posted
I fail to see how you can't shun an action. More to the point: Not acknowledging someone's point of view is partially the problem. If someone thinks you don't understand where they are coming from they may just try harder to explain it. Although I have found that if someone doesn't acknowledge what I say then I think no one is listening, and why bother explaining something further if no one cares?
If people acted with consideration of others we wouldn't ever have trolls. Part of the problem with the word 'troll' is just that, it's just a word, and it means too broad of a subject. My advice to Hatrack on this is to be polite, and respect each other, _including_ trolls. If you give a person respect they have some to give back if they had none before.
Posts: 1132 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
v 1: avoid and stay away from deliberately; stay clear of [syn: eschew] 2: expel from a community or group [syn: banish, ban, ostracize, ostracise, cast out, blackball]
I'd say that if you're looking for a definition that could only be applied to people, #2 would do it for you. I don't think definition #2 "expel from a community or group [syn: banish, ban, ostracize, ostracise, cast out, blackball]" was what Tom meant by "shun".
Posts: 2425 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
"I don't think definition #2 'expel from a community or group [syn: banish, ban, ostracize, ostracise, cast out, blackball]' was what Tom meant by 'shun.'"
Actually, it specifically was. After several years here, I've learned that the single most accurate identifier of an incorrigible troll is his insistence that his trolling is necessary either to liven things up or make us face the truth. It has nothing to do with the content of his opinions, or even his posting style; it has entirely to do with whether he believes that he should ignore the wishes of the community for our own good -- which, of course, he feels qualified to decide.
Such people inevitably -- inevitably, without exception in my memory -- either wind up flaming out spectacularly after causing a fair bit of disruption and/or drift away after a few months when people stop rising to the bait and start ignoring the troll altogether.
I greatly prefer the second of those two scenarios, and suggest therefore that skipping straight ahead to the shunning is preferable to risking the former result.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm sorry to hear that Tom. I was under the impression that it was the mods job to decide which people needed to be banned.
Posts: 2425 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Whether or not you shun the person's posts unilaterally (which is really an individual decision), if the person in question begins their own thread with an inflamatory post it's pretty silly to all rush in and tell the person they're a big stinky dork.
For a minimum of two pages. Which is pretty much what's been going down.
posted
I'm spooked by Katarain's encyclopedic knowledge of trolling displayed on the 1st page. She's a witch--burn her! Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:After several years here, I've learned that the single most accurate identifier of an incorrigible troll is his insistence that his trolling is necessary either to liven things up or make us face the truth. It has nothing to do with the content of his opinions, or even his posting style; it has entirely to do with whether he believes that he should ignore the wishes of the community for our own good -- which, of course, he feels qualified to decide.
Tom, you've just described almost everyone on this forum. Most of the threads on the front page are either designed to (a)liven things up, or (b)make people face the truth. Only a few do other things, like ask a completely open question or discuss a personal issue. This thread is (b).
The problem with your definitions are that, if we accept them, even you are trolling right now. After all, you are intentionally trying to convince us to "shun" people. This would be terribly harmful to the forum - we'd be driving out people and fighting constantly (as we do every time we try to shun someone, virtually without exception). Thus, you are intentionally doing something that would harm the forum. And you claim to be doing this for the forum's own good, as if you know better than all of us who we should call trolls and what we should do with them.
This is just the self-centered view you were describing as trollish - the only difference being this time it's you talking rather than some pro-Bush guy who you disagree with. Does this mean I should call you a troll too? Does this mean I should shun you until you leave? No. It just means what you are calling a troll is not a troll. It is virtually ALL of us.
Our goal here is not to drive people away. Whether they leave in a rush of flaming, or whether they leave slowly over time, BOTH are bad things. Our goal is for them NOT to leave, and for them to post their views in a reasonable fashion. That is a goal that has been accomplished, even with some of the most inflammatory posters - and the only way I've seen it done is by treating their opinions fairly, and giving them the time needed to figure out they won't convince anyone of anything by fighting.
posted
If I've learned anything in ten months here it's that the people who most vigorously wave the banner of tolerance and compassion are the most lacking in those qualities.
posted
Making people not want to be here, how can you have a forum if no one is around to talk to? Things have a way of snowballing way out of proportion.
Posts: 1132 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ther are more than enough "bad people" (in this case, people trying to stir up trouble and make people cranky) in the world for us to compare the good ones here to, TM.
Posts: 3214 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think that what Tom is sugesting is any different than what we would do if we met them IRL, so I don't think it is a problem.
Tom has repetedly refused to name the person/people who "inspired" this thread this time around, which is a very good indication of his intentions.
I don't like attempting to have a discussion with someone who isn't interested in hearing my side of an argument, nor do I like being called names just because I disagree with their views. If he/she/they were to speak to me IRL the way they do here online, I would either walk away and ignore them, or I would tear them a new one in public, hoping that they would take the hint and leave me alone.
However, I have no problem having spirited discussion, here or IRL, with people who don't agree with me on a given point...in fact I often enjoy it, as long as we are both respecting the others right to disagree, and making the attempt to at least understand where the other is coming from.
