Bunbury's guide to community disruptors part 4

[BarbaraStrozzi]

Thought it was time for another of these. I'll just cut-and-paste the opening of the last thread:

The useful Bunbury Guide to Spotting Community Disruptors is constantly evolving.

The best research and advice is not to engage with community disruptors and trolls. As ever, if you suspect troll activity, report it to MNHQ.

This is a continuation of the first Public Service Announcement thread:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3438714-Bunbury-s-Public-Service-Announcement-2

Thread 3 was deleted with this note from MNHQ; We're sure there will be a Bunbury 4 around soon, but we'd be grateful if we could draw a line under the issues raised in this thread if there's to be a new one.

If and when you see threads plopped into FWR, especially a curious repeat of well worn topics, maybe check for poster history before engaging.

There are a number of posts/posters/threads that are reproduced on Twitter or Facebook to foment controversy using screen shots & flagging to either MNHQ to have threads or posters deleted. Sometimes, it’s used to approach commissioning editors with ideas for articles. It’s a tiresome tactic that we’ve had several community disruptor posters who themselves post the comments that they then highlight elsewhere as purported evidence of racism, religious intolerance, anti-men sentiments, or transphobia.

Some helpful links can be found in the first posts on thread 2 (linked above) but in essence FermatsTheorem recommended “that in the absence of a block/hide poster button, I suggest the following strategy (given that you're talking to the lurkers).

Do not name check the sealion. Instead, respond to a depersonalised paraphrase:

"It is sometimes erroneously suggested that blah. Blah is wrong for the following reasons (short and pithy). If you need more information re. debunking blah, here's a link."

Then (this next step is important to combat derailment) go back up thread to the last useful contribution to the discussion, make sure you do name check that contributor, and pick up the discussion from that point.”

Nope ive got it....its like a cryptic crossword

I might not have it...but i feel i have it

I know that some of us disagree on the topic of engaging with JAQers, sealions etc. (I'm solidly with the research that says, "Don't" I know other people argue that exchanges benefit lurkers).

I find this interesting: The Price of Incivility

There's a graphic that sums up these findings (the following is a quotation but I haven't bolded it):

Through a poll of 800 managers and employees in 17 industries, we
learned just how people’s reactions play out. Among workers who’ve been on the receiving end of incivility:
• 48% intentionally decreased their work effort.
• 47% intentionally decreased the time spent at work.
• 38% intentionally decreased the quality of their work
• 80% lost work time worrying about the incident.
• 63% lost work time avoiding the offender.
• 66% said that their performance declined.
• 78% said that their commitment to the organization declined.
• 12% said that they left their job because of the uncivil treatment.
• 25% admitted to taking their frustration out on customers.

For people who've witnessed the incivility:

Survey results and interviews indicate that simply witnessing incivility has negative consequences. In one experiment we conducted, people who’d observed poor behavior performed 20% worse on word puzzles than other people did. We also found that witnesses to incivility were less likely than others to help out, even when the person they’d be helping had no apparent connection to the uncivil person: Only 25%
of the subjects who’d witnessed incivility volunteered to help, whereas 51% of those who hadn’t witnessed it did.

qualitymanagementinstitute.com/images/hrsolutions/HBR-ThePriceofIncivility.pdf

Lots of discussion in various quarters about incivility, robust discussion, tone policing etc. I'm not sure where the boundaries are.

I think my line would be, are you getting anything out of engaging with this person other than frustration? If not then don't engage.

For the second time in so many days, I was about to comment on a thread when it suddenly disappeared. Having been used to the robust discussions on Twitter, I am bewildered as to what is going on. So far it seems to me that the "be nice and put up and shut up" seems to be the order of the day here, otherwise the whole thread is deleted.

At least on Twitter we know the main targets are feminists, who are banned at an alarming rate. It therefore seems strange to me that a Feminist chat forum is also subject to censorship. I have tried to empathise with other threads, for example, people parking outside the OP's house, but the current threat to women and children's safety is real. Even yesterday, ice cold baths anyone?

