Is Countertrolling a Troll The Answer

[kphoger]

At the risk of sounding the Unpopular Asshole Alarm™, I feel the staff needs to act quicker in these situations.

Quackmaster General Mikey NumbersNYC trolled about a dozen threads and that toxicity quickly spills over into nearly every other thread.

I've been here 12 years and have never felt the need to suggest how to moderate; this isn't exactly a cause of any hurt feelings, but just how things can really get out of control with such a long leash.

On the other hand, there's a half dozen or so here that just don't know when to quit giving out admission passes to the shitshows.

The thing is, he did not explicitly break any rules. He was annoying, but being annoying isn't against the rules.

Right, that's kind of the key problem here. I don't want us to get to the point where someone can get moderated for having a stupid opinion. (If we did, I'd probably have to ban myself.) And we do need a clear rule we can point to when someone says "Why am I banned?"

Why?  I understand wanting to be fair and ethical, but limiting yourselves to a list of discrete rules isn't the same thing as being fair and ethical.  That is to say, it is perfectly possible to be fair and ethical while banning a troll who hasn't technically broken any rules.  This isn't a court of law:  it's an internet forum, and common sense can carry the day just as easily as technicalities.

This guy wasn't just annoying.  He didn't just have a stupid opinion.  He was committing the internet version of arson, and you don't have to determine exactly how a fire started before grabbing a fire extinguisher.  The answer to "Why am I banned?" could be as simple as "Because you were an asshole" and, while that would certainly be rude and perhaps uncalled for, it wouldn't make the ban itself unfair or unethical.

It was certainly conceptually possible to ban MMM on that basis.  It wouldn't even have been necessary to say something asshole-ish like "Because you were an asshole"--a formulation like "In our judgment, your posts fail to contribute to comity on the forum" would have sufficed.  But how many members would be comfortable with us running the forum in that way?  For better or for worse, the rules have evolved into an indirect mechanism for holding moderators to account.

(I wrote this before reading J.N. Winkler's response, so some of this may be duplicative and/or already addressed in your response to him)

You're right, and in some situations, invoking plenary powers to perform a ban as discretion applies is probably justified. The problem, though, is that without a clear set of guidelines saying what an 'asshole' is, we risk allowing ourselves to identify anyone who is being a minor irritant as an 'asshole' and banning them. Basically, it would be a tool that might become too tempting to overuse, absolute power corrupting absolutely and all.  That wouldn't be fair, and would arguably make the forum a worse place than it would be if we merely had to suffer a troll every now and then.

If the community feels like you have the right of it more than I do, however, and there's enough trust in the staff that they'd be okay with us having easier access to the banhammer in extraordinary cases, I can certainly be convinced that I'm overthinking it.

A great many posts (and their replies) have been moved out of sight since they have been found to breach the clause in the forum guidelines that prohibits offensive content.

Please remember that this forum focuses primarily on roads, and facilities for general-interest discussion are provided as an adjunct.  Reddit is a better venue for conversation on NSFW topics, such as sexual fetishes.

I still contend that I suggested the inevitable/eventual solution right before this thread went to dark places.  This is clearly circling the same drain others like tolbs and MMM already went down.  I'm not understanding what due process is really owed at this point?

I'm as guilty as anyone else of responding to the non-road-related stuff in this thread, but I would respectfully note that this thread itself has not really been related to "Fictional Highways" in quite some time (or, to the extent it has, it's been minimal)—see, for example, Poiponen's post quoted in Reply #3578. It's turned into the "Poiponen13 posts random thoughts and the rest of us ridicule them" thread. If the moderators are OK with that, then it's not my place to argue, but if Poiponen is unwilling or (more likely, I suspect) unable to control his scattershot random gibberish, then his postings seem to be inconsistent with your admonition about the forum's purpose. FritzOwl's posts—in a thread I do not follow—are, to his credit, at least road-related.

Yeah...this is well said.

Agreed. This entire thread is absolutely ridiculous and it's incredible it's gone on this long.

Regarding self policing, I get that the idea here is to hope P13 is going fall in line shape up.  I think most of us already know or have concluded by now that probably isn't going to happen.  The mod staff to their credit has generally had far more patience than probably necessary.  I do wonder though, how far does this have to go if stuff like yesterday wasn't enough to do P13 in?

