How to Deal with an Internet Troll

It seems to me that this has turned to the classic tactic of attempting to blame to the victim.

More like a few people too stubborn to accept they were and are completely off base - and some bleeding heart trying to play the sympathy game as if this perceived lack of sympathy has any relevance to how trolls should be discouraged.

As if anyone on the Watch were happy with the completely separate personal situation CelticFrost found himself in. He was the victim because he happened to experience something bad around the same time? What about the rest of the Watch? We're not here too? So, now we're all cruel and heartless because we can manage to stay on topic? Live in an alternate universe much?

You got trolled big-time and that's all there is to it. Taking it seriously was a mistake - and it was YOUR mistake.

Not what I would call impressive - but it happens when emotions run high.

To go on about it, playing stupid and indignant - when you're obviously of beyond average intelligence - is even less impressive - but even that happens especially when egos get in the way.

In this situation, you handled yourself poorly - and you failed to read the troll for what he was and what he was doing. It's human, but that's what it is.

End of story.

I'm done here - it has truly run its course.

It's done?

Thank God!

Well, Dart, I'm relieved you're "done", because you gave up addressing the actual arguments some time ago, and your signoff was distilled down to pure assertion and ad hominems.

I'm not acting out of ego, and I think you, of all people, might know something about engaging in extended arguments with people because their poor arguments and attitude frustrate you. I'm not feeling particularly emotional, nor am I "playing stupid and indignant".

I'm talking about the facts - on this last point, the amount of focus on criticizing Celtic, and statements like this:

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
He wanted to start a fire and watch it burn - and CelticFrost made it burn.

It seems to me, much like the mud being slung in my direction, this simply serves to distract from the actual problem.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
When I say it's discouraging - it doesn't mean it's going to work if it's not the general response.

I really find it strange that I have to explain to veteran Internet posters how trolls work.

You could have 99 out of 100 participants ignoring or deflating the balloon - but it does nothing if just 1 person is still blowing it up.

It HAS to be the general response - not just the response of one person.

Firstly, once we realise we are dealing with a troll, I don't see why should members of the community be expected to soak it up, rather than simply dealing with him.

Secondly, if your strategy for dealing with a troll is to seriously expect a community of hundreds of people to all completely ignore him, your strategy is naive and obviously doomed to fail.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
I really find it strange that I have to explain to veteran Internet posters how trolls work.

^
|

This.

And I think that is my frustration and exhaustion with this whole thing.

Sure the troll in question was nasty in things said and I can see that people could get bothered by it - we all have our triggers - and react in the heat of the moment. But after that things should settle down and be done. But THIS series of multiple never-ending threads … no clue.

Originally Posted by JDR13
It's done?

Thank God!

C'mon, you've been in enough discussions here to know that 'I'm done' is similar to a 'false cadence' in music … just when you think it is actually over it starts up again, and who even knows when it might end!

Here you are keeping it alive, though

I'm certainly done with explaining basics to people who should know better. I did my best - but failed, and that's ok.

Originally Posted by txa1265
^
|

This.

And I think that is my frustration and exhaustion with this whole thing.

Sure the troll in question was nasty in things said and I can see that people could get bothered by it - we all have our triggers - and react in the heat of the moment. But after that things should settle down and be done. But THIS series of multiple never-ending threads … no clue.

But I think that misses the point, Mike. Surely a conversation about the community attitude to trolls and how we should police them is perfectly reasonable, and surely to have that conversation after a particularly nasty bit of trolling is quite natural?

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
Here you are keeping it alive, though

I'm certainly done with explaining basics to people who should know better. I did my best - but failed, and that's ok.

Appreciate you getting my ironic post

Originally Posted by Ripper
But I think that misses the point, Mike. Surely a conversation about the community attitude to trolls and how we should police them is perfectly reasonable, and surely to have that conversation after a particularly nasty bit of trolling is quite natural?

Sure - if that was what happened. Instead we saw about 6 different posts spawn out with a variety of reactionary content, and numerous times taking everyone to task for failing to have the correct reaction, correct sympathy and correct … I dunno, correct thoughts I guess … about the whole thing.

I see it this simply:
- Troll came and did trolly things.
- Mods edited titles and content.
- Troll continued
- Troll banned
- Post-troll angst spread through multiple threads like wildfire and seems to never end.

Originally Posted by Myrthos
I wonder why you still wonder if those thread titles should appear on the front page. You keep on repeating that as if nothing happened. They were changed by a moderator not too long after he posted them, so I think it is safe to assume that they should not.