Earlier today a couple of new posters went after an advice thread on FWR using the the faux-naïve disingenuity routine. Eventually the OP felt sufficiently disquieted she got the thread pulled.

The tactics can be very effective.

Incoming. Probably.

Bunbury will take, "Things That Probably Didn't Happen" with a side order of a familiar dish for 10.

In other news, saw a discussion of trolls on Twitter with this diversion into how the phenomenon is discussed in Spain:

In Spain they have a word for this technique. 'Hammering the thought' you hit the idea like a hammer, and hit it, and hit it again with different people (trolls) hitting and eventually the person will give up.

I see that thread was deleted.

Just wondering what is going in in the Bigfoot and the Hendersons thread.

Implying that phobia and bullying was reason for the thread being pulled

Implying that phobia and bullying was reason for the thread being pulled

I think we may be talking about different threads (I was referring to a walk/cycle, an encounter with somebody with long hair, and the claim that adults shouldn't lie to children).

Apologies the thread I was referring to was talked about earlier this week, and you seemed to be referring to a poster on it and their appearance in a current thread

It's fine. I saw the earlier one that I'd referenced was gone and was wondering why there's so much activity on the current Bigfoot and The H thread about definitions (but yes, it was ambiguous and I didn't know that it had its own lively history of previous deletions).

I'm just expecting more activity with the mainstreaming of the news that GC feminists were not in any way aligned with recent newstories for which we'd been blamed. A propos, saw an interesting Twitter comment:

More women have been killed by men IDing as women than women have killed men who ID as trans, which is 0.

Depending on the country, I was wondering if there are interesting variations on that whereby more self ID'd/GRC'd-equivalent women have been killed by self ID'd/GRC'd-equivalent women than by other groups (altho' I probably the overwhelming number of perpetrators is male, no matter which country, because male violence is a public health problem).

Just popping in to say..

Fuck me.

Just swinging by to say there seem to be an awful lot of men around at the mo asking for marriage advice. There was also a thread on FWR this morning that started “Hi girls” that tripped my sensors, but others responded to in good faith.

Following last week's outbreak of creative writing, this week is seeing crippling cases of passive aggression.

Several interesting threads that serve as training practice for the Bunbury Guide..

I was having a 'twitch to comment' moment before I realised that some people on some threads do not seem to be arguing in good faith but are achieving the aim of disruption.

Arran I’m fairly regular so please don’t throw a biscuit at me (mince pie acceptable ), but I’m probably feeding a disruptor because I’ve not recognised that I should grey rock.

Please feel free to tell me to wind my neck in if you see me about

I haven't had a single mince pie. I must make another batch before the seasonality disappears.

I was more bumping GDU - I know we all have very different opinions on the topic of community disruption. To be clear, it's sometimes tricky to see if there's a line between disagreement and civil discussion of ideas and disruption. However, if a thread is growing rapidly, and a lot of the messages are in response to posters who are JAQing or playing at being sealions then I find it hard to extract the signal from the noise.

And most of the time the threads I'm commenting about seem to disappear tho' I've a feeling a current one will run for while.

Thank you 😊

I must make another batch before the seasonality disappears.

If you’re taking requests, I’ve just finished a box of sloe gin mince pies - bloody lovely. I don’t mind waiting

Fuck me! (Again) when will I learn?

I’ve just finished a box of sloe gin mince pies

You've reminded me of a description that I saw somewhere - I usually never put icing on anything but I saw a recipe that mentioned a mince pie with a gin icing. Opinions?

HorseWithNoAnecdotes - with hindsight? Sometimes it's so hard to anticipate what will happen when you start off responding as if something is a good faith discussion. Sometimes it's many exchanges and a sneaking suspicion that no points are being reflected upon and all hope has evaporated. (However, that might just be my impression from reading about MN Christmas Day and After rows.)

Another one gone then.

Maybe I'll just go and read Yahoo, watch YouTube or (insert any other media here) for news and comments instead.

Oops the thread I was watching is still there.

Yeah. It's all about them isn't it?

Fucking gits.

The thread has actually gone now.

Well well well.