"Any support for adding a "troll flag" button?" Topic

It's no secret that TMP has a trolling problem. By "troll" I mean not only the conventional defintion of the term (ie people who post offensive material designed to get a negative reaction from others) but also those who rarely if ever post anything on-topic or containing meaningful content, extremely argumentative folks, and other general trouble makers.

In theory the "stiffle" system should handle the trolls, but in practice it does nothing. True enough the individual stiffling member will no longer see any posts from the troll in question, but being stiffled has no effect on the troll himself. In fact some trolls take a perverse pride in the number of stiffles they have racked up. (a good reason to keep that "score" hidden in my view…but that's another subject) Others abuse the system by using sock puppet accounts to hand out multible stiffles to someone they disagree with to make them or their views look more unpopular than they already are. In short the existing system is broken and inffective in modifying troll behavior.

My recomendation is a "troll flag" feature attached to each post. I've seen this on a few of the sites I have posted to in the past and it used to be a feature of the Disqus discussion system. (Disqus has since moved to a "like and dislike flag system, which I feel is inferior) The idea behind it is that if a post gets enough flags (a value that is set by the site owner and is not disclosed to the general membership) the post in question is automaticly removed by the system without a staffer having to step in.

If the community as a whole is willing to flag troll posts, such a system is extremely effective in controlling problem children. People who act like this tend to thrive on attention…any sort of attention…and they get distressed when ignored or have their posts disapear. On a political blog I used to frequent we had a serious problem with trolls disrupting the site. (no, not just folks on the oposite side wanting to express opposing views, but clowns trying to disrupt the site) When the site owner put in place a "troll flag" button, the trolls soon found their posts had a shelf life that was sometimes measured in minutes and all but the most stubborn gave up their little game and moved elsewere. The point is that the trolls were actually held acountable for their actions and the automated removal of their material also removed the fun from their game.

It's an effective solution to the problem. It's also a form of democracy in action and community self-policing that takes stress off the workload of site staffers. It could work here and is a desirable option to add to the next overhaul of TMP.

What say you all?

Martin

Let's consider your suggestion. If enough people decided they didn't like a particular user for whatever reason, they could effectively shut down that user's contributions to the site.
Posting to the site should not be based on popularity.

If you don't like a post, hit the complaint button and it wil be attended to by the editors.

+1 Caesar

Caesar, that has not been my experience in such cases. True enough I have seen the most offensive of trolls get a "flag on sight regardless of content" status from the community (which is not a bad thing) and get shown the door, but I don't think I have ever seen a community with a "troll flag" system form a lynch mob against an undeserving target. Sure it could happen in theory. But it's unlikely in my view.

And yes, I do utilize the complaint feature. I've had to do it twice in the last couple of months. But there are more effective ways to allow the community to self-police in my humble opinion.

Martin

I am confident that we have members who will cyber lynch other members just because they can.

79thPA,
Sure. We have miscreants who would want to do just that.
But the bit that I think both you and Caesar are missing is that troll flag systems require a set number of flags from different members in order for a post to be removed. It's not something that can be done alone. So while a disgruntled TMPer could have the desire to abuse the system and silence an enemy, unless he could actually go out and convince a fair number of other people to go along with his wishes he would be unable to do so.

Again, this has been my experience with sites that have such a mechanism in place.

Martin

What Caesar said. There are already rules in place about trolling, and a mechanism in place to kvetch about it.

Doug

…being stiffled has no effect on the troll himself. In fact some trolls take a perverse pride in the number of stiffles they have racked up

Can I just say that I am no troll AND I have a high stifle count. Please don't equate me with such a creature.

I am human and I need to be loved…

+2 Caesar

Just like background noise in shopping malls I just zone out posts on threads I don't like. I cannot understand why people feel compelled to read posts from people they don't want to hear from. If you think, for example, that I am a troll, just jump to the the next comment and ignore my trollish contribution.

As far as Stifles go – seeing as you can only know how many a person has by going to their profile page and actually looking, my question is – why would one bother? I judge people by what they contribute.

