anti-trolling rules

[Steve]

Again im taking a harder stance against trolls and generally counterproductive behavior. It just takes one dickhead to cause trouble and degrade the forum.

Realistically its easy to see if someone has a personal vendetta and is just trying to piss someone off. But there still needs to be clearer guidelines to what is considered trolling.

Inportantly, the rules need to allow free speech, without tolerating blatant bullshit, or even an obvious attempt to bend the rules.

Heres how i define trolling so far. Its your community too. Please give feedback. Basically we want to stop troublemakers, but not protect complete ignorance, which is the required balance for productivity.


TROLLING DEFINITION

Without significant provocation, posts material with intent to annoy another member, in particularly when posts:

-contain opinion, rather than verifiable fact, and do not include a clear explanation of how others can verify the material's accuracy,

- contains repetitive information that all thread contributors reasonably already know

- appears more like a deliberate attempt to annoy any member, rather than a constructive or well-intentioned response.

- Repeatedly interupts and interferes in a thread, where the OP has clearly asked them to stay out of.

It is considered 'intent' when the offending member ought reasonably to know their behavior is considered trolling.

[Steve]

I've added the rule as below. Mods please take note. If you're unsure what to do in a particular case, let me know.

10. NO TROLLING. Trolls will either be moderated or banned. The definition of trolling:

Without significant provocation, posts material with intent to annoy another member, in particularly when posts:

          - Contain opinion, rather than verifiable fact, and do not include a clear explanation of how others can verify the material's accuracy.

          - Contain repetitive information that all thread contributors reasonably already know.

          - Appears more like a deliberate attempt to annoy any member, rather than a constructive response with good intention.

          - Repeatedly interrupts and interferes in a thread, where the OP has clearly asked them to stay out of.

It is considered 'intent' when the offending member ought reasonably to know their behavior is considered trolling.


If anyone feels someone is trolling, remind them of this rule and if they keep going, just report them AND give actual details of what they're doing.

[nottophammer]

[Turner]

I get Nottos response

@Steve, many here will see your no.10 as a perfect description of Caleb, who you allow to post freely without rebuttal.

As a Mod, I see caleb...for want of a less amusing phrase....half man, half troll.

Yes he is stating mathematical facts (over and over to a mind numbin boring level), but if you see it as a teacher roll, you are naive.

He uses the esoteric world of biased play to present a fake authoritarian roll which is used to belittle the "forumtards"

I have degree level maths and he said he doesnt believe me. Thats it in a nutshell.

He doesnt want to engage with others views or experience. He just wants some superior trip at the expense of others

That, my friend, is your true troll.

His agenda is calculated at a much wider level

Just look at the history of the game....hes been doing this MO for 10 years that I know of

[Steve]

Notto, what do you think the best thing to do when someone annoyingly butts in a conversation and explains the mistakes?

I've give you a section where neither he or i will post. The new rules are clear.

Please, answer the question. Often people criticize, without offering resolution of their own.

[Steve]

Yes he is stating mathematical facts, but if you see it as a teacher roll, you are naive.

As I said before, he flips between productive an unproductive. My view is if he can avoid the asshole part here, he is beneficial. Not because I view him as an expert. He may be an expert in his field, but that's not a consideration for me. I'm only considering that he understands basics everyone should.

He uses the esoteric world of biased play to present a fake authoritarian roll which is used to belittle the "forumtards"

I don't agree with him on everything, but I don't make it a point of discussion. As for belittling people, yes I agree, but you're also looking at part of the story.

Sometimes he's an outright ass. Sometimes he is helpful. Can you imagine being on a flat earth forum, where nobody seems to listen to reason? You'll get sick of it, and start to have a dig at some of the members and their logic. You just aren't getting through to them. Where caleb should just get on with life, he tends to continue. But you know he mostly just isnt well-liked. I dont see why people cant just ignore him if they dont like him. If he butts in on conversations, then ask him to butt out and if he persists, you can either discuss only in the system player forum, or he'll be moderated. He knows the rules here are different to other forums.

He doesnt want to engage with others views or experience. He just wants some superior trip a the expense of others

In some cases, depending on his mood for the day, yes I agree.

But again you know people you do and don't like exist in everyday life too. There shouldn't be a big deal about it.

[Turner]

Anyways, thanks for rule 10

It will come in handy