Trolling and constant nitpicking

Nicholas King said:I won't multi-quote every single individual post—just a few collective observations here.

Does the specific label of a ban actually matter? I’d argue it does—because if it didn't, we wouldn't have distinct categories for off-topic posts, harassment, trolling, and so on; we’d just hand out an arbitrary number of penalty points and say goodbye. So, it seems someone, somewhere, decided that my thread actually had enough merit to warrant introducing a "ban taxonomy"—otherwise, the only rule this Forum would ever need to implement (copyright Jack) would be a simple "don't be a jerk."

But there's more to it—and here comes the part that’s easiest to mock: much like how every janitor nowadays gets rebranded as a "facilities manager," it isn't quite right to lump vastly different types of disruptive behavior under the single umbrella of "trolling," or to dress up completely different users in the same "troll" uniform. It might be funny, sure, but it’s just as counterproductive to the health of the community to label a harmless goofball and some absolute chaos-agent like Miles... oops, I mean 😁 Sarah.

Therefore, I still maintain that providing clearer definitions makes sense; this isn't merely about rebranding a "trolling ban" as a "discussion disruption ban."

One more thing: I made it very clear that formalizing the rules won't somehow prevent a moderator from acting like an idiot or a nuisance—after all, even "real" laws are subject to various legal interpretations, let alone the rules of an online community. I also explicitly stated that there will always be a "gray area" where arbitrary moderator judgment takes over—but the whole point is to ensure that this gray area is limited strictly to those instances where no specific rule exists to cover them.

Are you serious? 😕
I mean, I had my doubts from the jump, but damn. Honestly, they might as well just admit they're trolling.

"Trolling" is such a loose term, but I'm not sure if dragging things out over five hundred pages counts, or if we should just call it pure nonsense. It’s exhausting to read, honestly. But then again, you just can't look away. ☕

Nicholas King said:🤦

I'm talking about the sheer audacity of opening a brand new account and then, by the third freaking post, bragging about how "I've been on this Forum for ten years."

I guess that's considered peak cool right now. 😁

I’ve only been hanging around this Forum for a few months now, but I feel like I’m constantly running into this vague, undefined concept of "trolling"... Most people here seem terrified to actually give examples, but I’ve never been one to just follow the crowd, so I’m going to lay it out...

Take two users, Herbicidna and Jacob Wood9. A whole bunch of people have called Herbi a troll, but then again, half the threads Jacob Wood9 starts could easily be labeled as trolling too. It looks like the mob successfully chased Herbi off the site, because I haven't seen them post here in a while...

If you look closely at certain sub-sections, it's obvious there are little cliques connected to the mods, which obviously leads to double standards for everyone else on the site—you've got the "untouchables" and then there's the rest of us...

The fix is pretty straightforward... don't ignore the trolling and don't try to rename it either. I'm sure the moderators have plenty of tools to handle people who take arguments too far; just issue a warning, and if they don't listen, hit them with a ban...

I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve had to step in and tell you all not to throw accusations around without a shred of actual proof. We aren't going to sit here and tolerate conspiracy theories designed just to "derail the conversation," nor will we tolerate blatant trolling or anyone simply trying to stir the pot for the sake of it.

Nicholas King said:On a neighboring thread, the question of what actually constitutes "trolling" has resurfaced—for some reason or another—so I am starting this topic (which, naturally, could be summarily deleted based on someone’s subjective whim) because it remains a perennial stumbling block on this American forum.

I suspect we are dealing with two distinct issues that are being stubbornly "kept alive" for no apparent reason, despite being entirely unnecessary. First, there is the issue from the user's perspective: no matter how perfect a definition you craft for a specific punishable category, you cannot prevent a bad moderator from being a bad moderator. It is impossible to turn an argument into an algorithm, and by extension, it is just as impossible to fully automate the sanctioning of rule-breaking within those arguments; there will always be that "gray area" where everything ultimately hinges on that infamous "discretionary moderator judgment."