Which brings me on to a third point. Given that, apart from a few people here, I don't know the real names of almost all the members of TMP including ones I interact with in these forums, I find it amazing that people who are usually posting with an anonymous pseudonym get so worked up by postings from other anonymous pseudonyms.

I vote no to your idea.

+3 Caesar.

+4 Caesar

I see this as a solution in search of a problem.

It's no secret that TMP has a trolling problem.

I disagree.

I am confident that we have members who will cyber lynch other members just because they can.

Exactly. There a lot of accounts whose sole purpose is to stifle someone. Anyone.

I've seen this on a few of the sites I have posted to in the past …

Again, this incomprehensible "need" to make TMP "like other sites". I don't get it.

It's also a form of democracy in action …

Democracy? Hardly. As you describe it, it is action by the most chronic complainers ganging up on someone.

No suprise, OFM. I suspect that you oppose the idea of a troll flag system because you recognize (correctly) that you would frequently run afoul of it. ;-)

Two quick specific points though….

>>There a lot of accounts whose sole purpose is to stifle someone. Anyone.

Well, at least then you admit that the current "stiffle" system is badly broken and ineffective in controlling trolls.

>>Again, this incomprehensible "need" to make TMP "like other sites

I didn't say anything of the sort. Please don't put words in my mouth. I have seen a mechanism for controlling problem posters that has worked elsewere and think it might be a good addition here. That is hardly a desire to rebuild TMP in the image of another site.

Martin

Shall we vote on it?

Do we need a troll control poll?

All the best,

John.

Democracy? Hardly. As you describe it, it is action by the most chronic complainers ganging up on someone.

That actually is exactly what Democracy is. The majority using their numbers to silence the minority for having a dissenting opinion. TMP currently operates more like a Republic from what I've seen. We get to vote on things, but the majority can't simple control the minority because they have numbers and dislike what the minority or an individual might state (Unless it strictly violates rules. Not unlike shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theatre to get a refund on a bad movie versus shouting "This movie sucked and I want my money back!" at the end.)

TrenchRaider, there's a report feature already for posts. It doesn't always work, but it would be better to fix the feature we have than to ask for implementation of one that it sounds to me would privy to excessive abuse.

Caesar, that has not been my experience in such cases.

I'll give you an example.
I don't want to derail this thread by having any of you write your support or condemnation of Tango, so please refrain from doing that.
I will point out that if your system was in place seemingly enough people would vote to remove his posts as an expression of dislike for him/his habits and an obsessive few might take it upon themselves to create multiple accounts just to vote down his posts every time one appeared. This does not fit into the 'troll' profile but it would be used this way and not just against him.
I can think of one user who no longer seems to post here but used to often, where I would have gladly hit an easy and convenient button to try to keep his posts from the world, although they were considered acceptable by the editor. He wasn't a troll, but I found his thoughts on a couple of topics to be repulsive and I know I wasn't alone.
I've also picked up a large number of stifles from posting about the shady goings on of a certain company, but that company has some die-hard supporters who would have tried to remove my messages warning others to not trust that company with their money.

This site is more than just a forum and we have multiple eyes looking out to moderate what is posted. Now I know that nobody completely agrees with the end result of that moderation, but it's there.

Well, at least then you admit that the current "stiffle" system is badly broken and ineffective in controlling trolls.

I find it amusing that you come back at me for putting words in your mouth when you do exactly the same thing with me.
First off, I NEVER said that the stifle system has anything to do with controlling "trolls", whatever they are.
That was never its intent. The sole declared purpose of a stifle is to let a person not see what someone else has written. If you can't understand that, I can't help you. Nowhere is the concept of "control" stated. Nor should it be.

I suspect that you oppose the idea of a troll flag system because you recognize (correctly) that you would frequently run afoul of it. ;-)

Now you are not only putting words in my mouth, you are trying to read my mind also.

Could it be that so many people oppose your solution in search of a problem because they think it's just dumb, and "controlling"?

