Thus, I'd like to continue the discussion here. There were some great ideas being bounced around near the end. Hopefully we can keep having a constructive dialogue here.
- WizO "Transparency": Some kind of way to let other people know that posts that are flagged as possibly violating the CoC have been checked by a WizO, and deemed acceptable, as opposed to it seeming the possible CoC violation has been ignored.
- Scaling CoC Violation Penalties: Do something minor, and get slapped on the hand. Do something major, and get more than just a hand slapping. And, things in-between minor and major should, of course, be dealt appropriately. But, the main idea was that disruptions be met with as much "force" as they cause.
- Moderation With A Memory: A person doing a million little thing that are against the CoC should add up to a million, not simply a million instances of one minor thing. If an individual has multiple minor CoC infractions, earn enough of them, and they should count as a moderate infraction, or a major infraction. In a set period of time, the CoC infractions an individual makes should be taken into consideration when considering disciplinary measures, and not (seemingly) ignored.
- A Limit On Multiple Accounts: There are valid reasons for people having multiple accounts, but many have, over the course of time, abused this policy. Thus, there should be a limit on how many separate screen names every e-mail address can have linked to it. Related, all of the screen names linked to the same e-mail address should be identified, so posters know the accounts that are linked to each other.
-All that said, I hope that this thread doesn't devolve into people making accusations, or generally trashing the moderation of these boards. The second they do, any input I have in this thread ends. In the past, all of these types of threads have simply turned into places to place blame and accuse, which is why, invariably, they all seem to become locked.
This thread was, for a time, having a valuable discussion about potential changes in how some things around here are done. It seems to have gotten sidetracked and locked at the end, and never unlocked.
Thus, I'd like to continue the discussion here. There were some great ideas being bounced around near the end. Hopefully we can keep having a constructive dialogue here.
Preliminary comments: I'm not sure if the CoC allows this, but I've heard of cases where mods closed threads for re-posting the same subject. Though, since this thread hasn't run into any trouble so far, I guess it's okay.
Now, I found this recently...:
Thanks for the compliments!
Seems like you are the one overreacting to me! LOL
People post completely unhelpful stuff all the time, most, if not all, opinions... can I not share mine?
You don't own this website ya know!
And I will continue to come here and post my opinions on d&d until I get banned in some way that I can't return...
So, if you have such a problem with me, I suggest using the ignore function...
And calling people a troll is against the CoC...
So many people were attacking him even though he was just presenting his opinions. I cannot stress this enough: Debate the opinion, not the poster. When you go after posters, it contributes more and more hostility to the forums which we don't need. I share this sentiment with him in particular:
And I will continue to come here and post my opinions on d&d until I get banned in some way that I can't return...
So, if you have such a problem with me, I suggest using the ignore function...
If you have a problem with someone's posting, you should use the ignore function. Please, show kindness and respect instead of flaming someone. If you can't do that, at least use the ignore function. Please?
The Ignore function is all well and good, but people DO like to see things get done. When I find that the same poster is posting in upwards of five Threads, and that he is instigating angry responses in ALL of them, I have not seen anything done about that poster; no actions have been taken, they continue to Bait or Troll, and since no one else will do anything, I will. I attack that persons arguments viciously and doggedly (though sometimes I don't have as much free time as they obviously do). I try my hardest not to attack that person, but I will admit that after I and many others have debunked any and all arguments that person has presented, and still they insist they are infallible, I begin to attack the poster. Now, I don't believe I've gone overboard (yet) in my attacks, and the Wizzos have definitely warned me in those Threads, and so I edit out my insults and rants and don't post there anymore. Unfortunately, they almost never Lock said Thread, they do not tell anyone if a User is Warned or Banned or anything, and most of the time, the Troll returns to Bait another day on another Thread. This simply builds frustration among Forum goers, as there doesn't seem to be any Justice.
See, this was one of the reasons we need better moderation.
I don't want to be suspicious of people just because of join date and avatar...
