Is Countertrolling a Troll The Answer

[roadman65]

Oh it’s called respect.  We don’t respect nowadays and we try hard to get others to view like our own selves.

I belong to the Knights of Columbus and I love their charity work is why I belong. However, they have a part separated from the Knights called the Fourth Degree which in my opinion is overrated. It’s supposed to be about patriotism, but after attending their initiation ceremony, I find it not to be that but an FU to certain other non Catholics despite it was founded in 1900 to prove to Protestants that Catholics are as American as they are. Yet the exempflication said otherwise.

Needless to say, I declined to join the Fourth, but believe strongly in the original core as that’s what the Knights truly are. However I respect other members who join the fourth and profess it despite its not for me. I will not go two miles to stop another member for partaking in the Fourth Degree initiation.

Why? Because I respect others beliefs. If they want to like the Fourth let them. Just because I don’t shouldn’t stop them.

[kphoger]

– May the Fourth be with you.
– And also with you.

[Big John]

– May the Fourth be with you.
– And also with you.

The Vatican recently changed "And also with you" to "And with your spirit".

[kphoger]

– May the Fourth be with you.
– And also with you.

The Vatican recently changed "And also with you" to "And with your spirit".

I was unaffected.  I grew up Lutheran and now attend a Baptist church.

[roadman65]

– May the Fourth be with you.
– And also with you.

It is. Even though I'm not a member as a Knight I have to accept it as being part of our organization despite my not participating in it.

[Roadgeekteen]

Looks like the mods are still trying to save this thread by deleting a bunch of posts. The ship may have sailed at this point...

[hotdogPi]

Looks like the mods are still trying to save this thread by deleting a bunch of posts. The ship may have sailed at this point...

I prefer deletions and keeping the thread alive rather than a lock.

[Roadgeekteen]

Looks like the mods are still trying to save this thread by deleting a bunch of posts. The ship may have sailed at this point...

I prefer deletions and keeping the thread alive rather than a lock.

I don't really think that there is much worth saving in this thread. It got into religious content like a few pages ago.

[bugo]

That update on Freeways of Los Angeles this morning made me do a double take.  That's one of the strictest Facebook groups I'm a member of.  I know some of the backstory of how things got how they are on this group but I have to wonder how tenable it will be now long term. 

Don't get me wrong, I like the admin of the Freeways or Los Angeles page.  He did ask me to post more fairly recently when I was speaking with him on a group call.  I didn't want to tell him the reason I don't is because all the posts by group members have to be approved and it takes to long for my tastes. 

What is the backstory? In what ways are they strict?

If he really wanted you to post more, he would add you to the preapproved list so your posts wouldn't have to be manually approved.

[Max Rockatansky]

That update on Freeways of Los Angeles this morning made me do a double take.  That's one of the strictest Facebook groups I'm a member of.  I know some of the backstory of how things got how they are on this group but I have to wonder how tenable it will be now long term. 

Don't get me wrong, I like the admin of the Freeways or Los Angeles page.  He did ask me to post more fairly recently when I was speaking with him on a group call.  I didn't want to tell him the reason I don't is because all the posts by group members have to be approved and it takes to long for my tastes. 

What is the backstory? In what ways are they strict?

If he really wanted you to post more, he would add you to the preapproved list so your posts wouldn't have to be manually approved.

There was an incident a couple years ago where a former forum user tried to copyright claim several shared photos from his page in numerous California Highway groups.  Since then the admin of Freeways of Los Angeles has put in the post approval and tends to be cautious.  The group content tends to run very high but it also leads to viable posts being missed and/or deleted without much explanation. 

I tend to not run things quite as strict in groups I manage but I can respect the rationale. 

[Alps]

Ok I don't take it as far as HB. I think that things like racism and homophobia should be taken down, but other stuff should be fine.

I don't think racism or homophobia should be taken down unless the post in question is abusive towards someone else.  Simply stating one's beliefs, no matter how bad, shouldn't be reprimanded unless it's a forbidden topic.

Yes it should. Please express your racism and homophobia here.

