Trolling vs. Thread Derailment

So, this is due to recent issues in the Politics threads.

As we know, there have been a series of postings for weeks that has bordered on trolling but never quite hits the line- despite multiple warnings from the moderators in these threads.

However, it seems to have now evolved to a point where the thread itself is often getting derailed for pages and, even for politics, we are entering into a vicious cycle that leaves those posting frustrated. While you could argue that some threads like US Politics are not exactly the most productive just by the nature of discussion, it has entered a new level of uselessness because of the time wasted trying to 'debate' with a user who keeps baiting posters with triggering posts.

Ignoring is not a productive option based upon what others have said and it has exposed the limits that the feature has.

Which brings me to the this question: At what point do the actions of a troll, that have yet to hit the line acceptable for removal, make it impossible for a thread to stay on track? And if the thread is being derailed by someone who borders on trolling and baiting, should they then be made to leave?

I get if a ban is a step too far. But can a user simply be barred from posting in that thread? To then be followed up with a ban if said order is not followed?

Since this issue seems unlikely to resolve on its own based on the last few months, it would seem other action may be necessary at this point.

 

I can speak only for myself, but I've opted not to participate in those threads because of one person's actions in consistently derailing and generally taking over discussions. I see no reason to waste time interacting with someone who lives in an alternate reality, and as most of the related threads have been dedicated for some time now to responding to said person's alternate reality dispatches, there's no reason to post in them for the time being.

People have been barred from posting in individual threads in the past. It can and should be done in this case.

 

This is the fault of Senate regulars for being unable to ignore him, and as a result, we all frankly deserve him. We deserve to have the discussion dominated by one person, because we not only allow it, we contribute to it by responding.

Ignoring is a productive option for me. It would be for everyone if everyone would simply choose to ignore him the majority of the time. Put him on ignore, his posts go away.

Most of his posts aren’t remotely “triggering”, they’re just stupid and easily dunked on, and Senate regulars can’t resist. We just can’t resist low hanging fruit. There’s nothing about his posting that is trolling, Senate regulars just have no self-restraint. A mature, reasonable adult should not be baited by his posts.

Senate regulars want to dunk on him all the time, but they don’t want his comments to dominate the thread. You can’t have both.

Senate regulars need to grow beyond their inability to resist responding. Get over the fact that Republicans exist, and take responsibility for your own behavior. It takes two to tango.

 

Agreed.... you can't engage with somebody constantly, for months, then complain when they wont go away.

 

I agree CT, although you've engaged him as well

 

CT: Your point is absolutely valid. However, while some have taken low hanging fruit, others tried to argue in good faith initially. What we are now seeing is that no amount of discussion will change this pattern. Even those who don’t engage and post their own things can be dragged in by being replied to and quoted. And as a result that line of discussion is also dragged off track and derailed.

And that’s the point. While other posters, myself included, have contributed to this current situation, even after disengaging with this line of discussion, the threads remain derailed. And because we are talking about, as KW put it, an alternate reality, it’s still not quite “off topic” according to the definition of trolling. But, if it leads to an entire thread, or in this case a series of threads, going off the rails, shouldn’t corrective action be applied? We’ve already established the ignore feature fails. We are seeing disengagement is also not feasible.

harpau: I agree. Except, the problem isn’t just that they won’t go away. The issue is that these posts are actively harming discussion and participation is also hurt as it is causing other users to disengage. We can disagree on the wisdom of initial engagement. And to be clear, I regret my part in what I thought was good faith discussion in the early part of this.

However, while good faith efforts were initially made by other users, we have now passed that point where any good faith can be applied here. It’s been communicated that this is problematic multiple times. And yet, it continues.

 

Aside from what everyone else is saying in regards to that particular user, I will add that I find it to have gone on long enough now. I remember back in February seeing him constantly posting and arguing with people. I figured it wasn't a big deal at the time. And maybe some of the regulars were just using it as a springboard to make the points they want to make. But, I did choose to stop participating for a while because that thread was just being taken up by that and there wasn't any point. But to see it continue now into June seems like something ought to be done about it. For a time it seemed to have slowed down, and then in the last little while it's picked up again. At least from what I can see.

