Is Countertrolling a Troll The Answer

[Roadgeekteen]

I personally think the 32 posts/day limit is too high, though I realize it was set at that value partly to preclude arguments that moderators enforce it arbitrarily.  A lower limit should (at least in theory) encourage participants to pack more of a punch into each post and think twice about whether a given point needs to be responded to.

I disagree. I don't want the forum to be something where you have to think super hard about making a post. The forum doesn't get enough activity to really justify going hard about uneeded posts. Especially with MMM gone.

[webny99]

1, how did you get this quote? Was this posted on the forum?

I could be wrong, but I think it's an email from MMM. It's not something a typical troll would bother to type out and give permission to share, which is another reason to think MMM could mature and come back someday.

[roadman65]

I think we are all in a state of shock. We thought this kid was just ridiculous and to hear he was someone else who trolled here before adds a new light on his identity.

Eh, I'm not. I even accidentally posted a reply to him once addressing him as "Mike" without thinking about it, before realizing what I did and going back to edit it out. I should have listened to whatever part of my brain made me do that, I guess.

I'm certainly shook. Wasn't on the forum when Mike was here, and I was actually talking to MMM like he was a real person just with crazy ideas, trying to take him seriously and help him understand. Now I know that he's just a troll.

When I was about five years older than you I came to the realization that there are some people that there's no point in trying to help understand anything, because they can't or don't want to. Trolls certainly fall in the "don't want to understand" category.

They generally do not pay attention is why you can't get through to them. It's like in real life when you walk into a room, then start talking to a person you know about something, then midway through your sentence that person starts another topic as if what you started to say was not heard.  Generally that person was not paying attention at all while you were speaking. Though we tend to consider that person to be rude anyway.

Or the best one is when a person starts ranting and you feel they don't need to. So you try to break into their conversation and try to get their attention even to a point to yell "Fire!"  but they keep ranting, they're the ones too that are not paying attention as well.

My mom was like that as it was hard to get her attention growing up as she was unresponsive to my concerns or too responsive where she would react to the first part of the sentence and immediately enter commentary.  So I'm well too familiar with the MO.

Joe Pesci in My Cousin Vinny wasn't paying attention either during the plea scene when the judge had to threaten Vinny with contempt to get the simple guilty or not guilty response he was seeking. As Mr. Gambini was not focused on the moment, but instead thinking the whole situation could be remedied by convincing the judge that there was confusion in the interagation  process and not to process his clients, he would not hear the plea request.

An acquaintance of mine was the same. He wanted to buy my house. He thought I wouldn't sell it to him, so he thought he has to convince me to sell to him.  I tried to assure him that he didn't need to do that, and for him to make an offer to what he thought was fair.  Instead he kept trying to convince me to sell despite my trying to get his attention that it was his if he had the right price in mind. Needless to say months later he brought up the moment and  said to me " You should have sold your house to me."    I then didn't say anything as if he wasn't paying attention then he wouldn't be now either.

[Molandfreak]

Unfortunately, it doesn't look like the "posts must add to the discussion"  rule is being enforced much, either.

That's very subjective and vauge a lot of the time.

Yeah, but numerous posts of just emoticons have been allowed since the rule came into force. Scott's initial post clearly mentions things like that.

[Roadgeekteen]

Unfortunately, it doesn't look like the "posts must add to the discussion"  rule is being enforced much, either.

That's very subjective and vauge a lot of the time.

Yeah, but numerous posts of just emoticons have been allowed since the rule came into force. Scott's initial post clearly mentions things like that.

Sometimes, a comment of just emoticons is an appropriate response to a comment or post.

[sprjus4]

I was passing 32 so many times during the whole MMM fiasco as there was so much shit going on in those threads.

This. This is half the reason the trolling kept going on. Continuing to reply and fuel the fire because one thinks it's "funny"  just makes it a nuisance for the rest of the forum.

[Scott5114]

I personally think the 32 posts/day limit is too high, though I realize it was set at that value partly to preclude arguments that moderators enforce it arbitrarily.  A lower limit should (at least in theory) encourage participants to pack more of a punch into each post and think twice about whether a given point needs to be responded to.

I disagree. I don't want the forum to be something where you have to think super hard about making a post. The forum doesn't get enough activity to really justify going hard about uneeded posts. Especially with MMM gone.

