I participate in a few forums, and I’ve never seen the kinds of trolls that infest this forum. You know the names: socratus, aetzbar, Mozart Link, and a few others. Knowing how the right operates, right politically and religiously, I start to wonder if there’s more going on that just some random posters who happen upon the forum, dump a bunch of threads, and leave. Could this be the case and why, or is this kind of thing pretty common.
Its common.
This forum encounters mild trolling compared to some of the others I’ve been on - however it should be said that people often interpret trolling in different ways. IMO, anyone who constantly posts memes, or one word repetitive phases like “whatever” in a discussion thread, is basically trolling - even though they might not intend to troll.
I think you see them here because the moderators are too nice. ML was recently banned from at least one other forum for posting the same crap he posts here. socrates and aetzbar have posted nothing interesting and incapable of engaging in discussion. I cannot imagine why the moderators let them continue posting.
Doug’s response to Handydan in the “Feedback” section of issues and complaints pretty much sums up the moderator’s contention that anyone is allowed to post if they follow the forum rules. Remember that several people have been banned in the past, George in particular, for persistent negative or flaming comments. Ignoring the posters’s comments eventually drives them away.
Cap’t Jack
I would not call them trolls. They are not even feigning that they argue. They just go on posting and posting… It is more like blogging.
I think it is not a good sign, that the forum of CFI is misused for these bloggers. In my opinion the forum should be a place to discuss the different topics that fit to CFI’s mission. Of course, people may come here to challenge CFI’s ideas or mission, but they should be prepared to exchange serious arguments. Those mentioned by CuthbertJ clearly are not.
A possible rule that could be added to the present rules, would be that new member are only allowed to start new topics, after they posted at least, say 10 meaningful reactions in other threads. But that may be difficult, in the first place because the moderators would have to look at the total numbers of postings ('New Topic: MemberX total posts: 5); and the question what 'meaningful means.
Another solution would just be that moderators just delete such posts without any notice. But that might be too hard again.
So, yeah, in the end: don’t react. Put them on your ignore list.
It would seem that trolls, like beauty, are in the eye of the beholder. The label is far too often invoked to dismiss someone of opposing views. Even when it is justified, it is better to take the time to deconstruct a complicated inundation of multi-layered malarky, than to try to cut things short by labeling them a troll. Learning to do this kind of heavy lifting is it’s own reward when it is achieved. But if you are not willing to do it, it is better not engage with them, because you will only feed the trolling behavior.
To be clear, “trolling” is firmly against the rules and something we do not encourage. The folks I believe are under discussion here are not trolls, they are oddballs. We do have rules against unresponsive posting, but are rather reticent to use them too often: we all have our manias and interests after all. That said we will try to look at this problem in a bit more depth. I’m out of town this week so it may take awhile though.
Ignoring the posters’s comments eventually drives them away.As tempting as it can be to respond to some of the posts that look to me like nothing more than baiting (trolling, if you wish), I end up ignoring them.
We should probably respond that the poster is trolling. The good thing about trolls is they shoot (usually very badly) and run. It's the ones who are not trolls but continue to argue their inane ideas that are more annoying. We should have a word for them. LoisIgnoring the posters’s comments eventually drives them away.As tempting as it can be to respond to some of the posts that look to me like nothing more than baiting (trolling, if you wish), I end up ignoring them.
pecker heads ?
pecker heads ? ;-PThat's more PC than what I had in mind.
I would not call them trolls. They are not even feigning that they argue. They just go on posting and posting... It is more like blogging. I think it is not a good sign, that the forum of CFI is misused for these bloggers. In my opinion the forum should be a place to discuss the different topics that fit to CFI's mission. Of course, people may come here to challenge CFI's ideas or mission, but they should be prepared to exchange serious arguments. Those mentioned by CuthbertJ clearly are not. A possible rule that could be added to the present rules, would be that new member are only allowed to start new topics, after they posted at least, say 10 meaningful reactions in other threads. But that may be difficult, in the first place because the moderators would have to look at the total numbers of postings ('New Topic: MemberX total posts: 5); and the question what 'meaningful means. Another solution would just be that moderators just delete such posts without any notice. But that might be too hard again. So, yeah, in the end: don't react. Put them on your ignore list.Not allowed to start a thread until X number of posts...I've seen that in other forums. I wonder if that's something available in the forum tool itself, versus needing a moderator to do manually.
Forum feature question: When I ignore a poster, does that poster know they’re are being ignored?
I wonder if that's something available in the forum tool itself, versus needing a moderator to do manually.Not an option with our (way outdated) software AFAIK.
Forum feature question: When I ignore a poster, does that poster know they're are being ignored?I don't believe so.
The moderators have discussed the issue raised in this thread. There are a number of rules concerning the type of content that is allowed and prohibited in this forum. Since our goal is both free inquiry and civil, productive discussion, we must balance allowing members to post content that other members dislike against restricting content that threatens to impede discussion. The section of the rules that seems to most closely address the concern raised in this thread is the following:
Threads that consist of repetitive posting of the same comments, information, or links without meaningful development or responsive discussion will be considered a form of spamming or trolling and may be locked or deleted at the Moderators’ discretion.In general, we would encourage members to post with the intent to discuss the content of their posts. If someone is posting the same material repeatedly and refusing to give substantive responses to appropriate comments from other members on that material, this may be a violation of the forum rules. Members should bring such instances to the attention of moderators through the post reporting or private messaging functions. However, please also be aware that moderators are volunteers with limited time available to manage the forum. If the occasional post appears that you consider devoid of significant content or if the author of the OP does not respond to your comments, it may be more efficient and effective to ignore the post or the member and move on rather than to persist in responding or involving the moderators, so please use your judgment.
Thank you for the update and reminder. Having been a moderator on a very popular photography discussion forum I know what a tough job it can be, especially in your free time. I think I speak for all members when I say I appreciate what you do here.