I've said this before, but I find it very suspicious that the few users who align themselves that way politically, tend to only ever be active one at a time. I never see two of them active at any given time. It's always just the one. And then as soon as one goes away, another one appears. There's only a handful of them, and I'm sure you guys know who they are. And then their behavior and tone when they post, it's just too similar. Like they don't even actually believe what they are writing, but are just opposing people here for the sake of it. And for whatever reason, they decided that this is the corner of the internet they want do that on. Because even trying to reason with them to at least get them to slow it down seems to not even register with them. To be blunt, I have a strong suspicion that they are either the same user, or like I said, they coordinate with each other at various times to be the right wing poster here. For a while now I've just felt that there's something off in the way those users post. It doesn't seem organic.

 

Is this flipside that without him the place is dangerous close to an echo chamber? Putting aside various faults in engagement and debate style, and just focusing on the fact that there's actually an "other side" view being heard, I mean.

 

It's sad that you all are talking about a thread I haven't really read since early January and yet I know exactly who you are talking about because he's been doing the same thing in the pandemic thread, which I am active in. He disappeared from that thread for a month or so, and the thread was much calmer and discussion more productive. Then he reappeared recently and each of his posts essentially derails the thread for a page or two. When I log in and see a whole unread page or more after one day, I know he's back peddling his false, debunked claims again before I even see his name.

For there to be an "other side" view to be heard, said view has to be rational and reasonable so that discussion can be had on the merits of the opposing argument. When the only rational response is "that claim is completely objectively wrong[citation][citation][citation]", there is no discussion to be had on the merits.

Frankly, I don't know if there are any arguments left from the American right wing that aren't total bull manure, but let's leave that matter to the politics thread (which I am unlikely to delve into).

 

Edit: you know what never mind, don't really care,

 

Yes, which is why I think many have tried to make discussion work until this point.

The issue however is that it is no longer true discussion. It is derailment from discussion that others are trying to have. If it were just a person who disagreed, then there is room for debate. But that we are now talking about debating alternate reality and watching pages go by with the topics being dragged off track- and not just politics but guns, racism and, most disturbing of all, the pandemic - is why the question has to be asked: what is the point where corrective action should be taken if these threads are being consistently derailed by one user.

 

Being a consistent detrimental influence on a community is something the administration can and should take action over. It's been done in the past, so there's ample precedent.

 

Agreed. And let’s be clear, we have had drive by posters before who go in, toss a bomb, and leave. The problem is the consistent, intentional posts derailing discussion. And that’s the issue: this is intentional derailment. It may be borderline trolling, but the act itself is still the act of a troll.

Ignorance can’t be claimed either. It’s not as if others users have been silent about how these threads are being derailed.

So, as you say, it borders on actionable. The question then is how long does the same behavior need to go on until it becomes actionable?

 

So I hate to drag this back to BACK IN MY DAY, but, back in my day as a Senate mod, if we had a user being a fantastic bell-end I'd talk to them about it and call them out on it in an official capacity. Not to censure beliefs, but to make clear the expected standards of the community so that they contributed to, rather than detracted from, it.

It is unclear whether this approach is out of fashion with the current mods but as community leaders I think there is an obligation to intervene in this way. KW's right; it's been done previously.

 

Don't ask, don't get.

 

This presumes that the person in question has not been made aware how disruptive their behavior is and that it borders on trolling. Yet, there have been several warnings by moderators in the threads. This is a pattern of behavior occurring in multiple threads and while others users have made their feelings clear and moderators have issued warnings, the behavior continues.

So, again the question is: When does borderline trolling repeatedly after being warned and continuing to derail discussion turn into something actionable?

 

For the aforementioned person to change their ways would require them going against what they deeply identify with and think of as part of who they are. It's not going to happen.

 

I would say right now as the poster is not changing their ways after being told to do so by the mods. You might not have any other choice.

 

I don't agree about the "echo chamber" thing. I know my politics are different than a lot of others around here. I've had pretty stark disagreements with other regulars recently, just not things that are usually part of the US mainstream. I and I'm sure most other American JCC'ers also hear and see quite enough generic Republican talking points in so many interactions outside of the JCC that an "echo chamber" in our little corner of the internet doesn't matter.

That said, I hate this parade of Comms threads about one annoying poster or another. Just don't respond to him so much. I didn't have to use the ignore button to barely acknowledge the guy, and yes, people engaging with him has made the politics threads less interesting.

 

I agree with Darth Punk,

a lot of people do not post in JCC precisely because they do think it is an echo chamber, so what Punk says isn't without precedent.

 

why are you saying "they" like I've made "people" up...

I can assure you that "they" exist.

And you can assume all you like.