What is so wrong or contraversial about wa;king away, or hitting the ignore button, when someone is deliberatly offensive to me?
I don't really care if I happen to agree with them or not, if someone comes in here and refuses to respect others in here, I won't care what they have to say about anything. That holds true even about a few recent threads where I agreed in part with some points that were made, but I still objected to the posters attitude and style. I haev also defended people from trolls even when I disagreed with their views...not because I had been converted to their viewpoints, but because they didn't deserve to be attacked for holding views that I don't agree with.
Xap, I find it rather funny that you are now berating anyone for holding a definition that differs from yours, and saying that it interferes with communication....you do that all the time. Then you blame the rest of us, most of whom agree with each other that YOU are the one with the faulty definition, for being obtuse for not bowing to your redefinition of terms.
You aren't a troll, but there are times where I could care less what you think because you don't usually debate topics, you debate semantics......and you don't eevn do that very well most of the time. You actually LOSE peoples resect and attention because you are so busy telling us what we really meant that we just tune you out.
Or at least I do.
But that doesn't make you a troll, just an ineffective debater.
You also come up with some very good points when you aren't busy tilting at windmills. You care about the discussions, at least some of the time, so by MY definition you aren't a troll.
Just annoying.
People can say they care all the time, but if you judge people on their actions as well as their words it soon becomes faily obvious who cares and who doesn't.
posted
I see the forum is alight again. Not as seriously as in many previous instances, but clearly this is a sign of boredom. It's hard to recycle old arguments over and over again.
I would have thought that we would have had enough experience to deal with this kind of thing by now. Seriously, Hatrack culture should have come far enough to be well prepared for alleged trolls, no matter how smart they are.
Posts: 2523 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
Hatrack hasn't come along because Hatrack lacks direction.
It's the same old high school popularity contest all over again, with the sports jocks and cheerleaders making up the IN crowd, and everybody else being a loser or a troll. Except you people aren't sports jocks and cheerleaders are you?
Nope, you spent your high school years on the outside looking in, criticizing the in-crowd's cliquishness. You swore you'd do things differently if you were ever part of a bunch of like-minded people. What a bunch of hypocrites!
Posts: 2655 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
There's some stereotyping for you. Actually, I'm willing to bet that most individuals, no matter how "nerdy" they might be, probably had their own kind of clique in high-school, and probably weren't so concerned about the social circles of jocks and cheerleaders, except when they wanted to either date them or avoid criticism from them. But being on the "outside," what would I know about the impressions that people on the "inside" have towards those on the "outside?"
posted
Besides, Hatrack has had direction before. It seems to be absent right now. That's unfortunate.
Posts: 2523 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's the same old high school popularity contest all over again, with the sports jocks and cheerleaders making up the IN crowd, and everybody else being a loser or a troll. Except you people aren't sports jocks and cheerleaders are you?
Wow. Way to stereotype. I almost forgot that all internet users are geeky outcasts. Or is it all OSC readers?
I don't think that admission of trollish activities is necessary to be considered a troll. All it requires is scorn, ridicule, and a desire to grab attention by becoming a common enemy. The same reasons people become bullies, deface buildings, or write computer viruses. I frankly don't care why they're doing it. It's usually not that hard to tell when someone is being provocative to change opinions and when someone is just itching for a fight. I have no use for online vandals.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just as we have trollish instigators here, we also have IN crowd ringleaders here. The two are going to clash. The ringleaders will not allow anyone to perturb their power base.
Posts: 2655 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
"I don't think that admission of trollish activities is necessary to be considered a troll. All it requires is scorn, ridicule, and a desire to grab attention by becoming a common enemy."
As has been pointed out, however, it's not always easy to tell when people mean to be trolls or not. So I generally try to refrain from passing judgement on anyone -- and prefer to believe that anyone can change, once asked the right way -- until they come out and say it.
In other words, it's not necessary for someone to admit to being a troll in order for them to be a troll, but it's a fairly dependable standard and (IMO) a good place to draw the line.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote: The ringleaders will not allow anyone to perturb their power base.
Having been involved in Hatrack quite heavily in the past, and being well-liked by most people here at the time, I don't recall ever having been exclusive of anyone. It usually went some thing like this:
"Hi this is my first post. I'm so and so."
"Welcome to Hatrack."
"Nice to meet you."
"Hey, I've been there before."
I also remember the occasional person who came in and said something to the effect of, "Well, I don't know you, but I think you're a freaking idiot for saying this..." That's usually not such a good first impression. I've been away awhile, so I guess I can't speak for the current state of the forum and how welcome new people are, or who the current "ringleaders" are.
posted
I've been cramming a 5,000 year old language into my head. I wish I had a port on the back of my skull. Consequently, it eats up way too much of my time. That, and military obligations. Not that I don't have any free time. Hatcrack requires so much devotion to enjoy it properly. I have free time, just not enough for this wonderful bit of code and personality. But I had a craving lately...
Posts: 2523 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's ok Shan. We don't have to associate often. Just once a week, and twice on Valentine's day. Posts: 1592 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
Hey, your name was created right before me. I haven't had the chance to get to know you yet. Am I a bastard and I just don't remember, or have we not overlapped our posting time?
