Topic: Scrap the trolling rule? - page 2. (Read 835 times)

Are you suggesting that TOAA was actually the vaccine for the cryptohunter virus, and not a mutation?

Hmm... maybe it's the other way round, maybe I'm ugly and my kids are dumb.


So I guess we have to thank CH and "friends" for inoculating us against that.

Although I agree, I like to think of it this way: If some troll finds it necessary to mention you long after your death, you did something right and made a real impact!

It's the internet, if the internet could hurt me, I'd have unplugged it a long time ago. I actually responded to it:
The problem with CH-like trolls is of course there's no point arguing with them, it quickly goes off-topic, and then there's the famous quote about arguing with stupid people.

That's actually a big win, it means many people now know it's pointless.

Yikes--Zepher hasn't been forgotten.  I have some nice copper BTC coins that were made in his memory and also a silver skull that he owned.

That post was totally trolling, but frankly if a rule can't or won't be enforced I think it ought to be taken off the books.  And since you have to be a seriously persistent and aggressive troll to achieve a permaban, I'd mostly be in favor of scrapping the rule.  I do think that dude's post was out of line, but I also believe in having the most freedom of speech possible--and there are other ways of dealing with a jackass like that that don't resort to having the rule book thrown at him.  The community could ignore him en masse, and that would probably be the best way of handling his posts if he's a complete troll. 

You can't feed attention to these idiots, because that's exactly what they want.  But if nobody is responding to their nonsense, they'll go away eventually.

And suchmoon, I have a hard time believing your kids are ugly.

Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what's for dinner.


No, it was an accusation.  But since you didn't deny that it's your alt, I'm retracting my accusations.  If it was your alt, you would have found some slithery, non-committal, half-assed way of denying it, sort of.

As on my understanding trolling can be defined as:

Someone who easily spouts aggressive or inflammatory messages/posts for the purpose of upsetting people for their own entertainment.

It could be characterized as trolling but it's mostly hatred and his/her opinion on the topic. He is just a hater that knows LoyceV and is jealous of the achievements. It's just typical and should just be ignored. My two sats.

No, this is not trolling. This is self expression. Moderators did everything right.


That's why you will never be a moderator here.

People are afraid of being eaten by your DT1 gangs. That's why they are forced to express their opinion from alternative accounts.

If that's the case then we should definitely scrap the rule - sounds unenforceable.

this

trolling has really always been defined as "(subtle) provocation on the internet"


subtle, because if the perpetrator does not go about it subtly, then the target will not be amply provoked

You should take a permanent one.

Confused about the specific trolling rule here and many other things it seems.

Take a break.

I might have confused it with Reputation then.

You should always add as much info as possible as mods probably aren't going to go investigating and they might not be aware of why you consider it trolling, but that's the sort of report I'd probably leave and neither mark good or bad, but there are far worse instance of trolling here that go unreported or unhandled.

I don't think we should get rid of the rule but it's obviously one where it's down to the opinion of the reporter and the mod who handles it. some people do get away with far too much trolling round here though.  


I don't believe there's ever been a dedicated mod of Meta, but any Global or Admin can handle reports there, but the user is a Newbie so any patroller can handles reports against them and maybe that's what happened here.

Not going to comment about the poll itself (so this can be considered off-topic), but fuck that person for shitting on Zepher. Who attacks a deceased forum member that was a friend to a lot of people?

This is an example of trolling or what?

What I'm wondering is why you didn't just post it from your truth or dare account?  What are you afraid of?

It appears that you are unable to understand the trolling rule here guaratees such a post is protected as accurate and valuable.

The promulgation of false and clearly debunked information as true.

Since his post is true.  Then why scrap the rule that defines this as clearly not trolling

Are you trolling suchmoon?

It is even more hilarious LFC bitcoin is meriting this trolling by suchmoon . Who would have suspected she would support this nonsense.

I'm sure LoyceV will survive this calamity but just ignoring who it was against - the whole purpose of that post seems to have have been an inflammatory and offensive attempt to disrupt the thread. I'm glad it didn't succeed. There is nothing of value in that post as far as I can see. Just like we don't consider off topic spam posts as protected free speech (just reported one right here in Meta and it's gone now) there is no harm to anyone's free speech if zero-value inflammatory content is removed or moved.


I think hillariousandco and/or Cyrus were listed as mods at one point but there is no one currently so I'm guessing globals handle it.


The people disagree:



50% of the forum can't be wrong.

It is obviously trolling, but it's also free speech.  I've never been particularly affected by trolls, I tend to ignore them for the most part.  I doubt LoyceV was hurt by it, he seems like he's got a thick skin, and knows how to shrug off the haters.  I don't know that I would have deleted that post myself (if I was a mod.)

I prefer free speech over enthusiastic moderation of trolling.  One man's troll and another man's...  I don't know what's the opposite of troll?  Rebel?  Protester?  Wise-cracker?  Whatever.  I voted for the first option; remove the rule.  It's fairly apparent that it isn't enforced anyway.  Just look at how long CH/TOAA has been trolling...  And still doing so.

I understand why you reported the post, though.  A fake newbie attacking LoyceV is more humorous than anything else.  What a fucking coward.  If you want to be critical of another member, find a way of expressing yourself without diving into attacks on the persons character.  And don't stoop so low as to attack the dead, without any legitimate reason to do so.  That whole part of the post was off-topic as well, so it's a gray area.  Still, it is dick-move, but that's no reason to delete it.

Slightly off topic; who's the moderator for the Meta board?

ETA:  OP is not stupid, and I'm sure that his offspring (suchmoonlets?) are adorable. 

This rule is pretty much effectively non-existent anyway. I think it is there mostly as an out for when a user literally does nothing but being disruptive of the general use of the forum for other users, but doesn't break any of the other rules.