[Roadgeekteen]

Ok I don't take it as far as HB. I think that things like racism and homophobia should be taken down, but other stuff should be fine.

I don't think racism or homophobia should be taken down unless the post in question is abusive towards someone else.  Simply stating one's beliefs, no matter how bad, shouldn't be reprimanded unless it's a forbidden topic.

Yes it should. Please express your racism and homophobia here.

I like don't understand what you are trying to say

[Scott5114]

Ok I don't take it as far as HB. I think that things like racism and homophobia should be taken down, but other stuff should be fine.

I don't think racism or homophobia should be taken down unless the post in question is abusive towards someone else.  Simply stating one's beliefs, no matter how bad, shouldn't be reprimanded unless it's a forbidden topic.

Yes it should. Please express your racism and homophobia here.

I like don't understand what you are trying to say

You are not required to respond to every post. In fact, you should not feel compelled to do so.

[hotdogPi]

Ok I don't take it as far as HB. I think that things like racism and homophobia should be taken down, but other stuff should be fine.

I don't think racism or homophobia should be taken down unless the post in question is abusive towards someone else.  Simply stating one's beliefs, no matter how bad, shouldn't be reprimanded unless it's a forbidden topic.

Yes it should. Please express your racism and homophobia here.

I like don't understand what you are trying to say

I think it's basically this concept: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Please_be_a_giant_dick,_so_we_can_ban_you

[hbelkins]

That update on Freeways of Los Angeles this morning made me do a double take.  That's one of the strictest Facebook groups I'm a member of.  I know some of the backstory of how things got how they are on this group but I have to wonder how tenable it will be now long term. 

Don't get me wrong, I like the admin of the Freeways or Los Angeles page.  He did ask me to post more fairly recently when I was speaking with him on a group call.  I didn't want to tell him the reason I don't is because all the posts by group members have to be approved and it takes to long for my tastes. 

What is the backstory? In what ways are they strict?

If he really wanted you to post more, he would add you to the preapproved list so your posts wouldn't have to be manually approved.

There was an incident a couple years ago where a former forum user tried to copyright claim several shared photos from his page in numerous California Highway groups.  Since then the admin of Freeways of Los Angeles has put in the post approval and tends to be cautious.  The group content tends to run very high but it also leads to viable posts being missed and/or deleted without much explanation. 

I tend to not run things quite as strict in groups I manage but I can respect the rationale.

That's a feature/bug of Facebook. It allows sharing from practically any source. Maybe the guy should watermark his photos on his site if he doesn't want them shared on social media.

This is at the root of some news organizations' complaints against Facebook for taking away ad revenue from them. If these companies want ad revenue from Facebook posts, then why do they maintain Facebook presences and post their stories there? If you click on a Facebook post, and you go to that news outlet's Web site, you see the ads. Facebook drives traffic to them.

[Max Rockatansky]

That update on Freeways of Los Angeles this morning made me do a double take.  That's one of the strictest Facebook groups I'm a member of.  I know some of the backstory of how things got how they are on this group but I have to wonder how tenable it will be now long term. 

Don't get me wrong, I like the admin of the Freeways or Los Angeles page.  He did ask me to post more fairly recently when I was speaking with him on a group call.  I didn't want to tell him the reason I don't is because all the posts by group members have to be approved and it takes to long for my tastes. 

What is the backstory? In what ways are they strict?

If he really wanted you to post more, he would add you to the preapproved list so your posts wouldn't have to be manually approved.

There was an incident a couple years ago where a former forum user tried to copyright claim several shared photos from his page in numerous California Highway groups.  Since then the admin of Freeways of Los Angeles has put in the post approval and tends to be cautious.  The group content tends to run very high but it also leads to viable posts being missed and/or deleted without much explanation. 

I tend to not run things quite as strict in groups I manage but I can respect the rationale.

That's a feature/bug of Facebook. It allows sharing from practically any source. Maybe the guy should watermark his photos on his site if he doesn't want them shared on social media.

This is at the root of some news organizations' complaints against Facebook for taking away ad revenue from them. If these companies want ad revenue from Facebook posts, then why do they maintain Facebook presences and post their stories there? If you click on a Facebook post, and you go to that news outlet's Web site, you see the ads. Facebook drives traffic to them.