On the other hand, there actually is a way to significantly shrink that gray area—and thereby reduce the amount of friction between users and administration: namely, it is completely unclear why, on this site, absolutely everything gets lumped under the label of "trolling" (resulting in vastly different users being uniformly branded as trolls), or why trolling is treated like some wild card a moderator can play whenever and however they feel like it.

I don't presume to think I can provide some flawless, universal definition of trolling when no one else has managed it—but, I do believe there is a solution that would simplify things; specifically, there are two obvious forms of trolling that are beyond dispute: the first is the total fabrication of stories about Milen... oops 😁, Soraya-topica, where people post entirely made-up narratives for reasons I cannot fathom, just to trigger a wave of outrage and pathetic responses. The second is "jumping into a thread just to stir the pot": you walk into a discussion on Veganism and start typing about how meat-eaters are idiots and so on. These types of examples are easy to spot, and penalizing them would never lead to any misunderstanding.

That leaves us with that problematic segment that is constantly shoved under the "trolling" umbrella, when it could much more simply be called "disrupting the discussion." This is the part that cannot be captured by a clear definition that would eliminate a moderator's discretionary right to decide what is what based on their own (in)competence. While I realize I am essentially inviting a massive amount of ridicule here—since it is always easier to mock someone on the first volley and lean on the "that's just how it's always been" inertia rather than pausing to actually think—I seriously believe that renaming the "offtopic/spam" penalty to "offtopic/spam/disruption," and separating those instances from unambiguous trolling, would clear up many of the ongoing misunderstandings. There is plenty of room for debate regarding the how and the why without needing further clarification 🙂.

Nicholas King said:I won't multi-quote every single individual post—just a few collective observations here.

Does the specific label of a ban actually matter? I’d argue it does—because if it didn't, we wouldn't have distinct categories for off-topic posts, harassment, trolling, and so on; we’d just hand out an arbitrary number of penalty points and say goodbye. So, it seems someone, somewhere, decided that my thread actually had enough merit to warrant introducing a "ban taxonomy"—otherwise, the only rule this Forum would ever need to implement (copyright Jack) would be a simple "don't be a jerk."

But there's more to it—and here comes the part that’s easiest to mock: much like how every janitor nowadays gets rebranded as a "facilities manager," it isn't quite right to lump vastly different types of disruptive behavior under the single umbrella of "trolling," or to dress up completely different users in the same "troll" uniform. It might be funny, sure, but it’s just as counterproductive to the health of the community to label a harmless goofball and some absolute chaos-agent like Miles... oops, I mean 😁 Sarah.

Therefore, I still maintain that providing clearer definitions makes sense; this isn't merely about rebranding a "trolling ban" as a "discussion disruption ban."

One more thing: I made it very clear that formalizing the rules won't somehow prevent a moderator from acting like an idiot or a nuisance—after all, even "real" laws are subject to various legal interpretations, let alone the rules of an online community. I also explicitly stated that there will always be a "gray area" where arbitrary moderator judgment takes over—but the whole point is to ensure that this gray area is limited strictly to those instances where no specific rule exists to cover them.

In light of the warning I just gave, there is really no point in you constantly backtracking on your suspicions by claiming someone is a clone. We have clarity regarding Sarah—that part is settled, no doubt about it—but we don't have that same certainty regarding Milena. You are more than welcome to hold your own opinions or express them, but please stop dragging this "clone" argument out every single time it feels convenient for you, because it isn't working.

Thanks.

slynomad14 said:I’ve only been hanging around this Forum for a few months now, but I feel like I’m constantly running into this vague, undefined concept of "trolling"... Most people here seem terrified to actually give examples, but I’ve never been one to just follow the crowd, so I’m going to lay it out...

Take two users, Herbicidna and Jacob Wood9. A whole bunch of people have called Herbi a troll, but then again, half the threads Jacob Wood9 starts could easily be labeled as trolling too. It looks like the mob successfully chased Herbi off the site, because I haven't seen them post here in a while...

If you look closely at certain sub-sections, it's obvious there are little cliques connected to the mods, which obviously leads to double standards for everyone else on the site—you've got the "untouchables" and then there's the rest of us...

