Feeding Trolls

[Greg]

This is a simple concept, the more you respond to trolls, the more disruptive they become.

We've had a string of nasty individuals who have been trying their best to disruptive the discussions and I'm surprised (and disappointed) at the amount damage they've managed to create in each of the threads they've posted in.

However, the extent of the damage (and most of the blame) rests on the shoulders of those forums members who repeatedly fed the trolls. It becomes very difficult for me to remove those ignorant individuals who are only here to troll and disrupt, when otherwise intelligent and respectful forum members choose to respond to the trolls with insults and off-topic postings.

If you see someone who is only here to troll, use the Report the Post feature and then ignore them. DO NOT RESPOND TO THEM. We're all intellegant enough to know the difference between someone who has inadvertently stepped on the rules and someone who is only here to cause trouble. If a new member has broken the rules, feel free to point it out to them and ask that they read the rules and guidelines.

In the case of a troll, I will step in and remove that person as quickly as possible. However, I'm not sitting at my computer 24/7 waiting to rid the world of trolls. There are going to be times when you'll need to ignore the troll for a few hours/days.

Last week I was in St Johns NFLD, and it was difficult for me to get back to my computer to check the forums. However, when I did return, I soon discovered that many forum members couldn't resist the temptation to pook and feed the trolls.

In the future, do me and the rest of the forum members a favour and ignore the trolls.

[PolyNewbie]

"In Internet terminology, a troll is a person who enters an established community such as an online discussion forum and intentionally tries to cause disruption, often in the form of posting messages that are inflammatory, insulting, incorrect, inaccurate, absurd, or off-topic, with the intent of provoking a reaction from others."

Wiki

I think there is some misunderstanding regarding exactly what a "troll" is.

[Greg]

I think there is some misunderstanding regarding exactly what a "troll" is.

The rules and guidelines are fairly clear what a troll is:

NO TROLLING/FLAMING

Do 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. In newsgroup circles, such a person is known as a "troll". We define "trolling" as a message that serves no constructive purpose and is likely to cause offence or arguments. We define "annoying" as any message that results in a complaint from a registered user -- we will then decide whether to take action.

Trolls who blatantly break the rules are usually easy to get rid of and I usually dispatch them shortly after being notified of their behavior. It's the subtle disruption of the troll, who is more of a nuisance then offensive, that can be difficult to resolve.

However, that doesn't change the fact that engaging a troll causes more damage than ignoring them. In fact if you ignore a troll they will often leave the forums. Trolls feed on conflict and if there is not conflict they find it incredibly boring.

[PolyNewbie]

The problem is that they constantly pollute threads they don't approve of. My 911 thread has been trolled by a lot of people that have absolutely nothing to say on the subject. They insert lies into the thread and ignore challenges to that affect. They accuse me of being a troll. I'd like to see one example of that.

[stignasty]

Ban 'em all!! Let God sort 'em out!!

[PolyNewbie]

stgnasty:Ban 'em all!! Let God sort 'em out!!

You should read a thread before posting. Banning trolls would mean banning you and most of your buddies, not me.

[Canadian Blue]

How about this, why doesn't everybody just stop feeding Polynewbies conspiracy theories, they are pretty crazy.

In most other thread's when some post is made where he blames everything on the banks, usually everyone simply ignores it.

As well, it's futile to debate with someone who believes the CIA has people on the payroll on mapleleafweb, and also believes that we are all going to be sent to death camps in the near future based on what he saw on youtube.

[Figleaf]

... someone who believes the CIA has people on the payroll on mapleleafweb,...

That's ridiculous. CSIS, sure, but not the CIA.

... and also believes that we are all going to be sent to death camps in the near future based on what he saw on youtube.

What do you think the Census is for?

[sunsettommy]

The problem is that they constantly pollute threads they don't approve of. My 911 thread has been trolled by a lot of people that have absolutely nothing to say on the subject. They insert lies into the thread and ignore challenges to that affect. They accuse me of being a troll. I'd like to see one example of that.

Polynewbie,

If any of them are VIOLATING a forum rule.

PM Greg about it.

Whining about people is a waste of time.

Please just drop this and go on.

P.S.

You can use the ignore button.

[PolyNewbie]

CanadianBlue:we are all going to be sent to death camps in the near future based on what he saw on youtube.

Thats based on what law professors are saying. Many have been saying this - historians too.

For example "Interview with attorney and President of the Center for Constitutional Rights, Michael Ratner."

Guns & Butter : see Ratner Mar 7 / 2007

So stop lying all the time. You are terrible at it.

[stignasty]

Thats based on what law professors are saying. Many have been saying this - historians too.

For example "Interview with attorney and President of the Center for Constitutional Rights, Michael Ratner."

What Poly "discovered" this week that has him all alarmed.

In the first few minutes of the interview you posted, the guest mentions that lawyers defending alleged terrorists were being harassed. He then says that a stop was put to it. What!? A government who is planning to send people to the death camps had to stop defaming lawyers because it was deemed unconstitutional? That alone makes the far fetched death camp assertion nothing more than crying that the sky is falling.

[Canadian Blue]

I think Polynewbie see's a conspiracy in everything.

"I didn't get my fries with my value meal, it must be those goddamn UN zionist bankers who worship satan and torture children!"

[PolyNewbie]

stignasty:In the first few minutes of the interview you posted, the guest mentions that lawyers defending alleged terrorists were being harassed. He then says that a stop was put to it. What!? A government who is planning to send people to the death camps had to stop defaming lawyers because it was deemed unconstitutional? That alone makes the far fetched death camp assertion nothing more than crying that the sky is falling.

If you listened to the whole thing he gets into the concentration camps and the laws that have already been created to put you there.

[Canadian Blue]

Alright everyone, we all know the drill, report and ignore.

[kimmy]

I think Polynewbie see's a conspiracy in everything.

"I didn't get my fries with my value meal, it must be those goddamn UN zionist bankers who worship satan and torture children!"

Those french fries are deep-fried in the fat rendered from tortured children.

-k

{you don't even want to know what's in the "secret sauce".}

[kuzadd]

Thats based on what law professors are saying. Many have been saying this - historians too.

For example "Interview with attorney and President of the Center for Constitutional Rights, Michael Ratner."

What Poly "discovered" this week that has him all alarmed.

In the first few minutes of the interview you posted, the guest mentions that lawyers defending alleged terrorists were being harassed. He then says that a stop was put to it. What!? A government who is planning to send people to the death camps had to stop defaming lawyers because it was deemed unconstitutional? That alone makes the far fetched death camp assertion nothing more than crying that the sky is falling.

did you listen to the entire interview??