAA, NCDC, NASA, EPA, NSIDC, etc. reference is drawn upon using 'world data' for discussion use? Why must you, by adding nothing else to the discussion, decide to drop a one-liner that highlights something along the lines of, "and yet another Merkin source being used"? no, it's not a , as you say, "Canadian Forum"... according to you, over quite literally a hundred+ posts... it's hosted in Texas! (just more of your "rhetorical method", hey?). .
Bryan Posted June 12, 2015 Report Posted June 12, 2015 The poster who brings up Canada all the time is not doing it for balance MH. That poster is not even close to the worst offender though. Is accusing other posters of bigotry and genocidal tendencies over and over again okay? If we all know who someone is talking about but they don't directly say the name, is it okay then? THAT is the worst one by far.
Bob Macadoo Posted June 12, 2015 Report Posted June 12, 2015 That poster is not even close to the worst offender though. THAT is the worst one by far. I guess worse is determined by the defining factor. To me it is tied to sucessful outcomes.....not the severity of their speech. I have watched a thread about existential philosophy be derailed by reference to "state-sponsored" media talk......hyperbole maybe but not far off. I find that more "trollish" than a person who sprinkles ad hominems etc. They are easily looked past and topic re-railed.....other.....not so much. When it is done there is no actual sideline debate......just shiteating grin satisfaction......
Canada_First Posted June 12, 2015 Report Posted June 12, 2015 The more I read these forums the more it appears that this site has a few people who exhibit trollish type behaviour. I'm sure they'd be loathe to admit it however but there it is.
Michael Hardner Posted June 12, 2015 Report Posted June 12, 2015 That poster is not even close to the worst offender though. Yes, this is my point - that you and Waldo couldn't come to a consensus, that MLW couldn't come to a consensus if it had to, that the moderators will try to apply *principles* (always difficult) to make the site civil but also engaging and able to discuss openly. Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Bryan Posted June 12, 2015 Report Posted June 12, 2015 (edited) Yes, this is my point - that you and Waldo couldn't come to a consensus, that MLW couldn't come to a consensus if it had to, that the moderators will try to apply *principles* (always difficult) to make the site civil but also engaging and able to discuss openly. Any intelligent person would come to the same conclusion that the second actions (constant serious accusations and personal attacks) are far more egregious than the first (continuing to post on the same subject regardless of what the thread is actually about). I have no argument against people who might find the former more annoying, but the latter is a far more serious breach of the forum rules. Edited June 12, 2015 by Bryan
cybercoma Posted June 12, 2015 Report Posted June 12, 2015 God forbid anyone stand up to bigotry, racism, and misogyny on this board. We wouldn't want to upset the old boys club.
BubberMiley Posted June 12, 2015 Report Posted June 12, 2015 This is quite similar to my experience here as well. it's almost as if the forum has received some kind of official complaint or warning from a human rights tribunal or something. They've clamped down on the silliest things and somehow expect it won't be noticed. And yes, the membership has dwindled down to probably a tenth of what it once was. Quite the success story.Internet forums are not what they once were now that there are newspaper comments sections and twitter and instagram and blogs. Saying it's a "tenth" is clearly an exaggeration because this forum was never very big at any time. It's always been a handful of people since I first came here 10 years ago. And the moderation has always been down on making generalized, hateful speech, but they may not have always caught everything. Just because you got away with making obscene statements in the past and are getting called out for it now doesn't mean there's a big crackdown. I think overall things are pretty consistent, both in terms of moderation and population. "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 12, 2015 Report Posted June 12, 2015 Seems that the "social justice" crusaders think that they deserve a pass on forum rules...just...because. Passion matters....to them anyway. Economics trumps Virtue.
Smallc Posted June 12, 2015 Report Posted June 12, 2015 God forbid anyone stand up to bigotry, racism, and misogyny on this board. We wouldn't want to upset the old boys club. If someone on this board was acting in this manner you may have a point.
drummindiver Posted June 12, 2015 Report Posted June 12, 2015 Lots of bigotry, especially against Jews and Americans. And disagreeing with a woman is not misogynist.
Bryan Posted June 12, 2015 Report Posted June 12, 2015 God forbid anyone stand up to bigotry, racism, and misogyny on this board. We wouldn't want to upset the old boys club. No worries about standing up to it if it ever happens. It's the constant accusations of it when nothing of the sort is happening that are nothing but inflammatory name calling.
GetBitGoldcom Posted June 12, 2015 Report Posted June 12, 2015 Hey i was wondering how long it takes for my account to be able to contribute to the discussion
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 12, 2015 Report Posted June 12, 2015 Besides, standing in front of an IDF Caterpillar D-9 is far more impressive and impactful than playing paddycake on a web forum. Economics trumps Virtue.
Recommended Posts