I do not still wonder, though there was no real conversation on what people here thought about titles of threads that. It would seem one of the members here that had posted those threads took it very personally and the conversation has moved on to a back and forth about Trolls and his posting in the after mass.

As for me double posting his comments and addressing you if you still thought he was entertaining in the public forum. I don't know, should I have done that? Maybe not, though I do believe it was the better then replying to him directly in the same manure he did to my posting.

So where does this leave us, well that is up to you. I can go in and edited my post directed or better yet you could just remove it. It really serves no purpose here but I will leave that up to you.

Originally Posted by txa1265
Appreciate you getting my ironic post



Sure - if that was what happened. Instead we saw about 6 different posts spawn out with a variety of reactionary content, and numerous times taking everyone to task for failing to have the correct reaction, correct sympathy and correct … I dunno, correct thoughts I guess … about the whole thing.

I see it this simply:
- Troll came and did trolly things.
- Mods edited titles and content.
- Troll continued
- Troll banned
- Post-troll angst spread through multiple threads like wildfire and seems to never end.

I see it quite simply too. I think this could have been avoided by taking a different approach, and I argue for a different approach in the future.

If there is also what you call a spread of "post-troll angst", does that have any bearing on the strength or weakness of the arguments I'm making?

I don't go along with this idea that immediately after the incident, it's not the proper time to talk about how we might prevent it in the future.

Originally Posted by Ripper
Firstly, once we realise we are dealing with a troll, I don't see why should members of the community be expected to soak it up, rather than simply dealing with him.

Dealing with this troll how? There is no definition of trolling in our FAQ. Actually the word 'troll' is not even in it.

So how should the moderators deal with this troll and who is to determine when someone is trolling?
I originally thought Chien is a troll as I don't get what he is saying half of the time, but he is not. It is just that English is not his native language (I think). FretRider might be a troll, do you want us to ban him already before he pops up again?

It is so easy to say, after the fact, what we should have done. However as I don't happen to have three women lying around here hooked up to a computer that can predict future events I think I do not want to ban people just because whatever they are saying does not break the rules, but might not be liked by some of our visitors or could be perceived as trolling, which potentially might end up in something bad, further down the road.
The only people we ban instantly are spammers, when it is clear they are spamming (although sometimes we do accidentally ban someone who was not really spamming).

You might want to say that there are other actions that can be taken besides banning. In the case of Unrestigered they were taken, which wasn't enough.

And above all, let us not forget that these sort of things are an exception at RPGWatch.

Because some of us see things differently we "blame the victim", there are "trolls on the staff", and trolls with a "a long history of posting unacceptable stuff on the site" are "encouraged" by the staff. Pretty big words just to say you would have liked things to be handled your way.

Personally instead of tending towards sympathy the words used have merely evoked the opposite: annoyance.

I would have handled things differently too.

But me, I think a book should not be judged by its cover - so to condemn the title of a thread without taking the trouble of reading the contents… It could well be someone who is merely quoting a line in an article, hoping you will open the thread and will read why s/he is so appalled by that quote.

And me, I am not worried about eight year olds, or there about, getting upset after visiting this site. The front page of RPGWatch contains endless words in few colors. No sweet, funny drawings to make it more appealing either - the pictures of monsters, skulls and ghosts are great ingredients of a nightmare. The forums: I am sure the avatars and names of the visitors would scare them off before they would get to reading the texts.
Anything old enough to be interested in tiny blue words (not even bold) somewhere in the middle of the frontpage, has already seen more horror on the internet than many parents suspect.
Poor innocent children… Children can be mean and unscrupulous.

Poor children, all too often being used by adults trying to get sympathy for a cause they find offending themselves.
Saying something is bad taste won't change much, saying you were shocked yourself might just provoke scornful laughter, but saying something might be harmful to children has more chance of getting sympathy.

To have to feel sympathy for people who are taking an unknown troll, a complete stranger, who is saying things just to get a strong reaction, seriously…
I am sorry, call me a nut, call me heartless, but I do not sympathize.

I think the staff has done a great job. There is always a grey area, some matters needs time to get crystal clear, but in this the staff seems/seemed to be thinking as one.
As far as I'm concerned: they handled the matter in an adult way. No need to change their approach.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
Here you are keeping it alive, though

I'm certainly done with explaining basics to people who should know better. I did my best - but failed, and that's ok.

The only failure I see you bring up I was a victim of what had happened to me personally. We are all humans with feelings but that shouldn't make me a victim because the title of something I read here about hurting children right after we had an encounter with someone that does like to hurt children.

