Playing into the hands of the trollsgreenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread
It occurs to me that some of us play right into the hands of the trolls, all too often by simply responding to one of their posts or answers. I know, because I've done it, too. I'm trying to wean myself now, though.
Some of us, too, lend currency to their efforts by invoking their species as a response to another's post. Too often, we see a response such as, "Let's see the pollys answer that one," or "What will they say about this."
As serious preparers, we shouldn't concern ourselves at all with how the trolls will answer or respond to a given comment or post. Our focus should be on the raison d'etre for this forum and nothing else.
I know it's fun, sometimes, to lash out at the trolls, but it really only plays right into their hands, and it's only momentary gratification at best.
Time is growing short, and I expect the troll postings will only increase. I, for one, am going to ignore them from now on, using my energy instead for the benefit of my family and friends.
-- Vic (Rdrunner@internetwork.net), July 19, 1999
I agree, but let's not confuse veiled humor with trollism. Sometimes, I'll admit, I respond in an attempt at humor just to bring a little lightheartedness. Please don't mistake me for a troll. If I commit a trollish act, I can assure you it was unintended.
BTW, I trimmed my nose hairs yesterday, so I am trying to resist being like one. LOL
-- CygnusXI (firstname.lastname@example.org), July 19, 1999.
All too true. Anyone ever see the old movie "When Worlds Collide"? Do you remember the sign that hung in the packing room that said "Waste ANYTHING but time"?..........
I'm afraid we are at the point where it is better to waste money than time.
-- Jon Williamson (email@example.com), July 19, 1999.
SYSOP - Can TB2000 block posts from anonymizer.com?
Maybe a certain pullet is paranoid about getting into CPR's FBI database, too. Maybe that's why he posted at De Boonkah this morning using the anonymizer (oh, oopsie). Or, could it be that Doomers@suck.com (who coincidentally appeared HERE this morning at about the same time) is also using the anonymizer? Gasp! You don't suppose...?
Sysop - Can you ask Mr. Greenspun if TB2000 can block posts coming from the anonymizer site? A lot of web-based chat and bulletin board systems do not allow anonymized IP's. I bet we'd lose most, or all, of the TB2000 trolls if this action was taken, and there would be little objection from anyone but the trolls.
Woops! Count your chickens
-- Hmmm (firstname.lastname@example.org), July 19, 1999.
Maybe you can't help responding to the trolls because you know they are right and you just can't stop your silly human self from defending your ego which you know has taken yet another devestating hit.
Here ya go, a nice soft handtowel for you face. Save it for New years, you'll have alot of egg to wipe off. Don't say I never gave you anything.
-- (email@example.com), July 19, 1999.
You're right vic, we should ignore people who are just trolls. Intelligent people like to discuss problems, not degrade others, or call names or other childish things. good post
-- SuperLurker (Slfsl@yahoo.com), July 19, 1999.
Yes, would everyone just please ignore the trolls, there's not much time left.
-- Michelle (??@??.com), July 19, 1999.
I agree. This could be a really nice forum. I will take the pledge. (It's tough to resist though.)
-- Mara Wayne (MaraWAyne@aol.com), July 19, 1999.
The overwhelming theme appears to be that little time remains to stop and smell the trolls.....what exactly does that mean? I'm sure we're all in agreement that the clock is ticking, but what does that have to do with the problem of trolls? Do you believe they will feel rejected by our ignoring them and leave? Are they capable of it? If your children throw fits in public, do you just keep shopping or do you handle it and move on? Just curious.
-- Will continue (firstname.lastname@example.org), July 19, 1999.
WC, I seriously doubt the trolls will leave if we ignore them. They will simply become more belligerent and disruptive (like the professional panhandlers have done). Have you ever watched a child try to get his parent's attention at the supermarket, and the mother ignores him? He starts to whine. The more he's ignored, the louder he whines until you rush your purchases and floor it out of there to avoid the headache fropm the glass-cracking shrieks. The shrill trolls are these ignored toddlers all grown up.
If the trolls simply disagreed with us, that would be one thing--but that's not their raison d'etre. They truly believe we are all making money off Y2K, and that if we're not vendors then we're shills for the vendors (proven by referring people to vendor sites. . .!).
The following is from the owner of Debunking Y2K (unaffectionately known to TB2ers as Bonkers):
Tuesday, 13-Jul-1999 16:34:58
Strip-away Y2k and you are left with a carnival midway full of hawkers, Chittum had it right long ago.
The GOAL of all con-artists is to wrap themselves in an air of credability. TB survives because of MIT, period end of story. Silent endorsement, in this case "actual" endorsement.
Merely attempting to "discuss" Y2k in that environment does NOTHING but endorse the scam, MHO. A loser game from the start, no answer, just choose not to feed the INSANITY. Y2k is not even what TB is about, as I hope you know. Last month is was Kosovo. Last week, gun control. This week, people control, yada yada. All a scam to sell fear and the assorted fixes for the imaginary boogeyman these conmen create. The RECORD speaks for itself. Reality 1000, the kooks ZIPPO. But there is always tomorrow.
