Troll hunting

[TheArmadillo]

As troll hunting season seems to be upon us once more and MNHQ have tried several times to outline their troll policy over the years I've been here and it has had little affect. Is there a way that troll hunting can be discouraged?

on threads like this where someone name changes to accuse OP of trolling.

This seems wrong because:
a) if the OP is trolling then surely there is no harm caused. They are not asking for people's money or contacting people offline (afaik)

b) if the OP isn't trolling there is a great deal of upset caused to them.

c) the only reason for calling 'troll' seems to be that their posting style seems familiar to one or two mners.

It seems that trolling accusations are now being thrown at people who have been round a while posting, not just newbies.

Also while I appreciate some trolls do cause posters a lot of upset and problems (I have seen a few) these are rare and tend to be more obvious than a thread on a sensitive asking purely for advice and nothing else.

Plus as MNHQ are unlikely to be able to tell if someone is trolling unless extreme and repeated. And even then not 100%

Would it be a good idea to have a policy of deleting posts crying troll? They cause upset and are offensive to those accused at difficult times. Any serious concerns re trolling can still be reported to MNHQ via the report this post function.

It seems that asking people to stop doing it isn't having any affect and I for one think it is damaging MN because it does put people, especially newbies off posting for advice on serious issues.

Anyone else got a view.

lol I'll be back to mean soon

what's happened to the song thread...?

What I don't get is that in one breath people are saying "this is the internet, it's not real so don't worry about whether people are genuine or not," and in the next they are saying "if you cry troll you could be hurting a genuine person." But isn't this just the internet where we shouldn't worry whether people are genuine or not?

The thing is, mn hq have pretty much openly admitted that they can't prove one way or another whether someone is a troll, so what is the answer? Reality is, people do get sucked in by trolls. People on here are generous by nature and when they see a cry for help many will become involved and try to help, be that emotionally or in some cases even financially. Now voicing suspicion might not actually make that person realize they're being conned until it's too late, but it at least might stop others from getting involved and in most cases tends to drive the troll away (for now at least) and reasserts to people that they should be more careful who they become involved with online.

I agree that shouts of "troll" on every thread which is a first-timer or a strange ibu is tedius and unnecessary. But in the case of longer term damaging trolls such as cvq and dm and judge flounce etc then yes, I think that it is necessary to say something.

I think it is always worth remembering that whatever you post is read by a huge number of lurkers if the number of registered users is to be believed. Over 800,000 as opposed to say 5,000 posters? It would be interesting to know how many registered users actually use the forum. I registered when ds was born in 2004 to get the development updates and never actually looked at the forum until a couple of years ago.

"By wannaBe Wed 18-Nov-09 23:24:56
What I don't get is that in one breath people are saying "this is the internet, it's not real so don't worry about whether people are genuine or not," and in the next they are saying "if you cry troll you could be hurting a genuine person." But isn't this just the internet where we shouldn't worry whether people are genuine or not?"

If you mean my posts - what I meant was that the effect on the OP is very real and very hurtful if they are called a troll on their first post.

Whereas if you are replying, then in the main there is no difference in replying to a troll thread or a real thread. In fact most of the time you never know for sure what the case was - just like MNHQ.

There are exceptions and yes, I can remember a number of trolls who caused real harm. But they are countable on the fingers of one hand - whereas the troll shouts go on every day and are getting louder.

I'm not saying don't warn posters if you think they're getting sucked in, but honestly, to take the thread in the OP as an example, what was the point or basis of calling troll on that? I'd just prefer it if people could wait a bit longer, and raise their doubts a bit more sensitively.

Apology accepted, and I'm sorry i I over-reacted to the accusation of troll on my thread.

I wonder if it would be useful to have a number of threads created, or posts made figure next to where peoples nickname is on posts? Like they do on ebay for purchases made?

That way, rather than having to shout troll all the time, anyone looking can exercise caution if they feel its a dubious post from someone who has never posted before.

I know this wont help where new MNers make their first post... I dont know, maybe thats a bit of a rubbish idea actually !

mmm, it's been discussed before and rejected for a number of reasons. My personal objections are

1. It creates a hierarchy of believability where oldies can do what they like and newbies are automatically suspect. We should treat all namechangers and unknowns by the same standards, IMO.
2. Being a regular doesn't preclude you from being a troll, in fact some of the most damaging trolls have been quite longstanding MNers.
3. It would compromise the anonymity of namechanging because if you are a long-standing regular there are probably only a handful of people with your exact number of posts.

That's my 2p worth anyhoo.

I don't think a number of threads created number would work at all. One of the absolute worst recent troll threads (and one of the worst ever imo) was done by a very profilic poster.

3 wouldn't matter as you'd have to try pretty hard to put the posts in chronological order and link them all together iyswim?

Anyway, I have a solution! I know probably 4 MNers in real life and am convinced of their non-trollery, and hopefully they think the same of me! If they can then name as many MNers as they know (who aren't already on my list) and so on, then we can create a Mumsweb of trusted MNers. Anyone outside that web is a troll by default. Namechanging doesn't matter as MNHQ can confirm whether a namechange is linked to a Mumsweb person.

oh and it starts with me BTW. You'll just have to take my word for it that I'm not a troll

By StealthPolarBear Thu 19-Nov-09 09:58:39
3 wouldn't matter as you'd have to try pretty hard to put the posts in chronological order and link them all together iyswim?

I disagree - you wouldn't have to link them all together, just know that they were in in the same ballpark area.

Say you're a long-standing MNer who has been TTC. Then you post anonymously to say you're pregnant and bleeding and want advice, but you're not ready to announce it to the whole board under your real name.

Everyone sees "14,320" next to your name and they KNOW you're a regular and probably recognise your posting style and ball-park figure of posts. It doesn't take a genius to pop off to the TTC board and see that MN regular is on there with 14,309 or something.

oh yes, hadn''t thought about similar stories - just complete one off troll posts. Also I suppose it's not beyond possibilty that a few people (lou33??) would be the only person in their bracket. And someone would start a spreadsheet to keep track...
What do you think of mumsweb??

or actually, thinking about it, wouldn't the total number be linked, so it changes everytime you post? That's usually how it works on other boards.

So you could look at MNregular and see they had 13,309. Then as soon as MNanon posts, both MNanon and MN regular's total would jump to 13,310 simultaneously.

mumsweb sounds a bit sinister

come into my web, mwah ha ha ha!!!

Perhaps you could have a polarbear stamp of probity, like the lion on vaccinated eggs ?

which one was that mollieo?
Give me scenario if you don't want to give a name...

"So you could look at MNregular and see they had 13,309. Then as soon as MNanon posts, both MNanon and MN regular's total would jump to 13,310 simultaneously."
oooh iwym, hadn't thought of that, yes, thast would be fairly clear!!

I am the bear on the glacier mints packet and need no more recommendation

The one about the twins being born very early and dying. Absolutely awful.

On balance I find the trolls more offensive than the troll hunters. Far from being keen to shout troll, I think a lot of us keep our suspicions to ourselves as we know how much some of your hate troll hunting. I kept off dm's threads as I thought they were suspicious from very early on. I admire the person who brought it to everyone's attention, actually, and yet still she was very unpopular in some quarters.

well if i'm not real then neither is my 9wo, so I shouldn't have as little sleep as i do! No guilt about leaving a virtual baby to cry all night

ah yes, it was . bit i didn't realise the poster had been particularly prolific.

I think that limiting namechanging would cut down on some of the trolls.

I can see why posters may need to namechange for sensitive purposes but tbh I cannot see why there is a need for unlimited namechanges. Other sites manage without.