I do not want to have the most vocal elements controlling what anyone posts.
I do not want that power for myself, and I certainly do not want it for you.
I totally reject the whole idea of anyone other than the owner of this site having the power to control, edit, ban, etc anyone at all. When the purely democratic Athenian Assembly voted to put the entire island of Delos (?) to the sword for rebelling, that was pure democracy in action. And when they countered it the very next day, so was that.
"Democracy" is rather overrated, IMHO. So is ostracism.

This is nothing but a back door way to shut up people like me, Tango01, Cacique Caribe (back when he was a prolific poster), aecurtis, kyotebluerthanblue, Smokey, Connard Sage, etc. Annoy a vocal few, and get someone banned.
Let's all talk about nothing but fluffy puppies and kittens. Oh, and of course unicorns.

My ultimate point is that although the intent is to have a tool that can be used for the good of the community, it would end up being a tool to be used for the detriment of individuals.

Exactly, no need for this. I find the whole idea of a troll flag ridiculous.

I am curious to learn more about these "stiffles" of which the OP speaks. Is it an alternative to the current "stifle" system? or did he mean "stiffies"?

Let's all talk about nothing but fluffy puppies and kittens. Oh, and of course unicorns.

You could always talk about miniatures and wargaming.

I vote NO!

"I would rather see the stiffle system replaced with a "troll flag" button. As it stands right now the stiffle system is really not a good anti-troll device. I post on several forums that use the "Disqus" commenting system. This includes an option to "flag" an offensive post. When a post receives a set number of flags from seperate IP addresses(a value set by the site owner) the post is automaticly removed.

It's pretty effective in keeping troll activity to a minimum. Not only are the really offensive posts quickly removed (assuming a low enough removal threshold and a willingness in the community to flag troll posts) but trolls get shown the door pretty quickly as known trouble makers get to the point were anything they post gets "flagged on sight regardless of content" by the rest of the community. Yes, the system can be abused, and it's not perfect. But it works better than a "stiffle" system."
TrenchRider – 23 Sep 2012 3:40 a.m. PST
TMP link

We have to give you credit for your persistence.

No problem for you about posting with "flag" danger, in 3 years and 6 month you barely post 100 threads!

Amicalement
Armand

but I don't think I have ever seen a community with a "troll flag" system form a lynch mob against an undeserving target. Sure it could happen in theory. But it's unlikely in my view.

Bwaaaahahahaaaaa, welcome to tmp, where the unlikely is possible.

You could always talk about miniatures and wargaming.

OK scrap that last thought

regards
dave

I am curious to learn more about these "stiffles" of which the OP speaks. Is it an alternative to the current "stifle" system? or did he mean "stiffies"?

If anyone here finds that they are giving a poster a "stiffie" instead of a "stifle" then I really, really, really suggest that they put the mouse down, turn off the monitor and go and have a cold shower. :-)

No problem for you about posting with "flag" danger, in 3 years and 6 month you barely post 100 threads!

Yeah. Armand posted that much last week! :)

So what happened to "Don't Feed the Trolls"? If you think a post or topic is trolling, don't respond, tell the editors. Simple.

And if anyone thinks Armand or OMF are trolls, they need to go to 4chan and see what trolls really are.

Stop be so precious, and stifle people you don't want to read.

Don't like the topic? Change the station.

"What say you all?

Martin"

No to your exceptionally bad idea, and I push your own button upon thee… 8)=

Caesar-
I get your point. But can't you make the "it could be abused" claim about anything? One has to weigh the potential good that something can do as opposed to the off chance that someone might use it for other than it's intended purpose. I think it's a worthwhile thing to do. Others clearly do not

GR C17-
The whole "ignore them and they'll go away" or "don't feed the trolls" line of thought is naive. One of the problems is that no matter how hard you try, you will never get everyone to shun a particular troll. You will always have at least one person who just has to reply to the troll post (and yes, I am guilty of that myself on occasion…I did it earlier this afternoon and the one and only time I have been "dog housed" was when I called a troll on his antics), which gives the troll exactly the sort of negative attention they are looking for. The other issue is how harmful to meaningful discussion a troll can actually be if not checked. A well placed troll post can completely shut down all meaningful discussion on a thread, or in more extreme cases, a whole website. One has only to look at the example of some of the folks in this very thread (three of TMP's worst trolls have chimed in this afternoon) to see how much troll activity can be distracting to a site. How much discussion has been wasted on and activity these three prompted over the years? (and in the case of one, in recent days..)