My ideal forum experience, and the goal I work toward in moderation, is to make this a place where one can go to learn more about roads, road signs, and geography from people around the country who are interested in discussing information about them. One generally cannot learn from a place where people are not willing to "think super hard about making a post".

If someone is not willing to "think super hard about making a post", perhaps they should leave the forum to those who are.

Unfortunately, it doesn't look like the "posts must add to the discussion"  rule is being enforced much, either.

That's very subjective and vauge a lot of the time.

Yeah, but numerous posts of just emoticons have been allowed since the rule came into force. Scott's initial post clearly mentions things like that.

Sometimes, a comment of just emoticons is an appropriate response to a comment or post.

No, it never is. Chances are if you see a post like that, it simply hasn't been deleted because I didn't see it (I don't check every subforum every day), or already addressed it by talking to the user privately.

[Rothman]

Meh.  I had a post responded to with just an emoticon by another user recently.  I didn't consider it a big deal or even offensive in the slightest.

[Roadgeekteen]

I was passing 32 so many times during the whole MMM fiasco as there was so much shit going on in those threads.

This. This is half the reason the trolling kept going on. Continuing to reply and fuel the fire because one thinks it’s “funny” just makes it a nuisance for the rest of the forum.

I proposed locking MMM's thread in off topic a long time before it was finally locked.

[Roadgeekteen]

Meh.  I had a post responded to with just an emoticon by another user recently.  I didn't consider it a big deal or even offensive in the slightest.

I think that there are situations where just responding with an emoticon is appropritate, but it is a very rare situation. Like if MMM made another sock puppet account and started spewing shit again I might respond with  or  . Not saying it should be common, but in very rare situations NE2 style humor can be funny.

[roadman65]

Sometimes an emoticon can say a lot.

[jakeroot]

I was passing 32 so many times during the whole MMM fiasco as there was so much shit going on in those threads.

This. This is half the reason the trolling kept going on. Continuing to reply and fuel the fire because one thinks it's "funny"  just makes it a nuisance for the rest of the forum.

Seems like it quickly goes from something funny to almost OCD-levels of engagement. From simple replies like "this must be a troll" to starting entire threads whose entire point is to "troll the troll", or continuously mentioning them even when said troll is not involved in the conversation. Whatever the case, it's just adding fuel to the fire. Trolls are only trolls because we acknowledge them and let them act that way, and we should really be ashamed of ourselves for even entertaining that kind of crap.

I've generally avoided the so-called trolls on here, people like MMM, FritzOwl, etc.. Of my admittedly ridiculous 15k+ posts, I doubt more than a dozen were direct replies to users who were either at the time or posthumously referred to as trolls. When a user's posts are of such outrageously low quality, to the point where it's ludicrous to even consider them legitimate replies, I really don't see the need to entertain an actual reply as it seems to just ensure further trolling. Or, if you absolutely have to respond, be as serious as possible. Trolls are usually looking for a certain kind of response, so just try to not give it to them.

[Roadgeekteen]

I was passing 32 so many times during the whole MMM fiasco as there was so much shit going on in those threads.

This. This is half the reason the trolling kept going on. Continuing to reply and fuel the fire because one thinks it's "funny"  just makes it a nuisance for the rest of the forum.

Seems like it quickly goes from something funny to almost OCD-levels of engagement. From simple replies like "this must be a troll" to starting entire threads whose entire point is to "troll the troll", or continuously mentioning them even when said troll is not involved in the conversation. Whatever the case, it's just adding fuel to the fire. Trolls are only trolls because we acknowledge them and let them act that way, and we should really be ashamed of ourselves for even entertaining that kind of crap.

I've generally avoided the so-called trolls on here, people like MMM, FritzOwl, etc.. Of my admittedly ridiculous 15k+ posts, I doubt more than a dozen were direct replies to users who were either at the time or posthumously referred to as trolls. When a user's posts are of such outrageously low quality, to the point where it's ludicrous to even consider them legitimate replies, I really don't see the need to entertain an actual reply as it seems to just ensure further trolling. Or, if you absolutely have to respond, be as serious as possible. Trolls are usually looking for a certain kind of response, so just try to not give it to them.

I do actually think some people enjoy arguing with trolls and making them mad/making fun of them. For me, it's like how someone trying to quit smoking still wants to smoke- I don't have fun engaging with trolls but I often can't stop myself from doing so. I also wouldn't call FritzOwl a troll IMO.I also have a tendency to try to "fix" the trolls and turn them into reliable members of the forum. There are several examples of trolls turing into non-trolls, but those instances are rare.