A catch-22, and there is no easy answer. I also understand the feelings of wanting an honest, calm discussion of this issue Y2k. I hope inbetween the noise this is happening. If one does not GI by now, one is not in reality.
This is about the power of the internet, and how a few have used this power to spread their filth, rather crudely at best even. A 6 to a million chain-letter you would toss-in-the-trash in a heartbeat in different times. Gary North, a crazed street-corner ranter in different times you would have chuckled at as you passed on by. Y2k, is it real? yes, but so is the incompatibilty of executing Java on the client and not the server, so what, does granny need to know?
(End of copy and paste)
And if we're not vendors or shills, then the major poster (cpr) at Bonkers says, in pertinent part:
. . . For over 2 years,I have been trying to answer the question why would anyone "prepare" for unknown impacts from Y2k far in advance of the possible problems??
That has been going on for at least since North and YurToast-Ed have been spinning the news.
I have seen some studies about other forms of "how Extremist recruit".
Suffice it to say that part of the techniques are PRECISELY what we see on EY's Flying Pig Board.
It is a deliberate effort to include only like minded people. Even a Flint is scorned if he does not "toe the mark".
The answer lies in what might be happening OFF LINE.
There a "newbie" who survives the equivalent of the Cyber Hell Week and adjusts to the framework of TB2k is "ready" for innoculations of more extremist material. . . .
(End copy and paste)
So you see, you're not dealing with optimists, per se. With the exception of Flint and perhaps one or two others, the pollies are missionaries from Bonkers, bent no longer on saving us from ourselves but on saving newbies from being inducted into extremist groups. We are now called the Viet Cong Doomers.
How in the hell do you deal with people like that? You delete their posts. There's no other answer. It's the equivalent of saying, "No TV tonight if you keep it up." And, as with children, you have to be consistent. BigDog's proven it works over at the preps forum.
-- Old Git (email@example.com), July 19, 1999.
I should add that all you have to do is scroll down and read the headings of the posts and you'll understand the problem (it's a different format from TB2K; all the posts are delineated, similar to the North forums). Here's a cold link for the main page--just scroll down past the banners, intro and links; the post titles begin right underneath. Put on your hip boots first, though!
-- Old Git (firstname.lastname@example.org), July 19, 1999.
Thanks Old Git, and there we have it folks. Ignoring them will not solve the problem. It isn't working for them to ignore Y2K either, too bad for them. I for one, will not tolerate their attempts to ridicule people taking responsibility for themselves, those they care about, their communities, neighbors and most of all, their Country. If we let our Country go down the big flusher....not much else *will* matter. For those of you with the strength and fortitude to calmly argue with their blatant stupidity.....go for it. Greybear says, "Never argue with an idiot. They pull you down to their level and beat you with experience." He's correct, I much prefer good old fashioned verbal abuse (preferably with humor. Really fine-tuned verbal abuse is the greatest form of humor, IMHO. Milne is King when he's on a roll!)
We've done such a fine job of this....they were forced to retreat and don new handles. We've never dealt with any more than the 'original' Dirty Dozen (or less). If you guys decided to fumigate, I wouldn't whine, I'm sick and tired of them wearing out our funniest and finest!! THEY RAN OFF MY BRAVEHEART BUDDY FOR CRYIN'OUT LOUD..... I'm pissed now. Where's a? Andy's vacation is about to be 'called'! The King and I (great movie) can't spend our whole lives whoopin' troll tush by ourselves, ya know! If I cross over to the prep forum and find them hiding out....they're gonna have some serious explaining to do. I CAN'T POST MILNE AND HAMASAKI OVER HERE arrrrggghhhh. Technology is dead........when left in *my* hands anyway. I'm in serious need of a laugh attack!
-- Will continue (email@example.com), July 20, 1999.
Yes yes yes . . all very interesting I'm sure.
It's easy to ignore that which makes you uncomfortable. Far easier than it is to embrace the possibility that you may be wrong about something.
A particularly interesting issue, (though one which is avoided at all costs), is the total lack of interest shown by certain users of this forum in the concept of fairness and legality (at least as far as it applies to THEIR having to abide by the law . . you can bet they're quick to scream if they feel THEY have been the victims of an illegal or unfair action).
As witnessed in this thread, it is clear that the preferable methodology is to huddle together and back-slap about the evils of the "polly trolls", rather than to attempt to discuss the unwillingness of the sysop/moderator team to enable, or create some kind of environment here where a true debate can take place. Indeed, it is only logical to deduce from their actions that debate is not part of their plan. This forum is for people who are prepared to disconnect the process of independent thought, and subscribe wholesale to a group-concept. But you'll never see them admit it.