This i can agree with wholeheartedly... with so many people getting around with multiple accounts it is hard to know if you are just "feeding the trolls".. so you either take a chance and dive right into something that could end up unpleasant (or is even likely too) or you ignore new comers all together (way to make new players feel welcome).. so it boils down to feeding the trolls or ignoring newbies because we can't tell one from the other.
If moderation was stricter it would not be a concern for anybody..
If someone posts something that is really bad, report it. If someone posts misinformation, correct it. But if someone justs posts whatever and you respond with anger or accusations, you are derailing the thread and opening the door for more "drama and lulz." There may be some trolls who know they can get things going just by saying hello. If you respond, you are playing into it *for nothing*.
I totally understand sticking up for the truth. There are people who are trying to wage some sort of public-relations campaign against 4e here, and it's pretty ridiculous. But if someone says something harmless, please let it slide, no matter who it may be.
button more often.I have at times run across threads that had material against the code of conduct and it just say there all day or had people post to complain about it rather than use the
button.After seeing these things I reported them and they where dealt with in short order. Of course I've also seen posters repeatedly get moderated for the same thing without lasting consequences.
I cannot help but wounder, how much the the crap on the boards would disappear if regular posters used the
I have at times run across threads that had material against the code of conduct and it just say there all day or had people post to complain about it rather than use the
After seeing these things I reported them and they where dealt with in short order. Of course I've also seen posters repeatedly get moderated for the same thing without lasting consequences.
I've seen posters get reported for stuff that wasn't a violation of conduct and it took 3 mods just to tell the posters that it was okay. Just because something might be controversial doesn't make it a violation of the CoC.
I've seen posters get reported for stuff that wasn't a violation of conduct and it took 3 mods just to tell the posters that it was okay. Just because something might be controversial doesn't make it a violation of the CoC.
I find it interesting that an individual with your join date is referencing threads from March, from C&C no less.
As for the thing with Dopplegangster, he was being a hypocrite and got called on it. When your entire purpose for signing up to the boards in the first place was to lambast 4E without ever having played it, you don't get to cast aspersions at the people who are potentially overreacting to being insulted. I was merely pointing out the double standard, and he reacted poorly.
I cannot help but wounder, how much the the crap on the boards would disappear if regular posters used the
I have at times run across threads that had material against the code of conduct and it just say there all day or had people post to complain about it rather than use the
After seeing these things I reported them and they where dealt with in short order. Of course I've also seen posters repeatedly get moderated for the same thing without lasting consequences.
I regularly hit the report button.. try and let the moderators sort it out, but sometimes i wonder about their decisions..
Batshido's 4 Step Forum Cleanup Strategy
Step 1: Definition.
Do not harass, bully, threaten, harm or cause discomfort for other persons, including any other members. For example:
* Use hate speech or racial, ethnic, sexist, homophobic or religious slurs
* Harass a specific person (repeated flaming, personal attacks or posting their private information)
* Troll or bait the community in general with inflammatory statements, such as ones designed to elicit a negative response from the community
* Post or otherwise disclose any personal or private information of another person, or any confidential information pertaining to a business, without consent
Right now, the definition of what it means to troll is based on interpretations of interpretations of words like "flame" and "bait." We need to better define those words in terms of the behavior we see on these forums every day. Baiting shouldn't be some nebulous concept the definition of which gets debated and altered from moderator to moderator. Concrete examples and solid definitions of what it means to "bait," "flame" or "troll" would help the people tasked with cleaning this place up immeasurably.
Right now, everybody has to shoot from the hip as far as their personal interpretation (at least if they're working off the same CoC we are), and that's not a good thing. Tightening that up would make a world of difference.
Step 2: Multi-Account Accountability.
