Hey trolls, tone it down.

[The Duke]

Hey trolls, tone it down.  We're losing posters because of the hyperpartisans.

[A18]

I consider this thread to be trollish.

[The Duke]

I consider this thread to be trollish.

Its true thouguh.  We almost lost Al this morning.

The new trolls aren't funny like John and Bandit.  They're just idiots.  Not naming names, but some people have come here over the last few months and they've cut the quality of this board.

[bgwah]

Then leave. No one will miss you.

[The Vorlon]

Best way to deal with trolls is to utterly ignore them.

If they start a thread and nobody replies, or if their posts get no replies they will either give up and leave, or modift their behavior.

I have nothing to actually add beyond this, I just love this graphic and now have an opportunity to use it again

[CARLHAYDEN]

Then leave. No one will miss you.

I emphatically disagree!

John has been an asset to this forum.

Hope he stays.

[The Duke]

Then leave. No one will miss you.

I emphatically disagree!

John has been an asset to this forum.

Hope he stays.

Yeah, I think I'll stay.  I'm operating under the assumption that no one cares what Bgwah says.

[Defarge]

We must pass anti-troll legislation, lest the forums be inundated with these nuicances!

[CARLHAYDEN]

I'm pretty much a 'free speech' advocate myself.

I believe that tolerating people with outlandish posts is a price we pay.

Actually, the posters generally thought of as trolls end up discrediting their positions with their rhetoric.

[muon2]

I'm pretty much a 'free speech' advocate myself.

I believe that tolerating people with outlandish posts is a price we pay.

Actually, the posters generally thought of as trolls end up discrediting their positions with their rhetoric.

I agree. I try to give any poster the benefit of the doubt. If they hang themselves with their own words, so be it.

OTOH, I understand exactly what John Ford is saying. I may have a thick skin, but there are many other fine posters here who will only take so much garbage before they bail out. That would be a shame, since this forum has had many remarkable and worthy debates. It continues to be a source of bipartisan analysis, and I troly hope it can remain that way.

[afleitch]

I almost left. But this is the best, if not the only forum of it's type and it would be sad to leave it rust because it was taken for a joyride.

[CARLHAYDEN]

I would draw the line at someone who uses threatening language (as opposed to merely expressing, in my view, stupid/crazy view) or whom spams other members of this forum.

I would also suggest that Dave might want to consider limiting the number of threads a new member may start.  

[A18]

Or just the number of new threads a nomorelies can start.

[Nym90]

I've even thought of leaving a time or two, though I doubt I actually would.

[freedomburns]

Everyone gets a little heated from time to time, and that's ok.  Consistently acting like a troll should be cause to get you banned.  Then there are the annoying posters who think that the quantity of their postings somehow makes up for the poor quality of their (often very short) postings.

Real questions - how do we get MarkDel to come back?  I nominate him for supreme dictator for life, or honorary president of the forum.

[ElectionAtlas]

Hi,
I'm concerned about this.  I added the forum to the site with the desire to have a mechanism for intelligent, thoughtful debate on elections, as well as a means for visitors to help one-another learn more about elections.  I have no desire to see it bogged down with posters only interested in emotional flames unwilling to listen to another point-of-view.  A while back I had mentioned the possibility for a member-only forum, but had enough negative feedback to drop the idea.  Another possibility, however, is to provide a forum by invitation only.  There are enough regular members that I could set it up such that one has to apply for membership or be referred by someone already established.  Thoughts?
Thanks,
Dave

[Keystone Phil]

Another possibility, however, is to provide a forum by invitation only.  There are enough regular members that I could set it up such that one has to apply for membership or be referred by someone already established.  Thoughts?
Thanks,
Dave

Sounds good to me.

[J. J.]

I'm new, so what's a troll?

[TeePee4Prez]

Am I a troll?  Come one I don't thinkI'm that bad.  Trolls are fun to knock down!

[Nym90]

Hi,
I'm concerned about this.  I added the forum to the site with the desire to have a mechanism for intelligent, thoughtful debate on elections, as well as a means for visitors to help one-another learn more about elections.  I have no desire to see it bogged down with posters only interested in emotional flames unwilling to listen to another point-of-view.  A while back I had mentioned the possibility for a member-only forum, but had enough negative feedback to drop the idea.  Another possibility, however, is to provide a forum by invitation only.  There are enough regular members that I could set it up such that one has to apply for membership or be referred by someone already established.  Thoughts?
Thanks,
Dave

I would oppose this. However Dave, is it possible to set up a "killfile" in which one could automatically ignore all posts from a particular poster? Thus, that person's posts would not show up at all when you view the forum.

I'm not sure if that's possible, but some sort of an ignore feature would be a much better solution IMO.

[The Duke]

I think all that has to happen is for real posters to ignore trolls and not get discouraged and leave and for trolls to learn to respect the other forumgoers.  Learning to be tolerant of other points of view is not just of benefit to this forum, but its a life skill that everyone needs to learn.

[Gabu]

I'm new, so what's a troll?

"Troll" is a term that originated on Usenet boards a while ago; its basic meaning is one who posts deliberately inflammatory or confrontational remarks with the sole intention of arousing anger and/or "flame wars" (strings of highly aggressive posts exchanged between users).

[CARLHAYDEN]

Hi,
I'm concerned about this.  I added the forum to the site with the desire to have a mechanism for intelligent, thoughtful debate on elections, as well as a means for visitors to help one-another learn more about elections.  I have no desire to see it bogged down with posters only interested in emotional flames unwilling to listen to another point-of-view.  A while back I had mentioned the possibility for a member-only forum, but had enough negative feedback to drop the idea.  Another possibility, however, is to provide a forum by invitation only.  There are enough regular members that I could set it up such that one has to apply for membership or be referred by someone already established.  Thoughts?
Thanks,
Dave

First, I would prefer it to avoid either a 'members only' forum or one available only by invitation as it might tend to deny useful additions to this forum.

Second, I would suggest that new posters be subject to a limitation on the number of threads they can start.

Third, I would suggest that a "condition of use" include an admonition against threats or spamming.

Fourth, for the 'slow' I would suggest that they be advised by email (if feasible) that their conduct (specified) has breached standards of the forum and warned that subsequent violations may result in their being dropped from the forum.

Hey, its your forum, but these are my random thoughts, which you requested.

[Gabu]

Learning to be tolerant of other points of view is not just of benefit to this forum, but its a life skill that everyone needs to learn.

Preach it, brother.

[Gabu]

Hi,
I'm concerned about this.  I added the forum to the site with the desire to have a mechanism for intelligent, thoughtful debate on elections, as well as a means for visitors to help one-another learn more about elections.  I have no desire to see it bogged down with posters only interested in emotional flames unwilling to listen to another point-of-view.  A while back I had mentioned the possibility for a member-only forum, but had enough negative feedback to drop the idea.  Another possibility, however, is to provide a forum by invitation only.  There are enough regular members that I could set it up such that one has to apply for membership or be referred by someone already established.  Thoughts?
Thanks,
Dave

I would oppose this. However Dave, is it possible to set up a "killfile" in which one could automatically ignore all posts from a particular poster? Thus, that person's posts would not show up at all when you view the forum.

I'm not sure if that's possible, but some sort of an ignore feature would be a much better solution IMO.

The only problem with this is that if someone responds to the ignored post, you would only see the response, and that could get quite confusing if the ignored person posts multiple times.