I believe he did begin watermarking after said incident.

Me personally, it doesn't bother me too much if someone does it.  That said, I recently blocked a repeat offender who used several of my photos and didn't credit me.  Normally in the instances I've found where someone has taken a photo of mine and didn't credit me I'll usually comment on the post (if I'm made aware of it).  At the end of the day Facebook compresses the hell out of photos and it is easy to prove you have the original copy simply by file size.  Personally I think watermarks tend to look ugly and I generally don't use them.

[1995hoo]

– May the Fourth be with you.
– And also with you.

The Vatican recently changed "And also with you" to "And with your spirit".

It wasn't a change. It reflects the use of a literal translation instead of the "interpretation" many of us grew up hearing. In Latin, the response to "Dominus vobiscum" is "Et cum spiritu tuo."

[kphoger]

So, back to the topic...  How would you define "countertrolling"?  Who was doing that and who was doing something else?

Is engaging with the troll in an intelligent way "countertrolling"?
Is calling the troll names and disparaging his ideas "countertrolling"?
Is creating threads parodying the troll "countertrolling"?
Etc?

[JoePCool14]

So, back to the topic...  How would you define "countertrolling"?  Who was doing that and who was doing something else?

Is engaging with the troll in an intelligent way "countertrolling"?
Is calling the troll names and disparaging his ideas "countertrolling"?
Is creating threads parodying the troll "countertrolling"?
Etc?

At some point, engaging with a troll at all isn't good, because its attention that they want. So at first, engaging with them is okay, but when it's clear they won't take the hint, it's best to ignore them.

[kphoger]

So, back to the topic...  How would you define "countertrolling"?  Who was doing that and who was doing something else?

Is engaging with the troll in an intelligent way "countertrolling"?
Is calling the troll names and disparaging his ideas "countertrolling"?
Is creating threads parodying the troll "countertrolling"?
Etc?

At some point, engaging with a troll at all isn't good, because its attention that they want. So at first, engaging with them is okay, but when it's clear they won't take the hint, it's best to ignore them.

Right.  That has already been established.  But is that automatically "countertrolling"?  To me, the term "countertrolling" implies an intention to perpetuate the chaos.  I don't think it was the intention of most of us to do that.

[JoePCool14]

You could argue that we did by letting the MMM thread get to 84 pages. And that's just one thread.

Countertrolling may not be the right term. It's just straight up engaging the troll.

[webny99]

So, back to the topic...  How would you define "countertrolling"?  Who was doing that and who was doing something else?

Is engaging with the troll in an intelligent way "countertrolling"?
Is calling the troll names and disparaging his ideas "countertrolling"?
Is creating threads parodying the troll "countertrolling"?
Etc?

I agree with JoePCool. I would say yes to all three questions, based on the premise of the question in the OP:

Is this what we should be doing? Feeding a hungry troll? After all his one reason is obvious for being here: He wants attention. Should we give him that?

[kalvado]

You could argue that we did by letting the MMM thread get to 84 pages. And that's just one thread.

Countertrolling may not be the right term. It's just straight up engaging the troll.

And 18 pages more in this thread after he's gone.
I think MMM has a reason to be proud!

[JoePCool14]

To be fair, a lot of this thread has been discussing how to deal with other trolls or alt accounts in the future, and some other unrelated, off topic discussion. Only a few of those pages were directly about MMM, and that's because people wanted to know his ultimate fate.

I've already given my opinions on what I'd like to see in the future regarding trolls.

[roadman65]

You could argue that we did by letting the MMM thread get to 84 pages. And that's just one thread.

Countertrolling may not be the right term. It's just straight up engaging the troll.

And 18 pages more in this thread after he's gone.
I think MMM has a reason to be proud!

At least his threads aren't the hot topic on the recent post board and it's back to seeing many different topics like it always was.

Like someone else said, you post something on his thread. Leave and come back later and fifteen other posts were posted in a short time causing you to have to go through them all to be up to speed.