For reasons that are apparently beyond my comprehension, this forum allows multiple accounts per poster. Personally, I'd like to see that practice abolished because, as demonstrated in this very thread, it's an incredibly easy way around bans and generally just fosters an environment of hostility and paranoia about the motivations of other posters. There's been a lot of push-back on banning such practices outright, though (again, completely beyond my comprehension), so I propose the following compromise;
Each poster gets one account, tied to one email address. Within that account they may, for whatever reason, have up to 5 logins/accounts/whatever (a completely arbitrary number) with different screen names. Each of those screen names, in their sig, will have a list of the other names used by that poster so that people in discussion with them will know where they stand as far as actual posters behind the names. All these names will be linked for warnings, bans and whatnot, so if you get banned on one of them you're out of luck on all of them.
Anyone starting a second account with a second email address and discovered will be immediately banned on all accounts and their IP will be permanently cut off from posting to these forums.
Step 3: The Condition Track
While several potential systems have been put forward for how to handle repeat offenders, the one I will outline below is (I feel) a much more comprehensive and potentially effective system and allows for the potential of second chances while still ensuring that career trolls be banned in an expedient manner with as little impact on the discourse as possible.
The system consists of a number of condition track "steps," a la Saga. You start at step 0. Each time you are moderated for a certain severity of CoC violation, you move down the track one step, and have the chance to "recover" via cooldown period determined by the step you're at. Each successive step you move down the track requires you to fulfill the cooldown period for each previous step to continue moving down the track. For example, if you got a Short Ban (Step 3), you would need to complete the cooldown period for it as well as Steps 1 and 2 before making it back to Step 0.
Step 0: Good Citizen. No recent history of moderation, no long or short term penalties.
Step 1: Warning. This is a "be good" type statement delivered either via PM or to the email of the individual. After one month of non-problem posting, the individual in question moves back to "Good Citizen" status.
Step 2: Second Warning. This is a more emphatic statement of wrongdoing, delivered in the same message as the first. After one month of non-problem posting, the individual in question moves back to "Warning" status.
Step 3: Short Ban. This is a one week ban, resulting from a CoC violation while at the "Second Warning" step. After two months of non-problem posting (starting at the end of the week ban), the poster moves back to "Second Warning" status.
Step 4: Long Ban. This is a one month ban, resulting from a CoC violation while at the "Short Ban" step, before completing the two month cooling off period. After 3 months of non-problem posting (starting at the end of the month of banning) the poster begins the 2 month cooldown for Short Ban and so on.
Step 5: Banned. This is a permanent ban of an account, including all screen names created via the system outlined in Step 2. There's no coming back from this one. Any future accounts started by this poster are immediately banned when identified.
Step 4: No more favoring the trolls.
As was observed by another poster in the General Discussion forum recently, it's getting to the point where the enforcement of the CoC is pretty one-sided: "It's against the CoC to call a troll a troll, but it's not against it to actually be a troll."
Stepping up enforcement and having a comprehensive system for doing so will go a long way towards correcting that issue, but the fact remains that without a better approach to moderation we're stuck with a system that favors the disruptive elements of the community over those who are just here to have discussions. That's as much a mentality/resignation issue as it is a CoC or enforcement issue, and it's something that needs corrected.
Those are my ideas. I've posted all of them previously, in disparate threads. Even if they're not enacted to the letter (and I don't really have any expectation they will be), hopefully they can help spark some ideas within the moderation team itself.
After seeing these things I reported them and they where dealt with in short order. Of course I've also seen posters repeatedly get moderated for the same thing without lasting consequences.
What people generally want isn't having these dealt with in short order. They want things dealt with in a manner where things change and it doesn't happen again. When this doesn't happen, the report function is seen as worthless, and people turn to other options.
Seriously, it isn't that hard to understand. We want the WizOs to be leaders, not janitors.
Guys, it's one thing to come down hard on someone for actually doing something wrong and another thing to take a swing at him every time he posts.
QFT.
Seriously, Thecasualoblivion. Way to violate the CoC (harrass a specific person) and attack the person (which I am NOT doing to you, by the way. I am pointing out certain BEHAVIOR in THIS THREAD).
Also I'm reporting your post since it violates the CoC.
Seriously, why don't you just come out and call him PsionX?