Maybe you think I should have been less human and took my personal feelings out of it and if that is the case I am fine with that. Though maybe I should have clicked on his post and went off on him. Any one with a key board could spew the words he did.

Your right though this thread should be done, I think I posted that a few nights ago. Looks like we are all trolling each other in it.

If we're going to ban all trolls - then I think we should start with Ripper, who I consider to be trolling right now

So, why not show Ripper why his suggestion sucks.

Originally Posted by CelticFrost
The only failure I see you bring up I was a victim of what had happened to me personally. We are all humans with feelings but that shouldn't make me a victim because the title of something I read here about hurting children right after we had an encounter with someone that does like to hurt children.

Let me start by making it clear that I like you. At least, I like what I know about you. I think what happened to you and your children IRL is terrible - but my sympathy is irrelevant to the topic at hand - and being overt about it would only fuel the fire even more.

I'm not suggesting you should be a victim. I'm suggesting you weren't the only victim - we're all victims here.

He was a troll and we all had to endure his nonsense.

Your personal situation was very unfortunate, but that really doesn't change anything in terms of the obvious trolling that wasn't specifically directed at anyone at the outset.

You just presented yourself as an easy target.

I'm saying that's not how you discourage trolling.

Maybe you think I should have been less human and took my personal feelings out of it and if that is the case I am fine with that. Though maybe I should have clicked on his post and went off on him. Any one with a key board could spew the words he did.

I'm usually not one to tell people what they should be doing.

All I'm saying is that if you take a troll seriously and you visibly react to his bullshit, you're playing his game - and you're going to encourage him. Pretty messed up, but that's human beings for you.

Trolls are a part of Internet reality. NOTHING we do can EVER keep them away.

However, there are ways to mitigate their influence - and I'm trying to explain the best way to do it, whilst preserving the spirit of the Watch.

Originally Posted by Ripper
I see it quite simply too. I think this could have been avoided by taking a different approach, and I argue for a different approach in the future.

You made your case, and it is very clear that Mythros heard you pages ago.

Originally Posted by Ripper
If there is also what you call a spread of "post-troll angst", does that have any bearing on the strength or weakness of the arguments I'm making?

At this point? Yes. Just as the reactionary temper tantrums altered the flow of events.

Originally Posted by Ripper
I don't go along with this idea that immediately after the incident, it's not the proper time to talk about how we might prevent it in the future.

I agree - it was the time, the discussion happened, the site admin has made some fairly clear statements, you have said you disagreed. That was 4 pages ago.

- Troll came and did trolly things.
- Mods edited titles and content.
- Troll continued
- Troll banned

Exactly.

I think the current laid back moderation policy at the Watch is the best I experienced on any board so far. We tried different policies at RPGDot and we failed.
The Codex moderates, deletes and merges threads and bans much more - it doesn't help.

Laid back moderation and laid back user reaction to trolls is turning trolls off. It's simply too boring for them.

Roqua is NOT a nasty troll at all - because he can be recognized in 1 sec.

Really nasty trolls

1. build up trust first
2. act perfectly normal at first
3. attack careful
4. try to divide the old user base
5. deny that they are trolls
6. use rhetoric tricks (straw-man arguments, playing naive, secretly insult someone, give rise to doubts, attack someones integrity, blow up tiny details, playing to be morally right, playing to be the most accurate careful person in the world, use good phrases instead of arguments, use rhetoric questions etc.)

Originally Posted by txa1265
I agree - it was the time, the discussion happened, the site admin has made some fairly clear statements, you have said you disagreed. That was 4 pages ago.

When I think a subject is worth debating, I tend to persevere and address the arguments as they they come at me. This is nothing unusual for me - you've participated in the epic debates in the P&R forum, for a lot longer than 4 pages! Neither you nor I tend to sit quietly and think "Well, I've already made my point", as people sling more silly arguments at us. We keep dealing with them for as long as necessary.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
If we're going to ban all trolls - then I think we should start with Ripper, who I consider to be trolling right now

So, why not show Ripper why his suggestion sucks.

Actually, this is one of the better points you've made.

I suppose it is obligatory to first state that, no, I'm not trolling. But, I do agree that by my reasoning, the admins have every right to warn me, suspend me, ban me, or whatever - if in their judgement I am troublemaker just here to antagonise and cause upset. If they sincerely believe that, then yes, they should act before I succeed.

I hope they don't. As I said before, because I'm having to repeatedly defend various assertions and nonsense, it creates the impression that I'm just relentlessly on the case, and I understand that. But I'm not going to quietly acquiesce to bad arguments, dodges and dismissals. That's just me - I have no spite or special axe to grind in this case.