Honestly, the degree of latitude Poiponen13 has been given is shocking.  The COVID thread and DST threads were all locked for far less than what goes on in here or the Metrification thread (and I would argue that the DST threads were more interesting).  tolbs took more flack for the Mary Hannah incident that Poiponen has over Sault Saint John Madden (even now!).  And let's appreciate that his original comment about what he would like her to do in his house is still here (did the follow-up comments get really bad between when I was logged in that afternoon and when they got removed?  Seems to me the original comment was worse, especially given her age).  And everyone who doesn't have the word filter on knows her name.

Seriously, does Poiponen have blackmail on the mods or something?  Seems like he gets away with a lot.

To me, it sounds like the community trusts the moderators enough these days to allow them easier access to the banhammer.  There's a place for grace and patience, but this freak sardine salad burning in a dumpster fire is no longer the place for it.

Seriously, how long does it have to burn, and how high do the flames need to get?  It's high time for the moderators to just grab the fire extinguisher, already.

(And, also, I'm sorry for pouring so much gasoline on yesterday.)

[Scott5114]

As I've stated before, the problem with issuing a ban for behavior like Poiponen is exhibiting is that it is very difficult to codify in a rule without resorting to a "I know it when I see it" type vagueness. And while I appreciate that the community would trust us to make such a determination on our own judgement, it raises the problem of how to defend such a determination when the banned user comes calling demanding an explanation.

This is, unfortunately, not a question that we can skate by on. Since the last time we had a discussion like this, we had a banned user dig up the entire staff's phone numbers and leave all of us harassing voicemails. One staff member's wife was even targeted. While this is an exception as opposed to the normal way that this goes, I felt a lot better in that situation knowing we had a clear rule we could point to saying what the user did wrong and why the ban was issued.

So rather than just a blank check to wield the ban hammer pro re nata—which, again, I do appreciate the trust put in us to do so responsibly—I think it would be most helpful to workshop a clear rule that is able to be applied consistently to handle both the situation at hand and any similar ones that are likely to occur in the future. I'm open to suggestions here. One place I think we could improve is by strengthening the rule against posting private information about people, since as worded right now it applies only to members and not to ancillary people a member knows in real life.

[Rothman]

I don't think a clear rule would have prevented that harassment.

[kphoger]

I think it would be most helpful to workshop a clear rule that is able to be applied consistently to handle both the situation at hand and any similar ones that are likely to occur in the future. I'm open to suggestions here.

The current (relatively recent) "shitposting" forum guideline already has a mechanism built in.  Simply include a process similar to workplace disciplinary action.  For example, (1) purple text warning, (2) PM warning, (3) active post moderation, (4) short ban, (5) long ban, (6) permaban.  Or whataver.

may be subject to a temporary cool-down ban if the moderation team judges that a user is making a high rate of low-quality posts

I don't think a clear rule would have prevented that harassment.

Sorry.

[Max Rockatansky]

Why would someone be owed an explanation for being banned after being warned multiple times for creating disruptions?  This is a forum, not a court or Human Resources department.  After all these years the only person I'm aware of who got banned and made significant trouble for the forum was the Baloo guy. 

In my real life, I'm often part of investigations that lead to people being terminated from their job.  A side consequence to being part of said process is at times people aren't happy and go out their way to let me know it.  Thing is that emails, messages and phone calls are all extremely easy to block/ignore in modern times.  In one extreme case I even had a person try to follow me home once, he was ultimately arrested.  I don't think this forum or really any road group would go quite as far as that last item.  I dunno, I'm not particularly bothered by telling people to pound sand when they think they are owed an explanation for their malfeasance.

[kphoger]

I don't think a clear rule would have prevented that harassment.

Sorry.

Oh, I just realized you didn't mean my harassment of the Finn.

[J N Winkler]

After all these years the only person I'm aware of who got banned and made significant trouble for the forum was the Baloo guy.

The person Scott alluded to in the middle paragraph of his last post (but did not name since we try to maintain confidentiality in this regard) was a separate individual.