And why not just report every single post that has that avatar, regardless of whether the person has something valid to say or not?
Please try to have a constructive conversation rather than turning this thread into a form of attack on a poster (who may or may not deserve it as an individual...we don't know one way or another..but who certainly doesn't deserve it for anything that this poster has done under that account or in this thread).
Seriously, it isn't that hard to understand. We want the WizOs to be leaders, not janitors.
So contribute to a thread that is brainstorming on how to accomplish this. Don't attack someone who you think is a troll...unless you want the thread to go nowhere and get locked.
Lord Karsus and Batshido, thank you for some good points/ideas.
QFT.
Seriously, Thecasualoblivion. Way to violate the CoC (harrass a specific person) and attack the person (which I am NOT doing to you, by the way. I am pointing out certain BEHAVIOR in THIS THREAD).
Also I'm reporting your post since it violates the CoC.
Seriously, why don't you just come out and call him PsionX?
And why not just report every single post that has that avatar, regardless of whether the person has something valid to say or not?
Please try to have a constructive conversation rather than turning this thread into a form of attack on a poster (who may or may not deserve it as an individual...we don't know one way or another..but who certainly doesn't deserve it for anything that this poster has done under that account or in this thread).
Blaming the trolled instead of the trolls? What was posted above has little to do with the issue. The issue is that there is nothing stopping Psionx from creating a new account, either replacing his most recently banned account or as a sockpuppet alongside his current one, and coming here using his usual avatar and posting in the exact same manner as he always does. This in and of itself is baiting, daring somebody like me to call him out on it, which will happen with or without me. Its just a matter of time. The problem is not my behavior, but the fact that this is possible in the first place. He has personally done this before, and this exact behavior was discussed at length in the previous version of this thread. We have voiced our concerns about this time and time again to community management, and still this sort of behavior continues. At this point, I don't have any faith in the moderation, and I'm going to behave any way I please with my only concern being to avoid any direct punishment. If somebody is being a douche, I'm going to call them out on it, because as far as I'm concerned, the people who should be doing something about it aren't going to.
So contribute to a thread that is brainstorming on how to accomplish this. Don't attack someone who you think is a troll...unless you want the thread to go nowhere and get locked.
Lord Karsus and Batshido, thank you for some good points/ideas.
We've brainstormed about this on thread after thread, going back months. Nothing has changed. Good ideas or no, they only mean something if they are implemented, and that isn't up to us. It also has yet to ever happen.
We have a CoC policy that assumes people are generally well behaved and a slap on the wrist is all that is necessary to keep things civil around here. This policy has no means to deal with people who specifically mean to cause trouble, and will do so even when slapped on the wrist. We do have this sort of people here, and they are making life on many forums unpleasant.
Either the CoC changes and we get a new policy that has the means to deal with disruptive people, or nothing changes.
[*]WizO "Transparency": Some kind of way to let other people know that posts that are flagged as possibly violating the CoC have been checked by a WizO, and deemed acceptable, as opposed to it seeming the possible CoC violation has been ignored.
If something like this was possible, I'd appreciate it being implemented. Same thing goes for "moderation with a memory".
I guess the point of my comments to you was based on a personal belief that they may not be.
What would stop me, if banned, from making a new account?
Ban my IP address? (What if it is shared with roomates? What if it is a library computer?)
But say my IP is banned. So I go to a library and use their computer, I change my IP address, I use a friend's computer, etc.
Do you ban a specific avatar? Do you jump on anyone when you suspect (as you have done, perhaps correctly, perhaps incorrectly) that they MIGHT be the same individual.
How bout this: a "Bad checks" group. Post the trolls as a forum. Maybe a "beware of these posters". Wizo's would have to be the ones to moderate/put up these guys, or trolls of all kinds could just post innocent posters, making the whole place worthless.
Use this INSTEAD of banning people. Let them stay and keep track of them. They can't be "killed"-- they'll respawn.