[jakeroot]

I was passing 32 so many times during the whole MMM fiasco as there was so much shit going on in those threads.

This. This is half the reason the trolling kept going on. Continuing to reply and fuel the fire because one thinks it's "funny"  just makes it a nuisance for the rest of the forum.

Seems like it quickly goes from something funny to almost OCD-levels of engagement. From simple replies like "this must be a troll" to starting entire threads whose entire point is to "troll the troll", or continuously mentioning them even when said troll is not involved in the conversation. Whatever the case, it's just adding fuel to the fire. Trolls are only trolls because we acknowledge them and let them act that way, and we should really be ashamed of ourselves for even entertaining that kind of crap.

I've generally avoided the so-called trolls on here, people like MMM, FritzOwl, etc.. Of my admittedly ridiculous 15k+ posts, I doubt more than a dozen were direct replies to users who were either at the time or posthumously referred to as trolls. When a user's posts are of such outrageously low quality, to the point where it's ludicrous to even consider them legitimate replies, I really don't see the need to entertain an actual reply as it seems to just ensure further trolling. Or, if you absolutely have to respond, be as serious as possible. Trolls are usually looking for a certain kind of response, so just try to not give it to them.

I do actually think some people enjoy arguing with trolls and making them mad/making fun of them. For me, it's like how someone trying to quit smoking still wants to smoke- I don't have fun engaging with trolls but I often can't stop myself from doing so. I also wouldn't call FritzOwl a troll IMO.I also have a tendency to try to "fix" the trolls and turn them into reliable members of the forum. There are several examples of trolls turing into non-trolls, but those instances are rare.

But realistically, we cannot have it both ways. Either we encourage trolling, or we discourage trolling. Everytime we respond to a troll, we make them into a bigger deal than they ever need to be and embolden them to persist in their efforts.

In fairness, you've been rather transparent about your approach with trolls, so I cannot call you out for being hypocritical. However, I would politely ask that you consider how your choices affect the rest of us who are not as keen on trolls.

[Scott5114]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deny_recognition may have some useful insight.

[sprjus4]

I was passing 32 so many times during the whole MMM fiasco as there was so much shit going on in those threads.

This. This is half the reason the trolling kept going on. Continuing to reply and fuel the fire because one thinks it's "funny"  just makes it a nuisance for the rest of the forum.

Seems like it quickly goes from something funny to almost OCD-levels of engagement. From simple replies like "this must be a troll" to starting entire threads whose entire point is to "troll the troll", or continuously mentioning them even when said troll is not involved in the conversation. Whatever the case, it's just adding fuel to the fire. Trolls are only trolls because we acknowledge them and let them act that way, and we should really be ashamed of ourselves for even entertaining that kind of crap.

I've generally avoided the so-called trolls on here, people like MMM, FritzOwl, etc.. Of my admittedly ridiculous 15k+ posts, I doubt more than a dozen were direct replies to users who were either at the time or posthumously referred to as trolls. When a user's posts are of such outrageously low quality, to the point where it's ludicrous to even consider them legitimate replies, I really don't see the need to entertain an actual reply as it seems to just ensure further trolling. Or, if you absolutely have to respond, be as serious as possible. Trolls are usually looking for a certain kind of response, so just try to not give it to them.

I do actually think some people enjoy arguing with trolls and making them mad/making fun of them. For me, it's like how someone trying to quit smoking still wants to smoke- I don't have fun engaging with trolls but I often can't stop myself from doing so. I also wouldn't call FritzOwl a troll IMO.I also have a tendency to try to "fix" the trolls and turn them into reliable members of the forum. There are several examples of trolls turing into non-trolls, but those instances are rare.

But why do you have the desire to do it in the first place? The same thing with the constant posting near the end basically trashing him... you may think it's helping but it's not. Simply ignoring the thread / posts altogether will make it move past much faster, and be far less disruptive for everyone on the forum.

Every time you reply, he'll reply with something. Then you'll feel the need to reply. Then he will. Then it's a cycle that you said has made you have over 32 posts in a single day alone.

[jakeroot]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deny_recognition may have some useful insight.

Agreed:

Denying recognition and infamy neutralizes common primary motivators for vandalism and disruption.

[roadman65]

I was passing 32 so many times during the whole MMM fiasco as there was so much shit going on in those threads.

