4 ms·

Feeding the trolls

12 points by mgunes 15y ago

chalst 15y ago
I responded to this in support on my Advogato diary. A quote: "be aware that if you regard yourself as supportive of women in free software and on their side, but you are vocally undermining of said women when they face this sort of shit, be aware that you are a fair-weather friend and some sort of a backstabber." http://www.advogato.org/person/chalst/diary/280.html http://www.advogato.org/person/chalst/diary/280.html
wccrawford 15y ago
So what you're saying is that she made the right decision. She found a community that supported abuse (by ignoring it) and she left that community. Everyone should do so. But think for a moment what happens when people DO pile on a troll. The troll gets what it wants: Attention. The best way to deal with trolls is to ignore them. They die from lack of attention. But beyond that, if the entire community attacks a troll, 1 person at a time, it turns into a very hostile community. By the time the troll has had enough, everyone is very angry and the forums are very ugly. Instead, the moderators should be handling it. That's their job. If a moderator handles it, the troll ends up going away fairly quietly, without much attention. They don't get what they want, and the community doesn't have to turn ugly. And nobody should have to alert a moderator. They should be patrolling. Again, their job. So if you want to blame anyone for this, blame the moderators. They were the only solution to the problem, and they failed.
Joeboy 15y ago
This is perhaps a bit off-topic, but it seems to me that there's a problem with the excessively widespread use of the word 'troll'. Often this is wrong because it dismisses people who are sincerely trying to argue a point in a hostile setting. In cases like the one we're talking about it's wrong because it mischaracterises people who are actually waging campaigns of harassment. From what I've read (which is admittedly far from comprehensive), MikeeUSA's contributions (which I understand are both public and private) aren't designed to provoke an entertaining backlash, they're intended to wear women down into submission and surrender. Describing him as a troll is misstating the case and letting him off easy.

12 points by mgunes 15y ago

I responded to this in support on my Advogato diary. A quote: "be aware that if you regard yourself as supportive of women in free software and on their side, but you are vocally undermining of said women when they face this sort of shit, be aware that you are a fair-weather friend and some sort of a backstabber." http://www.advogato.org/person/chalst/diary/280.html http://www.advogato.org/person/chalst/diary/280.html

wccrawford 15y ago

So what you're saying is that she made the right decision. She found a community that supported abuse (by ignoring it) and she left that community. Everyone should do so. But think for a moment what happens when people DO pile on a troll. The troll gets what it wants: Attention. The best way to deal with trolls is to ignore them. They die from lack of attention. But beyond that, if the entire community attacks a troll, 1 person at a time, it turns into a very hostile community. By the time the troll has had enough, everyone is very angry and the forums are very ugly. Instead, the moderators should be handling it. That's their job. If a moderator handles it, the troll ends up going away fairly quietly, without much attention. They don't get what they want, and the community doesn't have to turn ugly. And nobody should have to alert a moderator. They should be patrolling. Again, their job. So if you want to blame anyone for this, blame the moderators. They were the only solution to the problem, and they failed.

Joeboy 15y ago

This is perhaps a bit off-topic, but it seems to me that there's a problem with the excessively widespread use of the word 'troll'. Often this is wrong because it dismisses people who are sincerely trying to argue a point in a hostile setting. In cases like the one we're talking about it's wrong because it mischaracterises people who are actually waging campaigns of harassment. From what I've read (which is admittedly far from comprehensive), MikeeUSA's contributions (which I understand are both public and private) aren't designed to provoke an entertaining backlash, they're intended to wear women down into submission and surrender. Describing him as a troll is misstating the case and letting him off easy.