Finally, the way to deal with trolls is to ignore them. You have failed to do so in this thread, assuming you were correct about the person you believed to be a troll. At worst, you accused someone innocent. At best, you gave a troll more ammunition to derail the thread.
Blaming the trolled instead of the troll? No, I don't think so. Responding in the way you have is just as problematic (if not more so) than what Axetank has done (assuming that Axetank is PsionX..if not, then Axetank has done NOTHING).
I understand your frustration. I understand that wizards of the coast has done nothing and continues to do nothing (utilizing feedback isn't really their strong point, in case you haven't noticed).
I also note that your actions are causing more harm to your cause than benefit.
Finally:
I'm going to behave any way I please with my only concern being to avoid any direct punishment.
This is the M.O. of a troll. I don't believe you to be one generally, but really? Think about what you said there. Don't become as bad as the thing you purport to fight against.
Don't believe me?
EDIT: You guys don't seem to get it. As long as I don't troll, there isn't a problem to ban me for. If you troll for me or tell of my exploits, you're doing it for me. This hurts my reputation I'll admit, but salvation is a few clicks away and time heals all wounds.
--Posted by clinkzdps.
Way to go.
The Casualoblivion...YOU, not the one you believe to be the troll, are turning this thread into the exact same thread that got closed.
Option:
Require membership in D&Di to post in some or all forums. Lose posting ability, lose D&Di. Plus, lose the ability to sign up using that credit card again or the name on that credit card.
Harsh, but it would work.
Illustration - How to be the ULTIMATE troll:
"Thing 1" and "Thing 2". These are sock puppets for one another.
----Enter a Good thread with meaningful discussion.
Thing 1: 4E sucks and, even though I haven't played it, I know this to be true.
Thing 2: No it doesn't. But you suck, because you are a blatant troll.
Thing 1: Hey, that's not nice. I don't suck. Calling people trolls is against the CoC.
---Thread Closed---
So, if I really REALLY wanted to be an uberjerk and troll these forums (and I don't) this is what I'd do. I'd develop a "troll" persona and a "anti troll" persona. They'd both be me and they'd destroy threads left and right.
NOTE: I AM NOT ACCUSING ANYONE HERE OF BEING A SOCK PUPPET.
This illustration is meant to point out that, while I don't believe anyone is doing this, the patterns of behavior ARE in existence. No one HAS to do this, the "anti-troll" troll is supplied by "good willing" people in the community who can't hold their tongues.
I say, if we're going to ban people, ban Thing 1 and Thing 2. Who is to say they're both not intentionally trolling? Besides, they're both willing to violate the CoC to the point that it stretches so long as they aren't banned/punished.
Either the CoC changes and we get a new policy that has the means to deal with disruptive people, or nothing changes.
This is the bottom line, right here.
Either the management of this establishment takes steps to fix the problem or it persists. No amount of brainstorming on our part can change any of that.
Until that happens, you can blame the trolls, the trolled, the bystanders, the cats that random trop across keyboards, anyone. It doesn't do a damn bit of good.
Option:
Require membership in D&Di to post in some or all forums. Lose posting ability, lose D&Di. Plus, lose the ability to sign up using that credit card again or the name on that credit card.
Harsh, but it would work.
While I appreciate the other things you have said (not dog-piling other posters and such), this specific option you present is something that I would oppose very strongly. I, and presumably many other posters, have no interest in signing up for DDI. Your idea works fine presuming that everyone wants to and is going to sign up for DDI. But thats not the case. I darn sure wouldn't start paying to use anyone's forum, ever, period.
A middle ground might be requiring a credit card to join the forums as a form of identification and eliminating that name/card when people get banned.
But really, is it a police state we all want? Seems like some do, but the limits in both directions (free for all and tyrranical oligarchy) need to be defined. Maybe that could be accomplished in this thread?
Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
Are these things enforcable?
Yes. Most websites implement IP bans for serious offenders. While it is theoretically possible for an IP-ban to also encompass an innocent, IP bans are to be implemented when more innocents would be harmed without the ban than the possibility of an innocent being harmed by the ban.