This. This is half the reason the trolling kept going on. Continuing to reply and fuel the fire because one thinks it's "funny"  just makes it a nuisance for the rest of the forum.

Seems like it quickly goes from something funny to almost OCD-levels of engagement. From simple replies like "this must be a troll" to starting entire threads whose entire point is to "troll the troll", or continuously mentioning them even when said troll is not involved in the conversation. Whatever the case, it's just adding fuel to the fire. Trolls are only trolls because we acknowledge them and let them act that way, and we should really be ashamed of ourselves for even entertaining that kind of crap.

I've generally avoided the so-called trolls on here, people like MMM, FritzOwl, etc.. Of my admittedly ridiculous 15k+ posts, I doubt more than a dozen were direct replies to users who were either at the time or posthumously referred to as trolls. When a user's posts are of such outrageously low quality, to the point where it's ludicrous to even consider them legitimate replies, I really don't see the need to entertain an actual reply as it seems to just ensure further trolling. Or, if you absolutely have to respond, be as serious as possible. Trolls are usually looking for a certain kind of response, so just try to not give it to them.

I do actually think some people enjoy arguing with trolls and making them mad/making fun of them. For me, it's like how someone trying to quit smoking still wants to smoke- I don't have fun engaging with trolls but I often can't stop myself from doing so. I also wouldn't call FritzOwl a troll IMO.I also have a tendency to try to "fix" the trolls and turn them into reliable members of the forum. There are several examples of trolls turing into non-trolls, but those instances are rare.

But why do you have the desire to do it in the first place? The same thing with the constant posting near the end basically trashing him... you may think it's helping but it's not. Simply ignoring the thread / posts altogether will make it move past much faster, and be far less disruptive for everyone on the forum.

Every time you reply, he'll reply with something. Then you'll feel the need to reply. Then he will. Then it's a cycle that you said has made you have over 32 posts in a single day alone.

That's exactly what my OP was. To point out that we ourselves are the cause of MMM rising to his elevated state by responding to his ideas. As he would rebut all the time we respond to him and then over we respond to his rebuttals and then repeat and again.

We should have ignored him and maybe he would have left from lack of attention.

[Rothman]

I'm reminded of game theory experiments in which I've participated where someone always cheats the group's decision with the adequate incentive.

Someone will always engage the troll out of some personal and emotional benefit, probably thinking they're bringing some positive attention to themselves.

...

I blame DST for my participating in this thread today.

[roadman65]

I'm reminded of game theory experiments in which I've participated where someone always cheats the group's decision with the adequate incentive.

Someone will always engage the troll out of some personal and emotional benefit, probably thinking they're bringing some positive attention to themselves.

...

I blame DST for my participating in this thread today.

At least NE2 didn’t get into it. When the Diesel mechanic trolled a few years ago, him and that troll got very heated  when Alex had to get involved to delete their very heated argument.

[kalvado]

I'm reminded of game theory experiments in which I've participated where someone always cheats the group's decision with the adequate incentive.

Someone will always engage the troll out of some personal and emotional benefit, probably thinking they're bringing some positive attention to themselves.

...

I blame DST for my participating in this thread today.

And today's snow storm is caused by DST as well!

[1995hoo]

.... I don't have fun engaging with trolls but I often can't stop myself from doing so. I also wouldn't call FritzOwl a troll IMO.I also have a tendency to try to "fix" the trolls and turn them into reliable members of the forum. ....

[roadman65]

…. I don't have fun engaging with trolls but I often can't stop myself from doing so. I also wouldn't call FritzOwl a troll IMO.I also have a tendency to try to "fix" the trolls and turn them into reliable members of the forum. ….

Funny. 

I can name a few on here that are obsessed with correcting peoples mistakes like the user who taught you the correct way to spell Costco Wholesale when you accidentally misspelled it.

[Roadgeek Adam]

.... I don't have fun engaging with trolls but I often can't stop myself from doing so. I also wouldn't call FritzOwl a troll IMO.I also have a tendency to try to "fix" the trolls and turn them into reliable members of the forum. ....

Duty calls.

[SectorZ]

No, it never is. Chances are if you see a post like that, it simply hasn't been deleted because I didn't see it (I don't check every subforum every day), or already addressed it by talking to the user privately.

Does the paragraph symbol count in the emoticon-ish world? Asking for a friend...