No no. That would risk exposing the true nature of the forum to moderates and newcomers, and that would never do. Of course, the folly is that anyone who still retains the ability to think for themselves, after spending a small amount of time here, will easily see that anyone who dares to raise a question which may endanger the group-concept is bullied, labelled, attacked, and eventually silenced. But that doesnt seem to bother anyone at all. Ignore these annoying trivialities about truth and facts. . its about Y2K stupid !!! preps preps preps (keep repeating) . .
Evidence the continued silence from forum regulars, and particularly from the sysops, as to the question below, asked over 5 days ago.
Maybe you dont think this question is important. If so, you must logically accept that you have embraced the group-concept, and are uninterested in minor details like FACTS and THE TRUTH. Otherwise, you would have nothing to fear from an open debate, and the discussion of varied points of view. The only opinions which need such agressive protection are those which are truly so fragile that they can be damaged or destroyed by the smallest voice of opposition. But that doesnt apply to the opinions aired here does it ? After all, you are all SURE that youre right. So why the fear ?
These aforementioned questions revolve around the issue of the official (and illegal) policy of discrimination practiced in this forum.
For a full discussion on the points raised, see the thread . .
"Censorship ? IMO our moderators are fair."
For those not inclined to read through, heres a synopsis.
1) The moderators have the responsibility to administrate the forum, but they are also bound by the same laws as any other person. They are also, as administrators, accountable for their actions, (and inactions), in law.
2) The exact interpretation of the forum posting guidelines as set out, rightly allow for the presence of a range of opinion on this forum. In practice however, they are being applied in a prejudicial and discriminatory way by the current moderators. This misapplication is unneccesary, has no logic basis, and is harmful to the forum. It is not, as claimed, being used legally as a defence mechanism to protect the forum against such behaviour by certain individuals which may be in contravention of the forum guidelines. It is being used as a means of punishment for a range of persons who may hold views or opinions which the moderators do not agree with. The distinction on who is punsihed and who isn't is simply the individual's opinion. This is prejudice in its purest form, and indirectly is a negation of the right of free speech. (1st amendment), protected by law and applicable in this case.
2a) This, even on a public internet forum, where proven, is in contravention to several US laws, punishable by up to 2 years imprisonment. (see legal details posted by Hardliner in the aforementioned thread )
3) The moderators are unwilling to enter into any discussion about their misuse of power, despite repeated (courteous) attempts to seek an answer, preferring instead to divert the conversation into the more inflammatory (but unrelated) issue of censorship, which is not the issue in hand. The issue in hand is the practive of prejudice and discrimination in contravention of the US constitution.
4) The moderators may also have breached certain peoples civil rights by their actions, (as detailed above, in the threat made to a poster by use of privilaged information). This activity, (by the way, not an isolated case) is also being undertaken in a prejudicial and discriminatory fashion.
5) This forum resides on equipment and bandwidth which is in part funded from the public (I.e taxpayers) purse. Additional responsibility is therefore inherent upon the forum administrators to behave within the letter of the law. They are not. This, currently, is another subject which the moderators are attempting to fudge.
Before sitting down to draft an angry reply to this post . . GO AND READ THE AFOREMENTIONED THREAD. Then ask yourself the following questions . .
(i) Do you agree with the need to protect the civil rights of all citizens under the US constitution ?
(ii) Are you prepared to stand by and permit those rights to be ignored, or limited, unlawfully, by persons who in some way represent you ?
(iii) Do you agree with such persons benefitting from public funding ?
(iv) Are you in favour of unaccountable dictatorship over transparent democracy ?
(v) Are you so bothered by the concept of controlling so- called "troll" postings, that you are unconcerned if a number of innocent (non-troll) bystanders have their rights trampled in the process ?
Having answered those questions, impersonally, impartially, in principle . . feel free to respond. It will be, if nothing else, interesting.
-- W0lv3r1n3 (W0lv3r1n3@yahoo.com), July 20, 1999.
What it comes down to is the manner in which we, as individuals, wish to address the troll situation. If you get some satisfaction from "verbally abusing" them, more power to you.
Let's agree to disagree on the misbehaving child analogy. Because I loved (still do) my daughter very much, she was, indeed, punished for misbehaving in the grocery store. And guess what? She is now a very well-behaved young lady. I reprimanded her because I loved her.
I care nothing at all about trolls, so I don't feel the need to "punish" them. In any case, "yelling" at them or questioning their heritage isn't punishment.
Now, if I had the opportunity to spank one of them in aisle three ...
-- Vic (Rdrunner@internetwork.net), July 20, 1999.
You'd be manhandled by some old 'Dr. Spock groupie'! LOL. We agree to disagree about the trolls! I'm always glad for those with the patience to 'deal with them' rationally. Some of us tend to shut them up once their failed logic has been unearthed. It's a team thingie. We can't all be quarterbacks and even quarterbacks require the services of the less refined occasionally, eh?
Thank God for quarterbacks!
-- Will continue (firstname.lastname@example.org), July 20, 1999.