Discussion Thread Re: 8/3 No Insults Rule Amendment

[cybrsage]

You confuse the WHY and the HOW I FIND THE TIME...they are not the same.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

You confuse the WHY and the HOW I FIND THE TIME...they are not the same.

Honestly, I doubt anyone here cares. They only know that the more time you have and are allowed to post in this place, the worse it is.

 

[cybrsage]

Of course you care - you replied. If you did not care, you would not reply.

Posting as a royal does not become you, though. You are not plural...

 

[Bowfinger]

Still hasn't posted since.

Damnit. See what you did? This is why we can't have nice things.

 

[cybrsage]

I love you too.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Well, you certainly haven't given anyone any reason to cry of late, as you've been on one "vacation" after another over the last N weeks.

The only one who is in the process of getting you banned is you. It will happen eventually, for the simple reason that you can't stop your sociopathic behavior. That's on you, not anyone else.

Your "vacation" hasn't become permanent solely due to the commendable patience and fairness of the admins and mods here at AT -- not because you don't deserve to be gone.

++

How does someone that has a multi-year history of trolling, and with what 8? more? temp bans for trolling just here, still not get banned?

 

[cybrsage]

Dunno why you are still here, Garf?

 

[Charles Kozierok]

How does someone that has a multi-year history of trolling, and with what 8? more? temp bans for trolling just here, still not get banned?

Not an admin here, so I can't answer that. But I can surmise that they have a process of escalating vacations and he'll keep getting longer ones until he's gone for good.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Yesterday someone started a thread with potential and asked people to try to keep it civil. It degraded into strawmen, flamebaiting and insults within a few hours.

Just another example of why changes in the rules, or a subforum emphasizing logic and consideration, would be beneficial.

 

[jackstar7]

Yesterday someone started a thread with potential and asked people to try to keep it civil. It degraded into strawmen, flamebaiting and insults within a few hours.

Just another example of why changes in the rules, or a subforum emphasizing logic and consideration, would be beneficial.

While the purpose of that thread might not have been met, I will say it's a quick examination of a bunch of intellectually dishonest people. Rather interesting in that regard.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Yesterday someone started a thread with potential and asked people to try to keep it civil. It degraded into strawmen, flamebaiting and insults within a few hours.

Just another example of why changes in the rules, or a subforum emphasizing logic and consideration, would be beneficial.

That was a troll thread from the start and just collected more troll postings like a snow ball rolled down a hill in Winter.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

That was a troll thread from the start and just collected more troll postings like a snow ball rolled down a hill in Winter.

It was a "troll thread" only because it was posted in the current environment.

I think that if posed in a more productive venue, it could have been quite interesting.

That's the entire problem. Nearly every thread turns into a "troll thread" because negative behavior is not disallowed.

 

[monovillage]

It was a "troll thread" only because it was posted in the current environment.

I think that if posed in a more productive venue, it could have been quite interesting.

That's the entire problem. Nearly every thread turns into a "troll thread" because negative behavior is not disallowed.

In the thread you listed, who's post is the most egregious? I know which one is in my opinion, i'm just curious if we both agree.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

In the thread you listed, who's post is the most egregious? I know which one is in my opinion, i'm just curious if we both agree.

I'm going to pass on this, as I don't believe it would be constructive.

 

[monovillage]

I'm going to pass on this, as I don't believe it would be constructive.

Thought so, it's the same reason I didn't list who it was in my post.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Thought so, it's the same reason I didn't list who it was in my post.

I honestly had not looked through the thread in detail before I posted that. Believe what you wish.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Interesting article about internet trolls.....to be clear, the initial part of the article is about the troll that stalked that girl until she killed herself, and I am in no way claiming our trolls are stalkers, but the rest of the article brings up some points about trolls in general that certainly pertain to our resident trolls.

Link

Some pertinent quotes:

For people who are relatively isolated and feel powerless in their ordinary lives— like Brutsch appears to be— the net provides a world where they can wield power and influence others

Does this sound like some of our trolls here?

Both are clearly visible in Brutsch, who told CNN, “There are hot button topics that you can make a comment about and just enrage people. Sadly for me, I enjoyed doing that. I liked going in and making people really mad over what amounted to meaningless things.”

I've comment before that people that troll a lot, probably have sort of mild mental disorder, I guess the authors feel the same way:

One study of real-world bullies, which likely applies to trolls as well, found that the pleasure regions in their brains were activated when they saw other people being deliberately harmed— and the degree of activation was linked to their levels of sadism.