Posts: 2523 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: Hatcrack requires so much devotion to enjoy it properly.
I totally hear you on that one. I always feel like I'm just skimming and therefore on the outskirts of things. It's good to see you posting. Posts: 6415 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
Of course. I'm out of the loop. Everybody's got names and side-names with a thousand posts. I've got one side-name that's like 5 1/2 years old and it has 14 posts. Someday I'll bring this name up to 5K and I'll take that other one out for a spin for a few months.
quote: It's good to see you posting
Thanks, it's nice to see you, too. I'm sorry that I haven't been more active. I really need to stop in more often. I think all you guys are awesome, and I miss... a lot of things. I say that everytime I come in. Posts: 2523 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think there is a circle of ringleaders protecting their powerbase, although there are definitely factions and sides for most issues.
Tom and I tend to end up on the side of doubters and religious nay-sayers with the same players arrayed on the other side of the field of battle (conflict, dispute, discussion, disagreement), for example.
There is a pretty consistent bastion of defenders of the faith with a fairly consistent list of names.
posted
Yep, it's as regular as Monday Night Football...
Davidson takes the snap from center, fades back to pass and... it's a long one to the endzone, TMedina leaps for it and Dagonee intercepts the Hail Mary.
But, there's a flag in the backfield, roughing the passer on Sopwith, they're gonna call this one back folks.
Posts: 2848 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Hatrack hasn't come along because Hatrack lacks direction.
It's the same old high school popularity contest all over again, with the sports jocks and cheerleaders making up the IN crowd, and everybody else being a loser or a troll. Except you people aren't sports jocks and cheerleaders are you?
Nope, you spent your high school years on the outside looking in, criticizing the in-crowd's cliquishness. You swore you'd do things differently if you were ever part of a bunch of like-minded people. What a bunch of hypocrites!
How would you know? Do you have some sort of special powers that allow you to see inside our minds? Did you know each and every one of us in High School, and even if you did were you in any position to judge us in regards to our social standings?
That isn't trollish behavior, skillery...it is pure stupidity, with a dose of arrogance thrown in for bad measure.
There are always, in any social group, tendencies for people to form sub-groups with people they like and respect. It isn't exclusion, because there is no automatic friendship rules here, nor should there be.
However, just because I don't see eye to eye with you, or Dag, or Belle, or TomD doesn't mean that I have a right to yell and shout you down when/if we talk about something we disagree on.
I do, however, think that there are standerds of behavior that everyone must be held to so that this board will continue to prosper.
If you (not you, but whomever the troll of the moment is) can't be civil, and all you do is post inflammatory retoric, then we are probably better off without you here. If you disagree with me, or anyone else here, but are at least willing to listen to the other side, then we probaby are better off if you stay and participate.
It isn't rocket science, is it?
It has nothing to do with "power bases" or "popularity contests", becasue the same set of rules apply to everyone. If you have been here for a bit people MIGHT be willing to cut you some slack once and a while...or you might become the favorite target for others...I have seen both happen more than once. Sometimes being well know here has it's drawbacks too.....just ask Ralphie or Sara.
It is pretty simple...be civil most of the time, and don't assume that your ignorant stereotypes about others here are correct.
On a more personal level, I remember some of the first posts you made here at Hatrack, skillery, and I didn't see a lot of people discouraging you from posting. I think you said something about wanting to try again, so maybe there was something I didn't see near the beginning. In fact I saw a lot of encouragment from others once you got going. I rememeber a few of your posts, the pinewood derby one quite well actually...I used your suggestions, and still have the web site you recommended to us bookmarked for next year.
I am sorry that you see this as some sort of continuation of high school....but that tells us more about you and your experiences than it ever could say about us, as I am unaware of a single Hatracker you have met IRL. It is easy to make generalizations about people you don't really know, isn' t it?
When I proposed the WMASS Hatrack Picnic this summer I didn't restrict the attendance to those Hatrackers I liked, or to those that I agree with the most.
If we were all as petty as you seem to think we are, I would have.....and we would be all have missed out on a great time.
So next time please be a little more careful about that type of overgeneralization, OK?
quote:It's the same old high school popularity contest all over again, with the sports jocks and cheerleaders making up the IN crowd, and everybody else being a loser or a troll. Except you people aren't sports jocks and cheerleaders are you?
Nope, you spent your high school years on the outside looking in, criticizing the in-crowd's cliquishness. You swore you'd do things differently if you were ever part of a bunch of like-minded people. What a bunch of hypocrites!
skillery, this is a very unpleasant picture you paint. I can see why you wouldn't want to hang around at such a place.
What is it about Hatrack that keeps you here? What is it that balances out all the bad that you see (above) and makes it worth staying?
Posts: 2919 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I keep coming back because I have a couple of favorite threads that are fun to play around in.
However, I'm disappointed that some of the playground bullies killed my favorite playmate.
Now my favorite thread has reverted to Hatrack women's fantasies about having sex with their favorite Lord of the Rings characters.
Posts: 2655 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Taunt]](graemlins/taunt.gif)
![[Sleep]](graemlins/sleep.gif)
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