That's why you start with a temp ban. The innocent learns he's been banned and has a chance to communicate with CS about it (through the Contact Customer Service link, which you can still use even when IP banned form the forums).
The innocent can then be informed that somebody on his IP has been temporarily IP banned for continued poor behavior. The innocent is then informed that someone sharing his computer is abusing the CoC. The innocent can then apply whatever pressure he or she has to cause the problem-maker to stop. Otherwise, the innocent is then aware that the person with whom a computer is shared is going to be harming not only the troublemaker, but friends and/or family.
But say my IP is banned. So I go to a library and use their computer, I change my IP address, I use a friend's computer, etc.
The experience of numerous other websites and forums indicates that IP bans are a very effective means of stopping people from coming back. Most trolls go for the low-hanging fruit. When IP banned, they simply go to another website rather than the rigmarole of changing IP addresses.
I frequent a webstie that, for example, confronts Holocaust deniers. As you might expect, there are a lot of racists and antisemites there. The forum managers use IP bans (after a graduated system of warnings) and have had few if any issues with it.
Finally, the way to deal with trolls is to ignore them.
No, it's not. One should ignore a troll if one lacks the self-control to respond to a troll without violating the CoC. Otherwise, allowing a troll to spead misinformation and lies only drives away people who are looking for a civilized place to have discussions.
Ignoring trolls results in a forum where half the forum are trolls and the other half have half the forum on ignore. That's a bad situation.
Finally, the way to deal with trolls is to ignore them.
No, it's not. One should ignore a troll if one lacks the self-control to respond to a troll without violating the CoC. Otherwise, allowing a troll to spead misinformation and lies only drives away people who are looking for a civilized place to have discussions.
Ignoring trolls results in a forum where half the forum are trolls and the other half have half the forum on ignore. That's a bad situation.
Thanks for the thoughts. I think I agree with you, but with a bit of clarification. I don't think "correcting them" in the thread, and with vitriol to boot, is the way to go. By ignoring I DON'T mean "put on ignore". I mean "don't respond when they are clearly trying to get under your skin". I don't even think there should BE an ignore option (I know I've never used it on principle).
If the information is debatable, then the person isn't trolling (even if they are trying to get a rise out of someone). They're upholding a potentially valid viewpoint. If you disagree, by all means, disagree verbally.
However, if the information is deliberately false, (and here I'm not too sure on this) couldn't you just report it? I'm pretty sure that spreading blatantly false info is against the CoC. Other posters could choose to report it and have it erased (if it was from someone they believed to be more of a troll than a newbie) or they could choose to correct it.
It's hard to argue with facts...correct blatantly false info with "on page 132 of the PHB it says..." and the discussion is over.
Correct the person with "you're full of it, blah blah blah" and then the emotional tenor of the discussion has been amplified and the thread is on a one way trip to locksville.
If the information is debatable, then the person isn't trolling (even if they are trying to get a rise out of someone).
Yes, it is. If, for example, a troll says "The developers purposely made Wizards because they're fundamentalist Christians with links to Mellon Scaife", the only reason to write that is to get people discussing politics in the wrong forum and also to gets a rise out of people.
Yes, the point is "debatable" (in that it is capable of being debated) but it is an outright lie and it is trolling.
(My hypothetical is extreme simply to illustrate the point.)
Another example are people who derail otherwise productive threads. For example, someone (not a troll) asks "Hey, my fey-based warlock is thinking that his ultimate goal would be to kill the fey (with the help of his friends) with whom he made his pact. What sort of Epic Destiny would make sense for this?" And then a troll comes on and says, "The Feywild is ridiculous. It's a horrible and ill-conceived world that has absolutely no resemblence to anything in mythology or any previous edition of D&D. It just shows that the developers will stoop to any depth to create fodder for more supplements and they can do it becuase people who like 4E are just sheeple who will buy any pile of dung slapped between a cover with 4E stamped on it!"
