Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
waldo

Clarification - MLW Board Definition of Trolling

Recommended Posts

.

We need a definition of trolling from the moderators, since they're quite obviously working on a different one than what most people understand to be true.

clearly, yes, a (new) definition of trolling is needed. Trolling has reached a new threshold for abuse. We have one particular MLW member who makes... who has made... it his MLW board mission, year over year, to incessantly express his extreme sensitivities to anyone choosing to utilize United States sourced references, irregardless of forum or topic. It makes no difference whether the sourced reference ties, linkages, relationships, associations, groupings, affiliations, connections, etc., to the United States, are direct, indirect, partial, peripheral, tangential, etc.. The MLW member's expressed sensitivity simply acts, as intended, to purposely disrupt/derail/distract topic discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waldo makes a good point. But often trolling is in the eye if the beholder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waldo makes a good point. But often trolling is in the eye if the beholder.

and often it is brazenly self-evident, it is a long-standing repeat pattern of flagrant board rule abuse and is recognized by some members as not being enforced (properly)... at least under the current interpretation of trolling - hence, the request for clarification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, let's wait for the response to come down from the mountaintop.....maybe on two stone tablets. One would hope that the time honoured tools of engaging and pressing discourse will be supported now and in the future. Censorship and outright attacks by certain members in an attempt to silence contravening views should not be tolerated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, let's wait for the response to come down from the mountaintop.....maybe on two stone tablets. One would hope that the time honoured tools of engaging and pressing discourse will be supported now and in the future. Censorship and outright attacks by certain members in an attempt to silence contravening views should not be tolerated.

If you were Canadian you could probably go to a Human Rights Commission over this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, let's wait for the response to come down from the mountaintop.....maybe on two stone tablets. One would hope that the time honoured tools of engaging and pressing discourse will be supported now and in the future. Censorship and outright attacks by certain members in an attempt to silence contravening views should not be tolerated.

laugh.png a simple request for clarification - why would you take such exception? Apparently:

- to you, trolling equates to, 'engagement and pressing discourse'!!!

- to you, a request for clarification is "censorship"!

- to you, active challenging trolling "engagement and pressing discourse", is a personal attack intended to silence contravening views!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we just leave this until we get a comment from the mods ?

We all know that trolling is what the OTHER guy does - other than that I don't see what there is to discuss until we hear back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we just leave this until we get a comment from the mods ?

We all know that trolling is what the OTHER guy does - other than that I don't see what there is to discuss until we hear back.

Agreed...we can readily see who is most anxious about this. Chill.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we just leave this until we get a comment from the mods ?

We all know that trolling is what the OTHER guy does - other than that I don't see what there is to discuss until we hear back.

There are blatant examples of trolling. Some are present in this very thread. I don't think it takes a genius to spot trolling when it happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed...we can readily see who is most anxious about this. Chill.....

agreed - chill... we can certainly see who is most anxious to avoid this, who is most anxious in attempting to trivialize this; who is most anxious to equate trolling to "engagement and pressing discourse"; who is most anxious to readily claim censorship; who is most anxious to play the attack card against those questioning/challenging trolling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My 2 cents is that worrying about trolling isn't worth the effort. The way to deal with trolls is not to respond. If you do engage the supposed troll in discussion, it can't be a troll, since you deem the subject worthy of discussion.

Edited by Canuckistani

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read the rules and guidelines of this forum. You will find they are very thorough and address your issue of the definition.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?app=core&module=help&do=01&HID=17

However, the only way to effectively deal with someone you feel is trolling is to ignore them. Its really that easy...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you do engage the supposed troll in discussion, it can't be a troll, since you deem the subject worthy of discussion.

Exactly!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read the rules and guidelines of this forum. You will find they are very thorough and address your issue of the definition.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?app=core&module=help&do=01&HID=17

However, the only way to effectively deal with someone you feel is trolling is to ignore them. Its really that easy...

thanks for clarifying the existing rule, as quoted below, remains as is, and in effect. However, respectively, this isn't a question of "feeling". There is a blanket defined rule that is being, and has been, flagrantly broken and abused for years on end by the same person. Equally, the ignore suggestion fails against a most prolific poster who repeatedly and purposely uses the trolling tactic to disrupt and derail threads. Either a rule is enforced or it has no bearing... or worse it is sporadically enforced to the point you get this type of clarification request coming forward from multiple members.

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Inflammatory remarks just to annoy people"

"[Messages that are] simply a nuisance"

"Persistently creating conflict without contributing anything useful"

Hilarious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are not bringing anything new to the argument, then do not say anything at all.

If this is the standard, we never hear from BC again!! lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Use ignore and stop complaining. Eventually everybody will be on the ignore list...result: you win the debate every time by default.

:)

NASA Scientist: [resigned] Well, Homer, I guess you're the winner by default.Homer Simpson: Default? Woo-hoo! The two sweetest words in the English language: De-fault! De-fault! De-fault!            [assistant clubs him]NASA Scientist: [looking at club] Where'd you get that, anyway?NASA Assistant: Sent away...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, we ignore trolling, but we strictly enforce other rules, even when the line for them has barely been crossed? Why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Inflammatory remarks just to annoy people"

"[Messages that are] simply a nuisance"

"Persistently creating conflict without contributing anything useful"

Hilarious.

so, in a nutshell:

You mad bro?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read the rules and guidelines of this forum. You will find they are very thorough and address your issue of the definition.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?app=core&module=help&do=01&HID=17

However, the only way to effectively deal with someone you feel is trolling is to ignore them. Its really that easy...

You post the rules and yet you do not enforce them. A certain member abuses the rules for many years and you let it slide. Ignoring members who break the rules is one part of the answer, but it doesn't mean that they should be given such free reign to keep breaking the rules and trolling members of MLW.

Do your job. Ask members to obey the rules or force them to leave. I've never seen any member of a any message forum be given such free reign to troll and break forum rules in all the years I've used internet forums. This should have been properly dealt with years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

....Do your job. Ask members to obey the rules or force them to leave.

They do....the mods manage this site quite well with warnings, suspensions, and bans.

Some members are in the Cooler right now. Something that some of the complaining members don't appreciate is the degree to which the forum owner and moderator(s) discreetly enforce the rules without public flogging. We have the e-mails and warning points to prove it. They can't and shouldn't have to baby sit dozens of active members and thousands of posts to everyone's authoritarian satisfaction.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yz_jdaXD9qA

Edited by bush_cheney2004

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×