I think most people already knew this on some level, but the more people that realize this, the better.

 

[cybrsage]

Yesterday someone started a thread with potential and asked people to try to keep it civil. It degraded into strawmen, flamebaiting and insults within a few hours.

Just another example of why changes in the rules, or a subforum emphasizing logic and consideration, would be beneficial.

I still think that thread can be salvaged...it seemed like a great way to ask and answer questions.

 

[cybrsage]

In the thread you listed, who's post is the most egregious? I know which one is in my opinion, i'm just curious if we both agree.

I'm going to pass on this, as I don't believe it would be constructive.

Thought so, it's the same reason I didn't list who it was in my post.

I agree with both of you.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

I agree with both of you.

This is an example of trolling/flamebaiting, since I specifically did not answer the question monovillage posed, and you are pretending that I agreed with monovillage.

This is the exact sort of behavior that I would like to see prohibited.

 

[cybrsage]

This is an example of trolling/flamebaiting, since I specifically did not answer the question monovillage posed, and you are pretending that I agreed with monovillage.

This is the exact sort of behavior that I would like to see prohibited.

Your lack of comprehension is no one's fault but your own. You look for offense and, therefor, always find it. Just look back through this thread and find the time when you started foaming at the mouth and crying about how horrible it was when I agreed with you - you just could not abide by it - it made you all angry.

I agree with both of you. It is simple to understand, but I will put it in an easier format:

Person A: I think Bob the Soda Jerk is a loser. What do you think, B?
Person B: I think discussing it is not helpful.
Person A: That is what I thought.
Person C: I agree with both of you.
Person B: I hate everything you stand for, even when you agree with me, C!!!!! ::foam forming on lips, spittle spewing forth::

It is easily seen that Person C agrees Bob the Soda Jerk is a loser and that discussing it is not helpful. It is also easy to see Person B needs to go on medication to aid in calming down.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

He asked me who I thought started the thread in question going downhill.

I said I didn't want to answer that.

He implied with his response that I was agreeing with his opinion on that.

I again replied to make clear that I was not answering whom I thought was the initial instigator in the thread.

You jumped in "agreeing" with the two of us when the two of us hadn't agreed on anything, solely to try to instigate an argument with me.

That is trolling. It should be prohibited.

And you should be banned from this forum. Actually, should have been a long time ago.

 

[cybrsage]

So you are actively seeking offense and are willingly tossing aside both common sense and rational thinking in your effort to find it. I understand.

 

[monovillage]

Interesting article about internet trolls.....to be clear, the initial part of the article is about the troll that stalked that girl until she killed herself, and I am in no way claiming our trolls are stalkers, but the rest of the article brings up some points about trolls in general that certainly pertain to our resident trolls.

Link

Some pertinent quotes:

Does this sound like some of our trolls here?

I've comment before that people that troll a lot, probably have sort of mild mental disorder, I guess the authors feel the same way:

I think most people already knew this on some level, but the more people that realize this, the better.

I don't disagree with that article, but why would you consider yourself less of a troll then many of the opposing view posters on this forum? Have you read through some of your own posts lately? Have you looked at some of the topic threads lately? You'll also notice in that article that there's a pernicious bully factor that makes the trolling much worse and more damaging.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

I don't disagree with that article, but why would you consider yourself less of a troll then many of the opposing view posters on this forum? Have you read through some of your own posts lately? Have you looked at some of the topic threads lately? You'll also notice in that article that there's a pernicious bully factor that makes the trolling much worse and more damaging.

Don't see how it applies to me, since I don't troll. Call out other trolls, sure I do, and I always provides links to real facts and articles making my case and showing why they are wrong. I don't think posting facts is trolling.

Now in cybrtroll's case, I think that article describes him and a few others here perfectly. Clearly he enjoys lying and posting intentionally incorrect and inflammatory remarks, trying to piss people off. He posts a ton every day (on his non-banned days at least), and has been doing it for years. Sure sounds like he enjoys it, doesn't it? Why would someone do something they don't like for so long, it's not like it's a job that he gets paid for or anything. So some sort of mental disorder is certainly a plausible conclusion.


And as the article also states, the only way to deal with them is to make it difficult for them. So you have to call out trolls with facts, expose their lies, and make them present proof of their statements. They never can, so they will just fall back on trolling and lying more. At that point, you can PM the mods and show that you presented strong evidence, and that you have asked for proof from the troll several times, and more often then not, it's vacation time for the troll.