Now, his points are "debatable" in theory. But they're vaguely off-topic (maybe not so much that they'd get deleted) and clearly the cracks at the developers are designed to get a rise out of people. So what to do?
if the information is deliberately false, (and here I'm not too sure on this) couldn't you just report it? I'm pretty sure that spreading blatantly false info is against the CoC.
Really? What section of the CoC would that be?
I agree that people should respond to trolls without trolling. People who cannot should use the ignore feature.
-The main issues and ideas were, more or less:
- WizO "Transparency"
- Scaling CoC Violation Penalties
- Moderation With A Memory
- A Limit On Multiple Accounts.
I would like to add my support for these things.
Really? What section of the CoC would that be?
I had to go look it up. My reading is that this does the job:
Do not disrupt chat, forums, blog comments or other communication channels.
I remember a thread that was blatantly false a long time ago that was locked for this reason. It was something extreme, such as (as an example..can't find actual thread--and wouldn't want to credit it in anything other than a PM anyway. Will PM you if I do find it.)
"The fourth edition books are going to be printed on papyrus!".
Blatantly false, and locked for that reason...because it was so false it was disruptive.
My reading is that this does the job
That says nothing about making blatantly false statements. Whether something is "disruptive" is entirely in the mind of the WizO. WizOs are also not allowed to make determinations about editorial content. I think this might hamper their ability to punish something that is blatantly false.
Blatantly false, and locked for that reason...because it was so false it was disruptive.
I think the trolls can be smart enough to fall just under that line (such as the example I gave).
(Now I can stop looking for that thread)
Regardless of whether people respond to trolls or not, the forums are still trolled. People are human, and expecting human beings to turn the other cheek and just let something like this slide is naive. The best solution is to have forum management deal with things in an efficient manner. Most forums do this. This one does not. They do nothing to deal with repeat offenders who keep coming back and playing the same games.
As for reporting things instead of hitting back, that is an issue of faith. When I see Troll X post a baiting thread or reply for the 137th time, I stop having faith in moderation. Without faith in moderation, I can either accept a trolled forum or I can answer the troll.
Its like having a dog who messes on the floor. Cleaning up the mess solves nothing by itself, since the dog is still messing on the floor every day. You have to housetrain the dog so it doesn't mess in the house. Some people here could use some housetraining.
Point 2: An example of dealing with a troll
This was an exchange found on the last page of the previous incarnation of this thread. This is an example of forum management dealing with a troll, followed by the troll expressing the success of said moderation:
Okay, this right here? It's a bald faced lie.
You, in your PsionX guise came to my and opened up with a post filled with vulgarity and inexplicably homophobia. You were banned six minutes after you posted.
You then reregistered with a fake email address and did it again. You were banned that morning when I woke up, reminding me to turn on confirmation.
You then jumped computers twice more, prompting my to block the entire hostname at the University of Nevada to lock your vulgarity out of my place of business.
I did not give you any more chances other than the month ban you got initially. You circumvented it and got permed. Then you tried your level best to try everything else, until you were reduced to stalking me via PM here.
Actually, each lab has a separate thingy... and I haven't even used my home PC yet... It just got boring so fast though. Re-registering emails is not fun and takes too long even if IP's can be changed.
EDIT: Personally, I'd much rather be playing online games than harassing you Vaal (which is another of the reasons I stopped), but I had to do a little housewarming for you.
Note the bolded part. It is a hassle to have to come back when you institute a real ban. The key is that you have to actually apply real bans, and this is what does not occur here.
Maybe it should.
Very good points.
You have to housetrain the dog so it doesn't mess in the house.
More like beat the dog. Grr. I always liked how Jay and Silent Bob dealt with Trolls, but hey, I ain't rich. Bill Gates, on the other hand, should definitely hire me to go Troll-hunting. :D
However, the above is completely off-topic, and so, returning to the OP ideas, I love the suggestions you guys are making, as well as the discussion itself. This thread should be the Poster-Boy of "Posting and You."