The fix is pretty straightforward... don't ignore the trolling and don't try to rename it either. I'm sure the moderators have plenty of tools to handle people who take arguments too far; just issue a warning, and if they don't listen, hit them with a ban...

It's all pretty obvious to me; I just don't get why it isn't clear to everyone else.

I've mentioned this a few times already—there isn't one single way to define trolling. It can be anything, even just going off-topic. Someone might derail a thread on purpose, which is essentially trolling. Moderators have the "Custom Infraction" option, where they can flag anything that doesn't fit into specific categories. Even if we scrapped the "trolling" tag entirely, mods could just use the custom option to label it, so we'd be right back where we started.

Basically, trolling stays in that "gray area" because sometimes it's hard to explain exactly what happened. On many threads, if you ask the mods, they'll point at a post and call it trolling, while someone looking from the outside wouldn't see any issue at all.

I don't see why it's a problem for the Forum to call out trolls, regardless of how popular or active they are. A troll is a troll, no matter their username or post count.

Daniel Ward87

slynomad14 said:I’ve only been hanging around this Forum for a few months now, but I feel like I’m constantly running into this vague, undefined concept of "trolling"... Most people here seem terrified to actually give examples, but I’ve never been one to just follow the crowd, so I’m going to lay it out...

Take two users, Herbicidna and Jacob Wood9. A whole bunch of people have called Herbi a troll, but then again, half the threads Jacob Wood9 starts could easily be labeled as trolling too. It looks like the mob successfully chased Herbi off the site, because I haven't seen them post here in a while...

If you look closely at certain sub-sections, it's obvious there are little cliques connected to the mods, which obviously leads to double standards for everyone else on the site—you've got the "untouchables" and then there's the rest of us...

The fix is pretty straightforward... don't ignore the trolling and don't try to rename it either. I'm sure the moderators have plenty of tools to handle people who take arguments too far; just issue a warning, and if they don't listen, hit them with a ban...

The subjects I choose to bring to the table tend to spark quite a bit of interest, mainly because they're designed for an audience with a somewhat higher intellectual threshold... if people are more accustomed to threads titled "I've never even had sex, please help me," well, I guess that isn't really my concern.🙂

Daniel Ward87 said:It's all pretty obvious to me; I just don't get why it isn't clear to everyone else.

I've mentioned this a few times already—there isn't one single way to define trolling. It can be anything, even just going off-topic. Someone might derail a thread on purpose, which is essentially trolling. Moderators have the "Custom Infraction" option, where they can flag anything that doesn't fit into specific categories. Even if we scrapped the "trolling" tag entirely, mods could just use the custom option to label it, so we'd be right back where we started.

Basically, trolling stays in that "gray area" because sometimes it's hard to explain exactly what happened. On many threads, if you ask the mods, they'll point at a post and call it trolling, while someone looking from the outside wouldn't see any issue at all.

I don't see why it's a problem for the Forum to call out trolls, regardless of how popular or active they are. A troll is a troll, no matter their username or post count.

Daniel Ward87

If that's the case, there's a massive amount of room for abuse.
How are you supposed to define or describe the abuse of power when you can't even pin down the definition of 'trolling' itself?

And if that kind of abuse actually happens, what can a user even do about it?
How would they even prove it? 🤷

Let’s be real, this place is basically just a dumping ground for trolls to post whatever random garbage they want

hook 22

Speaking of double standards...

Libertango said:page 18 of Jacob Wood9's thread🙂

This particular sentiment is being directed by one female member toward a former moderator. Quite possibly for good reason, if you ask her. Yet, strangely enough, even that specific post escaped any disciplinary action, despite clearly falling under the category of off-topic spam or outright trolling.

Specifically, we are looking at the thread titled "Why do you think you deserve love?" Now, in what context was this post actually made?

If this little snippet had been posted by Herbicidna instead of Libertango, would she have faced a penalty, or would we be sitting here in silence?

And what about that thread on the bulletin board titled "Where Has Romantic Love Gone?"

There was this author writing all these flowery pieces about romance, but the moment it became clear the whole topic was just a troll setup—and that the author was actually trolling us—they decided to slide into my DMs with physical threats and personal insults.

