3 ms·
I guess the premise is that they are (objectively speaking) a valid part of any community. Perhaps in some way it is better to have "troll trolls" than people
by Quarrelsome 17y ago
I guess the premise is that they are (objectively speaking) a valid part of any community.
Perhaps in some way it is better to have "troll trolls" than people who appear to be normal but are actually very trollish. I remember a community where a bunch of people would just answer all questions with:
"OMG WTF? NOT THIS AGAIN. Use the search FFS."
Now this was more or less encouraged behaviour as Admins and Mods did this but these guys took it too far. So it eventually was trolling all but in name.
To be honest i'm not sure I believe all that but at least he has a "troll rating" system.
- zedshaw 17y agoLook at my previous reply on the subject, but I'm hoping tons of really smart people can think of a solution that is not so binary as: moderation=="list nazi moderates all dissenting opinion away" OR troll=="full frontal goatse porn for all!". In other words, with the librelist code, it IS possible to have a middle land where the community can voice their opinion of what's spam or troll without eliminating real dissenting opinions and debate.
- Quarrelsome 17y agoAs my name suggests I am a bit trollish myself as I am a fan of swears, passion and strong opinions. I certainly look forward to a community where the "owner" is less able to control people's input according to their own tastes. Stackoverflow has recently banned swearing.... because. This the kind of thing that pisses me off.
- count 17y agoIt's like the new War on Swearing. Fucking nazis!