The real answer to trolling is, of course, agressive moderation with real and permanent penalties for rule breakers. But that's not going to happen. To be honest, I blaim Armintrout for that to a large degree. He's waaay too leniant and tolerant when dealing with his problem children in my opinion. He's just too nice a guy to come down hard on those who need it. (there are worse things to be!)

And finaly, yes I am quite familiar with 4chan. It's a complete cesspit from which nothing good has ever come. Christopher "Moot" Poole should be severely beaten for the damage he has done to the state of civil discussion on the 'net and the mentality his site has inspired in today's kids. But to claim that our trolls are not really trolls because the 4channer kiddies are more severe is a bit wrong headed in my view. That would be like saying Jack the Ripper was not really a serial killer because Ted Bundy racked up a bigger body count!

Martin

One of the problems is that no matter how hard you try, you will never get everyone to shun a particular troll.

And that is a "problem"…how?
What it means is that not everyone thinks that a "troll" is a troll.

…(three of TMP's worst trolls have chimed in this afternoon)

Why, that would be… ME!
Now I see your point. Stifling me does not "control" me. So, you wish to have a cartel of 20 "democratic voters" (2/3 of whom will be multiple "Sybil" accounts) unite to block me from posting.

Oh, there is so much I wish to say, but my desire to stay out of the DH precludes that. (Is the desire to stay out of the DH "controlling"? I will leave that for another day. ) Name calling, accusations of leanings towards now-discredited nationalistic political philosophies from the 1930s…
Naaaah, I won't go there. Orwell has warned us against cheapening the definition frivolously.

Ironically, I suspect the OP would find himself receiving multiple flags for this thread, if the tenor of the replies is anything to judge. File that in the category of "be careful what you wish for."

As for me, I oppose this idea. It indeed does sound too much like "Mob Rule," which is a horror no matter where it arises.

three of TMP's worst trolls have chimed in this afternoon

If that's what you think, then you have no clue what the term "troll" means.
Prolific posting isn't trolling. Posting humorous or slightly off topic comments isn't trolling. Trolling is posting something in order to deliberately generate controversy or to sow discord, or to generate attacks upon a specific individual or group. Outright lying about a company or individual or topic also qualifies, in my book.

So, then, threads that target individuals for criticism (such as anti-whomever threads) are more than likely the real troll posts, not the posts of those individuals themselves.

Well said Parzival!.

Amicalement
Armand

Nope. No support here. . Robert

I know this will land me in the DH but, I AGREE WITH THE OFM.

I do not want to have the most vocal elements controlling what anyone posts.
I do not want that power for myself, and I certainly do not want it for you.
I totally reject the whole idea of anyone other than the owner of this site having the power to control, edit, ban, etc anyone at all

…(three of TMP's worst trolls have chimed in this afternoon)

OK. Really? What you actually mean is three prolific posters on TMP whose opinions you don't like. Why don't you name them because I see noone who fits the accepted definition of 'troll' active on this thread.

First off, a couple of quick replies…

>>>>Seriously, yes, ignoring does work

Well, no. The reasons I gave above, explain why that blanket statement is often not true. Let me give a specific example of how the "just ignore the trolls" advice can be ineffective and counter-productive. Some years ago, on one of the political blogs I used to regularly comment on (this was prior to the site applying a flag system) the regulars had a productive and civil discussion going on one of the comment threads. Then a troll came on to the thread and started posting outrageous and deliberately antagonizing things like "Christianity is Harry Potter for adults". (this was a predominately conservative site, so such a comment was going to anger most of the regulars. Even I, a religous agnostic, found the comments uncalled for and offensive) Well, the site regulars lost their collective minds and went at the troll agressively. As a result all meaningful dicussion ended on that thread. Would an individual ignoring the troll have been effective there? Admittedly, this is an extreme example and did not occur on TMP. But the point remains.