The thing is, the thread is still sitting there, visible to everyone, even though the author has already been sanctioned.

Ethan Hayes2 said:Speaking of double standards...

This particular sentiment is being directed by one female member toward a former moderator. Quite possibly for good reason, if you ask her. Yet, strangely enough, even that specific post escaped any disciplinary action, despite clearly falling under the category of off-topic spam or outright trolling.

Specifically, we are looking at the thread titled "Why do you think you deserve love?" Now, in what context was this post actually made?

If this little snippet had been posted by Herbicidna instead of Libertango, would she have faced a penalty, or would we be sitting here in silence?

The whole point here is that Libertango thinks Jacob Wood9 is just trolling with that specific topic. And honestly? It’s working, because people are still biting and replying to it.
So, yeah, that's just her take on the thread.

If this image had been posted by Herbicidna instead of Libertango, would she have been banned or not?

No, she wouldn't. Unless she was going around every single thread dumping posts like that.
Libertango is actually a productive member of this community, and there's a real point behind what she said.
Maybe try taking a page out of her book and spend more energy actually contributing to discussions rather than hunting for mistakes made by the mods. Especially when you're looking for problems where they don't exist.

Ethan Hayes2 said:And what about that thread on the bulletin board titled "Where Has Romantic Love Gone?"

There was this author writing all these flowery pieces about romance, but the moment it became clear the whole topic was just a troll setup—and that the author was actually trolling us—they decided to slide into my DMs with physical threats and personal insults.

The thing is, the thread is still sitting there, visible to everyone, even though the author has already been sanctioned.

If someone is hitting you up with threats or being abusive in your inbox, you should definitely report them.

granitefalcon10 said:The whole point here is that Libertango thinks Jacob Wood9 is just trolling with that specific topic. And honestly? It’s working, because people are still biting and replying to it.
So, yeah, that's just her take on the thread.

If this image had been posted by Herbicidna instead of Libertango, would she have been banned or not?

No, she wouldn't. Unless she was going around every single thread dumping posts like that.
Libertango is actually a productive member of this community, and there's a real point behind what she said.
Maybe try taking a page out of her book and spend more energy actually contributing to discussions rather than hunting for mistakes made by the mods. Especially when you're looking for problems where they don't exist.

I see. So, 🙂 you essentially slap a troll label on a moderator and claim it somehow relates to a thread titled "Do You Believe You Deserve Love"? How exactly does that connection work? 🙂

How can the accusation "you're a troll" accompanied by a troll meme possibly relate to the subject matter without being, in itself, a form of trolling?

That isn't a comment on the topic at hand; it's a direct jab at the moderator, Jacob Wood9. 😉 The point of the thread isn't "Is Jacob Wood9 the troll of the year, right?" 😁

She could have easily sent that exact sentiment via private message instead.

granitefalcon10 said:The whole point here is that Libertango thinks Jacob Wood9 is just trolling with that specific topic. And honestly? It’s working, because people are still biting and replying to it.
So, yeah, that's just her take on the thread.

If this image had been posted by Herbicidna instead of Libertango, would she have been banned or not?

No, she wouldn't. Unless she was going around every single thread dumping posts like that.
Libertango is actually a productive member of this community, and there's a real point behind what she said.
Maybe try taking a page out of her book and spend more energy actually contributing to discussions rather than hunting for mistakes made by the mods. Especially when you're looking for problems where they don't exist.

I disagree. She absolutely would. She'd likely end up with a warning.

Do you actually agree with Libertango's assessment regarding the moderator, Jacob Wood9?

Thanks for the advice. 🙂 Personally, I’d recommend you follow the lead of Herbicidna and learn to balance your energy between serious discourse and lighthearted wit. Find some middle ground.

In my view, scrutinizing the criteria for what constitutes trolling is a shared responsibility we all hold as a community on this Forum.

rustydrifter10 said:If someone is hitting you up with threats or being abusive in your inbox, you should definitely report them.

