Coping with Trolls and Derailers

[ElephantsAndMiasmas]

There have been some very persistent posters on here recently - some of them funny (unintentionally), and some of them not - dragging threads off track so we have to go back and explain something over and over again. I'm all for a lively debate, but there always comes a point when you realise that they are not listening at all, are on a blatant wind-up mission, or are just insulting posters with no intention of debating the original issues.

If we don't want this to happen, and bearing in mind that some people spot the pattern quicker than others, I was going to suggest that we have something like a warning word/phrase that could alert other posters to the fact that they are wasting their time. What do you think? Is this a stupid idea?

Saying "ah, a troll" just adds fuel to the fire you see. But if you were to say "I blame Princess Michael of Kent" or something, and then everyone disappears...well it might work?

Please refrain from calling me dumb I thought it was pretty dumb (though was too polite to say so) to say his editors were laughing up their sleeve at him and only used him as he was a 'total car crash' or whatever similar thing it was you said in the SH thread - which I can tell you, quite categorically and with first hand experience, was not true.

On a really basic level, Aitch, I should think some of the people who came on the thread are upset at the loss of their friend and didn't agree that it was a laudable thing to protest at his funeral or dance on his grave or whatever. Sebastian aside, I think (for example) that Mugabe is a horrendous, horrendous excuse for a human being. Would I go to his funeral to protest? I wouldn't, because I don't agree with doing so.

Thanks for engaging with what I was trying to ask/say Leningrad. I'll have a think about that.

Prolesworth - you have no idea how tiresome and inaccurate it is for you to suggest that I dislike women with strong opinions...being one myself.

Right, off to try and catch bus again!

I do think that if you're talking about people who disagree generally on the boards, you're talking about something different from the derailers on the feminism section. We are talking about a specific group.

They register only to argue on one or two threads. They are relentless. They do not respond to direct questions, and instead repeat the same meaningless stuff over and over again. They do not engage, basically, their tactic is specifically to block debate.

The long threads about the Pepsi/Facebook thing, there was a bloke on there who came on specifically to argue that point - new poster - but while we basically all disagreed with him, he actually responded to questions, attempted to clarify his position, and engaged. That was fine.

But the FOSH troll is just talking absolute bollocks. There is nothing substantive in hir commentary at all. And it's hugely prolific, in a way that a substantive poster (and I'm pretty verbose!) never is. It is a different issue.

And even if it wasn't, and we were actually talking about regular posters with dissenting opinions (and there are several who come on the feminism section just to disagree), why does it matter if some of us greyscale them? It just allows us to decide if we have the energy to have a 101 debate yet afuckingGAIN that day or not. Sometimes I'm happy to, sometimes I'm not. I don't understand how it could be a problem, honestly.

and i can tell you, also with first hand experience, that it absolutely was true. looks like we have reached an impasse. your publication thought he made jokes, mine thought he was one. both printed his copy and paid him for it(which is pretty despicable imo).

oh and i didn't call you dumb, i called the 'it's okay because it'd for effect' line dumb (because it is). would have thought with your specialised knowledge of written english you would be able to see the difference.

although i presume that you found both quotes in my post absolutely fine because he was only saying that his ideal woman would be a composite of two dismembered corpses, unable t speak or demur when he fucked it in the face?

I don't really think we need to rehash the protests at funerals debate, there is a perfectly good thread for that already started by SGB.

What problems can you envisage with a "fade poster" option LadyT?

It's not silencing anyone's voice at large, it's quietening them to me, and might allow discussion to continue without being continually dragged off track.

And for the record if you checked YDWTK's posts (and i don't recommend it), you'd find the vast majority are slagging off posters, calling us abusers or making up lunatic insults. (for instance, dittany said that many prostitutes are raped. Elsewhere she described the derailing posters as "knobs". YDK cobbled the two together to make the phrase "raped knobs", which she has repeated about 100 times, and which she claims is an insult to prostitutes...you don't call that a derail?)

That's two buses I have missed! I have actually totally screwed up my day now. MUST get next one.