>>>It indeed does sound too much like "Mob Rule,"

I think you are confusing community self policing with "mob rule".

>>> then you have no clue what the term "troll" means

I'm very well aware of what a troll is. I outlined it in the very first paragraph of my original post. I still contend that TMP has a largely un-adressed troll problem.

That all being said, I'm bowing out of the conversation now. I've said my peace and this is just going in circles now. I don't need the grief and hostility anyway. My contention that the addition of a troll flagging feature is a desirable change remains unchanged and I would hope that Armintrout would at least consider the option the next time the site is updated. Furthermore, I clearly mis-read the mood of the TMP community (or at least the portion that reads and posts to the "TMP Talk" sub-forum) and I obvously grossly underestimated how much support the various trolls here actually have. I blaim Stockholm Syndrome! ;-)

Martin

I was on the verge of agreeing with OP, when I remembered that while I have a right to not read what I don't like, I don't have a right to stop someone from writing it.

Likewise, while I have the right to not feed a troll, I can't stop others who want to.

"I obvously grossly underestimated how much support the various trolls here actually have. I blaim Stockholm Syndrome!"

Sure, if you don't agree with the rest, then *they* must be the ones who have a psychological disorder…

>>>Sure, if you don't agree with the rest, then *they* must be the ones who have a psychological disorder…

Someone clearly missed the ;-) at the end of my post…

Ok, I did say I was bowing out. I'm gone from the thread now. Later.

Martin

No.

All that this thread has proven is that one particular poster has NO idea what an internet troll is, and even less an idea what irony is. 8)=

I'd support the notion of a "Troll 2" flag. Nilbog is goblin spelled backwards!

No I think what's clear is the group did not accept the OP's collective lable of Troll.
"By "troll" I mean not only the conventional defintion of the term (ie people who post offensive material designed to get a negative reaction from others) but also those who rarely if ever post anything on-topic or containing meaningful content, extremely argumentative folks, and other general trouble makers."

So give it a new lable. The demarkation line of narrowly related postings, politics, obits, and general good taste seem to be a bit blurred these days. And I agree with the OP that this "blur" is detrimental to this site.
Its not a case of agreeing or disagreeing with any post, it is a question of whether or not an item should have been posted on the boards of a miniature wargaming site. Rob.

No, In my experience with this and other sites it would be used as a means to punish other members because the internet is unfortunately full of 's.

"… it is a question of whether or not an item should have been posted on the boards of a miniature wargaming site."

Ah, you mean censorship! Why didn't you say so earlier?

Thanks, but I would prefer to make the decision on what I will or will not read on this site without troubling my fellow TMPers.

In fact, OP's proposal is like letting some other TMPers decide whom to put on *your* Stifle list, isn't it?

What scale is it in? Metal or resin?

If by censorship you mean have you come to a miniatures wargames site to discuss miniature wargaming then yes I guess it is censorship. If as an individual you can't make that distinction yourself, likely society will make it for you.
For example:

TMP link

Should this have been posted (even under the guise of utter drivel) on an internet forum dedicated to miniature wargaming?

All the standard questions apply, such as, "Can I get this in 15mm?"

In fact, OP's proposal is like letting some other TMPers decide whom to put on *your* Stifle list, isn't it?

Pretty much.
And not a "majority" either, just a quorum of cranks.

FWB-- well, since that topic you linked to was in the "Utter Drivel" section then yes, it SHOULD have been posted. One must remember that even though this is the Miniatures Page, there are pages for sports, movies, cooking, comic books, workplace stuff, and many other topics that have little or nothing to do with miniatures or wargaming. And that is okay. If you don't want to see that sort of thing it is quite simple and easy to shut off those non-miniature related boards.

This is a COMMUNITY, and we talk about all sorts of things that relate to us. I like it that way!