Of course I reported it. But the thread is still sitting there, which leads me to wonder about the logic being used here—if it’s been proven that the person who started this whole thing is nothing more than a professional troll on this site.

rustydrifter10 said:If someone is hitting you up with threats or being abusive in your inbox, you should definitely report them.

She reported it right away, and she didn't even get hit with a penalty, though she definitely deserved one... I'm still sitting here waiting for some kind of response to my PM, but nothing...

Ethan Hayes2 said:Of course I reported it. But the thread is still sitting there, which leads me to wonder about the logic being used here—if it’s been proven that the person who started this whole thing is nothing more than a professional troll on this site.

Logic dictates—people are actually talking and debating here... doesn't even matter who started the thread...

Ethan Hayes2 said:I see. So, 🙂 you essentially slap a troll label on a moderator and claim it somehow relates to a thread titled "Do You Believe You Deserve Love"? How exactly does that connection work? 🙂

How can the accusation "you're a troll" accompanied by a troll meme possibly relate to the subject matter without being, in itself, a form of trolling?

That isn't a comment on the topic at hand; it's a direct jab at the moderator, Jacob Wood9. 😉 The point of the thread isn't "Is Jacob Wood9 the troll of the year, right?" 😁

She could have easily sent that exact sentiment via private message instead.

I disagree. She absolutely would. She'd likely end up with a warning.

Do you actually agree with Libertango's assessment regarding the moderator, Jacob Wood9?

Thanks for the advice. 🙂 Personally, I’d recommend you follow the lead of Herbicidna and learn to balance your energy between serious discourse and lighthearted wit. Find some middle ground.

In my view, scrutinizing the criteria for what constitutes trolling is a shared responsibility we all hold as a community on this Forum.

I wrote up a response to that question. Just so we're clear, Jacob Wood9 isn't a mod.

Look, saying "you're just trolling, and you've been at it for years" doesn't actually connect to the topic at hand. It’s not even a real argument—it's just pure, unadulterated trolling in itself.

You haven't been around this Forum long enough. If you stuck with us more often, you’d run into posts like this all the time, and they wouldn't seem nearly as shocking to you.

I think she would. She’d definitely be getting a red card for that one.

I honestly think you’ve got way too much time on your hands. But look, I don't have any actual receipts to back that up. 🤷
And according to all that, my opinion doesn't mean squat.

Do you actually agree with what Libertango said about that moderator, Jacob Wood9?

That doesn't even matter.

Thanks for the tip.🙂 Look, if I were you, I’d take a page out of Herbicidna's book. You need to start putting as much effort into your serious posts as you do into the jokes. Find some middle ground.

Yeah, you definitely haven't spent enough time hanging out with us.

Jack Bishop94 said:She reported it right away, and she didn't even get hit with a penalty, though she definitely deserved one... I'm still sitting here waiting for some kind of response to my PM, but nothing...

Logic dictates—people are actually talking and debating here... doesn't even matter who started the thread...

I just checked my inbox and I don't see any report from her. I did respond to yours, though.

Ethan Hayes2, please, go ahead and report it again.

rustydrifter10 said:I just checked my inbox and I don't see any report from her. I did respond to yours, though.

Ethan Hayes2, please, go ahead and report it again.

Ah... okay. I assumed the other admins had seen it and just hadn't acted yet... since you aren't the only one running things, I figured they'd check too. 🤷
Thanks 🙂

Jack Bishop94 said:She reported it right away, and she didn't even get hit with a penalty, though she definitely deserved one... I'm still sitting here waiting for some kind of response to my PM, but nothing...

Logic dictates—people are actually talking and debating here... doesn't even matter who started the thread...

Jack Bishop94 said:Ah... okay. I assumed the other admins had seen it and just hadn't acted yet... since you aren't the only one running things, I figured they'd check too. 🤷
Thanks 🙂

Jack, would you mind doing me a huge favor and forwarding those reports from vranin to my forum email? Specifically the ones you received that haven't been logged yet. I've got a few old ones from when she reported another user and action was actually taken, but I don't have anything recent or any cases where someone hasn't been sanctioned.

Thanks so much! 🙂