But seriously this is going to accomplish nothing. CS doens't care. They just don't care. The trolls come in here, flash thier teeth, talk about how great the current system is for them and CS just cruises on past.
As long as you don't care what your name is, there's exactly 0 reason to follow the CoC. Which says a lot for the regular posters that they *don't* just let fly on these smug little fools.
People are human, and expecting human beings to turn the other cheek and just let something like this slide is naive.
When you respond with flaming you are violating the CoC. I have reported people in the past for flaming me and their posts got deleted. The moderation does work. Just hit the report button people. Be the better person and don't respond. I also like what someone said about ignoring someones comments even without the ignore button. Lastly, don't worry about people spreading misinformation about 4e. People who are gamers are typically smart enough to know when someone is being disingenuous.
I'm almost considering posting a "Vote of Confidence" thread for CS here on Community Business. If it wasn't for the fact that I think the thread would be in bad taste I would have done so already. I'm starting to wonder if necessity is overruling the bad taste.
Wouldn't that be starting a poll?
When you respond with flaming you are violating the CoC. I have reported people in the past for flaming me and their posts got deleted. The moderation does work. Just hit the report button people. Be the better person and don't respond. I also like what someone said about ignoring someones comments even without the ignore button. Lastly, don't worry about people spreading misinformation about 4e. People who are gamers are typically smart enough to know when someone is being disingenuous.
You have reported people in the past? You move fast, as your join date is September 19, which was three days ago. Also, these are a lot of opinions on general forum behavior from somebody who is as new as you are. Talking as if you have been here a while is on the same level as your avatar in terms of calling who you really are into question.
As for what you are saying, it is also known as the "post something inflammatory and then report people for flaming it" troll game. A banned user who was best known as Psionx used to love to play this game.
You have reported people in the past? You move fast, as your join date is September 19, which was three days ago. Also, these are a lot of opinions on general forum behavior from somebody who is as new as you are. Talking as if you have been here a while is on the same level as your avatar in terms of calling who you really are into question.
As for what you are saying, it is also known as the "post something inflammatory and then report people for flaming it" troll game. A banned user who was best known as Psionx used to love to play this game.
Two people can be so much alike and yet be different people. Such is typically the case with 6 billion+ people on the planet, but I want to remind you that this discussion should be about the main topic and not these tangents.
Two people can be so much alike and yet be different people. Such is typically the case with 6 billion+ people on the planet, but I want to remind you that this discussion should be about the main topic and not these tangents.
The behavior of disruptive posters is very much on topic, as the topic of this thread is disruptive posters and the moderation of them. Banned posters with a reputation of making new accounts and sockpuppets and their continued behavior on the forums are part of the assertion that the forum moderation here is not doing its job. You chose an avatar that is well known here from its use by someone here, and your posting and comments resemble his. You admit this resemblance. You also talk as if you have been here longer than the three days your account indicates.
This begs the question, who are you? People creating sockpuppets and evading bans is at the core of what this topic is about.
When you respond with flaming you are violating the CoC. I have reported people in the past for flaming me and their posts got deleted. The moderation does work. Just hit the report button people. Be the better person and don't respond. I also like what someone said about ignoring someones comments even without the ignore button. Lastly, don't worry about people spreading misinformation about 4e. People who are gamers are typically smart enough to know when someone is being disingenuous.
CS doens't care. They just don't care.
I couldn't have put it better myself, Vaal.
The behavior of disruptive posters is very much on topic, as the topic of this thread is disruptive posters and the moderation of them. Banned posters with a reputation of making new accounts and sockpuppets and their continued behavior on the forums are part of the assertion that the forum moderation here is not doing its job. You chose an avatar that is well known here from its use by someone here, and your posting and comments resemble his. You admit this resemblance. You also talk as if you have been here longer than the three days your account indicates.
This begs the question, who are you? People creating sockpuppets and evading bans is at the core of what this topic is about.
Wouldn't it be more constructive to talk about the system than an individual poster?
The thread has been brought to the attention of Community Management, who will decide if it should remain closed, be reopened, or moved.