What is 'trolling' here?

[Devil's Elbow]

Don't think that regulars should be completely exempt from moderation, but it is very worrying that bans are being handed out at seemingly triple the rate they were before the change in moderatorship. For me, the first rule of moderation is that it should be aligned with the wishes of the community as a whole - it definitely doesn't feel like this is the case right now and for me, too, it's taking some of the fun out of posting here.

 

[RedheadDane]

Don't think that regulars should be completely exempt from moderation, but it is very worrying that bans are being handed out at seemingly triple the rate they were before the change in moderatorship. For me, the first rule of moderation is that it should be aligned with the wishes of the community as a whole - it definitely doesn't feel like this is the case right now and for me, too, it's taking some of the fun out of posting here.

On the flipside, AC has been doing a lot of actual mod-work.
Splitting off-shot discussions into separate threads. Cleaning up the rider thread index. Stuff like that.

Honestly, I still wonder how much of the issue comes from the fact that we have a bunch of administrators who - frankly - are not active members of the forum.

 

[AmRacer]

On the flipside, AC has been doing a lot of actual mod-work.
Splitting off-shot discussions into separate threads. Cleaning up the rider thread index. Stuff like that.

I second that.

 

[AmRacer]

@Krzysztof_O we usually banter about them, or even Remco or Roglic, i didn't feel harrased about the post.

We have our differences too, but all is fine with me. Hope you feel the same.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

I continue to receive many reports of trolling, with no really clear consensus as to what criteria it is identified by. Many complainants are clearly working to a different definition than I am.

This is extracted from an essay in Wikipedia on the matter: it largely describes my take on the matter. I'm interested in your thoughts on it, and you might think of it when making an accusation or wondering why I have not acted on what you might consider trolling.

Italics are my adaptations:

Trolling is a deliberate, bad faith attempt to disrupt the forum. Ignorance is not trolling. Genuine dissent is not trolling. Biased posting, even if defended aggressively, is in itself not trolling. They are only trolling when they are motivated by a program of malice rather than ignorance or bias. This requires a judgment of the personal motivation for another's action. Such a judgment can never be made with anything approaching certainty. This fact should always be kept in mind when one is tempted to label someone a troll.

When you try to decide if someone is a troll, strive to assume they are not. Explain errors politely and reasonably; point them towards the grounds for your contrasting opinions, without personal comments about them. Do not conclude they are a troll until they have shown complete inability or unwillingness to listen to reason or to moderate their position based upon the input of others. Even in that case, it is likely better to remain silent and let others conclude the obvious instead of calling someone a troll and creating even more mayhem. It is better to humor a troll for too long than to drive away a sincere but misguided forum member.

Remember: if a troll's intention is to cause annoyance (and if that is not the case, I would suggest they are not a troll), then showing that you are upset only rewards them.

 

[jmdirt]

Since you are the mod, you get to decide what the definition of trolling is. IMO, trolling is being disengenuous just to bait others into an argument.

To those who are reporting trolling, I encourage using the ignore feature because it has made my experience here better.

 

[bNator]

I continue to receive many reports of trolling, with no really clear consensus as to what criteria it is identified by. Many complainants are clearly working to a different definition than I am.

This is extracted from an essay in Wikipedia on the matter: it largely describes my take on the matter. I'm interested in your thoughts on it, and you might think of it when making an accusation or wondering why I have not acted on what you might consider trolling.

Italics are my adaptations:


Remember: if a troll's intention is to cause annoyance (and if that is not the case, I would suggest they are not a troll), then showing that you are upset only rewards them.

That’s probably why people choose to report instead of showing they are upset.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

That’s probably why people choose to report instead of showing they are upset.

Indeed: and I prefer that they do so. If the showing upset goes beyond rules, than I find myself in the position of sanctioning the responder, although I do always take context into account.

But I will then apply a judgement as to whether it is trolling rather than, as that article would put it, ignorance/bias/dissent. And some make it obvious that they do not share my perception of where boundaries lie between trolling and those characteristics of debate.

 

[velaso montador]

IMO, trolling is being disengenuous just to bait others into an argument.

To those who are reporting trolling, I encourage using the ignore feature because it has made my experience here better.

Couldnt agree more with this post.