There is also the aspect that we don't necessarily want to ban a forum member many others find annoying, if it is clear that he or she has a sincere interest in roads.  Being on this forum comes with an expectation that each of us will make a reasonable effort to manage personality clashes.  (Goodness knows there have been a few people over the years that have made me pause and take a deep breath so I don't give in to the temptation to voice irritation.)

As for possible options for handling "we know it when we see it" situations where there is no clear breach of the forum guidelines that can be pointed to, I have thought of a couple:

*  Ban vote (simple majority results in a ban) held after five complaints are received.  This is essentially the system SABRE uses, but to copy it exactly would require creation of a separate category of closely involved membership (to be a voting member of SABRE, you currently need at least 150 posts in the past year; only complaints and votes from such members count in the process) as well as a secure voting mechanism.

*  Forum staff members receive the ability to propose, second, and vote on a ban proposal, which carries by simple majority of voting staff members after the subject of the proposed ban has been given a chance to defend himself or herself in writing.  One disadvantage of this is that it occurs behind closed doors.

[Max Rockatansky]

Sincere interest in roads you say?

Seriously this is the point I was trying to make.  This kid is literally walking himself right back into the same scenario as yesterday.  I don't think he can control himself in any way.  This isn't the correct thing to keep catering to this.  The right thing would be to just close him out with a ban and let this forum move on.

I don't want to be banned from this forum. I like to present new discoveries about calendar to you.

[on_wisconsin]

This thread is turning into an AARoads version of ANI on Wikipedia...

[epzik8]

This thread is turning into an AARoads version of ANI on Wikipedia...

I looked that up, and this is a good point.

[vdeane]

I think we have our answer, straight from the man himself:

Seriously this is the point I was trying to make.  This kid is literally walking himself right back into the same scenario as yesterday.  I don't think he can control himself in any way.  This isn't the correct thing to keep catering to this.  The right thing would be to just close him out with a ban and let this forum move on.

I don't want to be banned from this forum. I like to present new discoveries about calendar to you.

Why don't you start a Tumblr or a blog or something, then? That way you can present all the discoveries you want and nobody can tell you that you  can't.

Tumblr or blog has way lower chance to get comments. And I like very much when someone other comments my ideas, discoveries etc. rightly after I have written them, as in this forum.

[Rothman]

I think we have our answer, straight from the man himself:

Seriously this is the point I was trying to make.  This kid is literally walking himself right back into the same scenario as yesterday.  I don't think he can control himself in any way.  This isn't the correct thing to keep catering to this.  The right thing would be to just close him out with a ban and let this forum move on.

I don't want to be banned from this forum. I like to present new discoveries about calendar to you.

Why don't you start a Tumblr or a blog or something, then? That way you can present all the discoveries you want and nobody can tell you that you  can't.

Tumblr or blog has way lower chance to get comments. And I like very much when someone other comments my ideas, discoveries etc. rightly after I have written them, as in this forum.

Max must feed the trolls.

[Max Rockatansky]

As you already know, I never a miss an opportunity to make a Flat Illinois joke when the opportunity presents itself on Roadgeekery.

[vdeane]

I agree that the "unproductive posts" rule could be used on Poiponen, although in the shower today I thought of another issue: the fact that Poiponen basically admitted to wanting to produce child porn.  Relevant posts below, unedited except for adding bold for emphasis.

At least temperature should be in Celsius, if other measures are in US customary. That is because the Celsius scale very logically sets its 0 and 100 to freezing and boiling point of water, a very important substance without which the life cannot exist. Fahrenheit on the other hand has its 0 and 100 in arbitrary points close to freezer temperature and human body temperature.

The freezing point of water is indeed very important in real life, but its boiling point has basically no impact on my life whatsoever.

But it's pretty well known that water doesn't freeze at 0^oC. Ice melts at 0, that's true - but homogeneous freezing temperature is below -40 ^oC (or F, at -40 it doesn't matter any more)

These posts should be in metrication thread. Such posts are not welcome to Poiponen13 in one thread. We shall not merge metrication thread to this thread.


A thing more appropriate to this thread - a random thread name:
Video: Sault Sainte John Madden licks a toilet seat
This is a thing she should do when she comes to my house.