"Fade poster" - we-ell..., I do wonder what would happen practically to the debate, if some people had 'faded' someone and some hadn't, and some people were responding to things that others had faded. I think it might get a bit messy and confusing. I wouldn't fade someone however aggravating (free speech too precious, even if some abuse the privilege) and if it as you describe about YDWTK, Elephants, I do understand why that would be called a derail.

Aitch...as to the quotes, I am not about to be trapped into being an apologist for every word uttered by the man, particularly when 98% of what he said was either to elicit attention or to please himself in some way. It's a ridiculous and repellant thing to say, obviously. Is that what you want me to say? Do I believe he meant it? Er, no. So am not going to huff and puff about it. And do quit the sniping remarks about my supposed specialised knowledge of written English, when I don't believe I have made any such claims! I am genuinely interested in discussing some of these issues and don't want to get waylaid by unnecessary carping, if it's all the same to you....

I know you were illustrating a point aitch, but did you really have to post those sick quotes?

lol, you were the one banging on about your specialist knowledge, ladyt, back when you quite specifically called me dumb. i'm reeling from the fact that your eds thought he was worth publishing for any other reason than as car crash journalism.

so he didn't mean it? but he said it. for effect? and now he's getting the effect. some people think he's a scumbag... he shouldn't have dished it out if he couldn't take the response. (and btw WHAT a response... one woman with a placard that didn't even mention his name. stone her.)

i know, sorry, they are repellent. i didn't locate them, i'm glad to say, i just c&p them from the other thread. pity the people who found them in amongst all his other dross.

I think there are two things

One is people who disagree but are open to having a conversation, and engaging, and arguing (poss rather heatedly) about whatever it is. That's fine and good as it would be no fun if we all sat around agreeing with each other (although I am currently waiting for someone to come and troll the rape experiences thread).

The thing which is annoying is when people come in who are coming in specifically to cause a row, or have no interest in other people's views, or are on the windup etc. This is the feminist section and so surely there is an understanding that people will be posting with reference to that.

So eg someone coming into a thread about something where everyone is having a good chat and saying "men are demonstrably cleverer than women", is derailing. It is irrelevant and designed only to provoke. Ditto it we're having a conversation about rape and the law, the people who always come in and take us back to a different and incorrect starting point ie women are liars what can we do about that then eh? And so on.

If I started a thread in baby names asking for suggestions and someone came on and said why are you having a baby the planet is overpopulated, then that would be derailing and deliberately provocative. That is the equivalent of what is going on on here.

I can see that there might be an idea that the people who post here regularly would be trying to shut down alternative views, which is not the case. But it is the feminist section - teh place for feminists/interested parties to talk about things from that perspective. Like the "green living" (is it called that?) section is for people who are interested in green issues to talk about being green. It is not a place for me to go in and start posting repeatedly "what you are doing is a waste of time, global warming is a lie, this section is really stupid, I don't know why you bother" to some poor sod wanting to talk about compost, and then keep going on and on in the same vein until everyone left...

I don't know what can be done about this problem though TBH.

exactly, the green living section is a good example i think.

Also agree with aviddiva that Dittany is getting singled out time and time again by these people and attacked terribly. I assume they do it as she often is the strongest "voice" and they think if they can take down the ringleader we'll all go quietly...

This sebastian horsely bloke, I understand he was a columnist, did those quotes of his appear in the mainstream press?

Why would the mainstream press print something like that?

Which papers are we talking about?

Well, I for one, am thrilled that the thread that this thread referred to is dead.

I probably engaged too much with the trolls, at times I could have accused of being a derailler.

But hey ho, I am not going to put up with hate speech.

Seriously.

Excellent post, ISNT. The Green Living section is a very good analogy.

Dittany is clearly very threatening to them. more power to her.

Hate speech is about right. If the 'provocative' comments of SH had been about black people, he'd have been in prison.

Reading those quotes, if SH wasn't a misogynist, I don't know who is. He had some right-on friends among the celebs. Stephen Fry gave the eulogy, and Marc Almond and Will Self were at the funeral.

.you wouldn't believe how many women..(and i don't mean prostitutes) were friends with Sebastian Horsley.....work that one out..