At least temperature should be in Celsius, if other measures are in US customary. That is because the Celsius scale very logically sets its 0 and 100 to freezing and boiling point of water, a very important substance without which the life cannot exist. Fahrenheit on the other hand has its 0 and 100 in arbitrary points close to freezer temperature and human body temperature.

The freezing point of water is indeed very important in real life, but its boiling point has basically no impact on my life whatsoever.

But it's pretty well known that water doesn't freeze at 0^oC. Ice melts at 0, that's true - but homogeneous freezing temperature is below -40 ^oC (or F, at -40 it doesn't matter any more)

These posts should be in metrication thread. Such posts are not welcome to Poiponen13 in one thread. We shall not merge metrication thread to this thread.


A thing more appropriate to this thread - a random thread name:
Video: Sault Sainte John Madden licks a toilet seat
This is a thing she should do when she comes to my house.

It's not about metrication. It's that you don't know basics of metric system, for example what 0 ^oC corresponds to!

I would like to know what Sault Sainte John Madden thinks about this. She should join this forum as soon as possible. Do you remember that she is 15 today and was born on the same year as kphoger's eldest son?

There's also a third related comment, which looks like he's randomly making an inane comment about his favorite Arctic city until you look up what "white Christmas" means on Urban Dictionary (don't do that at work).  Given how short it was and that it was in the middle of the removed posts, I think there's a good chance that Poiponen knew that definition.

Chance of white Christmas in Souky is 100%.

[kalvado]

I agree that the "unproductive posts" rule could be used on Poiponen, although in the shower today I thought of another issue: the fact that Poiponen basically admitted to wanting to produce child porn.  Relevant posts below, unedited except for adding bold for emphasis.

At least temperature should be in Celsius, if other measures are in US customary. That is because the Celsius scale very logically sets its 0 and 100 to freezing and boiling point of water, a very important substance without which the life cannot exist. Fahrenheit on the other hand has its 0 and 100 in arbitrary points close to freezer temperature and human body temperature.

The freezing point of water is indeed very important in real life, but its boiling point has basically no impact on my life whatsoever.

But it's pretty well known that water doesn't freeze at 0^oC. Ice melts at 0, that's true - but homogeneous freezing temperature is below -40 ^oC (or F, at -40 it doesn't matter any more)

These posts should be in metrication thread. Such posts are not welcome to Poiponen13 in one thread. We shall not merge metrication thread to this thread.


A thing more appropriate to this thread - a random thread name:
Video: Sault Sainte John Madden licks a toilet seat
This is a thing she should do when she comes to my house.

At least temperature should be in Celsius, if other measures are in US customary. That is because the Celsius scale very logically sets its 0 and 100 to freezing and boiling point of water, a very important substance without which the life cannot exist. Fahrenheit on the other hand has its 0 and 100 in arbitrary points close to freezer temperature and human body temperature.

The freezing point of water is indeed very important in real life, but its boiling point has basically no impact on my life whatsoever.

But it's pretty well known that water doesn't freeze at 0^oC. Ice melts at 0, that's true - but homogeneous freezing temperature is below -40 ^oC (or F, at -40 it doesn't matter any more)

These posts should be in metrication thread. Such posts are not welcome to Poiponen13 in one thread. We shall not merge metrication thread to this thread.


A thing more appropriate to this thread - a random thread name:
Video: Sault Sainte John Madden licks a toilet seat
This is a thing she should do when she comes to my house.

It's not about metrication. It's that you don't know basics of metric system, for example what 0 ^oC corresponds to!

I would like to know what Sault Sainte John Madden thinks about this. She should join this forum as soon as possible. Do you remember that she is 15 today and was born on the same year as kphoger's eldest son?

There's also a third related comment, which looks like he's randomly making an inane comment about his favorite Arctic city until you look up what "white Christmas" means on Urban Dictionary (don't do that at work).  Given how short it was and that it was in the middle of the removed posts, I think there's a good chance that Poiponen knew that definition.

Chance of white Christmas in Souky is 100%.

That's all good... But why are you thinking about all that in a shower? And moreover, bring it up as an important detail?

[Max Rockatansky]

One of my deleted posts pertaining to "White Christmas" being a euphemism.  I wouldn't say it is a widely known one but it isn't totally obscure either.

[Scott5114]

This has been dealt with in a permanent manner, so I'm closing this thread.