Knowing Trolls By The Company They Keep

At least you did not blame President Bush and VP Cheney for the trolls like you usually do. maybe there should be congressional hearings on trolls and maybe a cap and trade regulation on trolls so that left of center posters do not have to worry about anything but their own point of view.

Well, how else can one respond to a posting devoid of substance, save for ad hominem attacks? This post is a fine example. You have failed to put forth any logical argument at all except for your own interpretations/classifications of what is a 'troll' and what is an 'ad hominem attack'. I mean, if I call you a cocksucker is it an ad hominem attack? Some would instantly claim that it is an ad hominem attack to call you a cocksucker. However, if I were to find you kneeling in the bathroom of the Chicago O'Hare airport bathroom with Larry Craig's penis in your mouth, I would merely be stating a fact. Perhaps there are less rough terms that could be applied, but I believe that I make my point.

Try to back of your rantings with a logical argument and perhaps the troll traffic will subside. I don't see other posters being afflicted with the same problem.

Finally Shaun stands up and tells truth to power.

Trolls who snipe around the edges of Shaun’s thoughtful, balanced articles should hang their heads in shame.

Where did you find that picture? I want a print of that! (No, nothing to do with blog comment sections... I'm just a former D&D nerd and I love that stuff.)

Shaun, I'm a little left of center in my beliefs as well... but don't think that a main post on this observation was entirely necessary. Given the presence that blogs have on the internet today, most readers are accustomed to adverse statements in the comment sections - especially political blogs.

Let's look at this from a different perspective. I'll assume, for the moment, that your goal is to shift the nature of political discussion and actuality more to the left, liberal viewpoint. I'm also going to state, for the sake of this conversation, that the validity of whether commentators are trolls is from your perspective. I may or may not agree (as would others), but that's besides my point.

In some of the comment sections that I've read in the past week (at least), those supporting the right, conservative, viewpoint have lamented that TMV has strayed a bit in its goal to provide balanced reporting in favor (or quantity) of more progressive contributors. In this, I see your goal already achieving ground.

Now, here's where it gets sticky, for that goal. In authoring a main article such as the above, you're (from this reader's perspective) distracting and devaluing your own message by paying attention to something that shouldn't matter in the first place. Indeed, some readers probably never pay attention to the comment system. Conceivably, your public attention to the matter may even pique the interest of other conservative commentators, who then register on the site and increase the quantity and/or quality of those disagreements.

As a final possibility (and I write hypothetically, here, so please keep that in mind), Joe Gandleman or other main contributors to the site might read that article and say, "Hey, you know, maybe we should have a few more conservative writers than we do right now." I don't presume to know Joe's thought process on this issue, but I bring it up as a possible hinderance to your political goal, as I stated as assumed above.

Personally, I'm all for ignoring trolls and ad hominem attacks. Having experienced flame wars on usenet, chat, and blogs for the past 10 years (generally as a commentator than main author), I'd much prefer to see them put to pasture... rather than given the limelight or my time - neither of which they probably deserve.

"drag the level of discourse down into the shadows under your bridge"

What mirror talk!

What are you going to do if McCain-Palin win this November?

Hilarious!

For the last few days, one commenter has been repeatedly making comments about the exodus of a couple of right leaning bloggers that happened a while back, and falsely claiming that those bloggers left because they desired more censorship in the comment section.

Hey, who needs censorship when we can just post an article that declares that virtually all dissenting views in the comment section are without substance! No need to invoke the heavy hand, just impugn the reputation of anyone right of center here as a troll.

BTW, Shaun, did you calculate the rate of substantive comments from people who agreed with you? I'm just curious, for example, where you'd place the commenter who pondered about the state of hygiene of my 'hoo hoo'.

Uh oh!

Shaun was certainly raising the level of discussion in this forum when he posted a photshopped image of Palin in a bikini toting a gun wasn't he?

Shaun, word of advice, when you post Rovian ad hominem comments attacking a candidate, can you rightly have room to critize what someone might post on that same thread?

You can still hold anti-McCain viewpoints, just try to present with with more calm rationale and data to support your observations and less ranting and rhetoric. If you can learn to control your message in a more mature presentation, you will likely get a bit more civil criticism.

Shaun's posts carry weight because of his pedigree as a veteran journalist, and frankly, reading only right-of-center sites is like mowing your lawn every time with the same pattern: It's boring, and in the long run, it's not good for the grass. Where Shaun errs is when he includes content - how to say this? - that is coarsely "anatomical." One expects this occasionally in some of the comment threads (see PWT comment above), but what place does this have in a main post on TMV? Whether one is left, right, or somewhere in-between, can't we do better than that?

Peter_Allen:

Thank you for your THOUGHTFUL response. People who have followed my writing for years know that I'm an equal-opportunity basher. I call 'em as I see 'em. My writing is indeed provocative, but it is not an effort to move the discussion to the left or anywhere else. (See No. 13 above for how ridiculous labeling has become.)

My goal, such as it is, is to spark discussion. Which you kindly did. And trolls are incapable of responding to.

Why, I ask, is the McCain Palin carrot-and-stick strategy -- which at the same time consciously ignores their past records as died-in-the-wool Business As Usual conservative establishmentarians and steals Obama's "change" meme -- effective?

Do they really think that enough voters are so stupid as to buy this schizophrenic approach, which alternately puts The Great Rove in a dominatrix's get-up and a ballet tutu?

That to me is great food for thought, not occasion to hurl Gramm crackers.

Superdestroyer:

Hate to break it to ya, pal, but I don't consider yourself to be one of these trolls.

While your comments are seldom thoughtful and are regularly tinged with xenophobia and a touch of racism, you at least try to discuss "the issues."

CStanley,
The issue here is not that there is dissent in the comment section - if there wasn't it'd be boring - it's that Shaun's seems to receive nothing but direct insults when he posts.

Shaun, if you think that the McCain campaign's approach is condescending to voters, then how is it not equally so when Obama speaks about the dire need to change the tone of politics but then lets rip a zinger like "McCain says he'll follow Bin Laden to the gates of hell, but he won't even follow him to a cave in Pakistan?" And when his campaign repeatedly quotes the line about McCain voting with Bush 95% of the time (which is false anyway) but ignores Obama's record of lockstep with the farthest left wing of his party?

chris: so how is one to respond to an emotional diatribe that contains no factual content? When he insults others and lowers the level of discourse, he reaps what he sows- and my point is that there's no shortage of those kinds of ad hominems in the comment section directed at the more conservative commenters- but you don't see it in response to the main bloggers' articles because there are so few that lean right anyway.

"so how is one to respond to an emotional diatribe that contains no factual content?"

Bingo!

Like I said, when Shaun starts placing something other than the aforementioned diatribe, the level of commentary will improve dramatically. When he posts some facts they can be discussed, when he posts so statistics, those can be discussed, when he goes on an emotional rant without references or quotes to refer to, what can you really say?


Shaun, try doing this. Have Joe read your entries over the last several days, I think pretty much everyone here respects him, (if they don't, they aren't worth worrying about) and ask him what he thinks about the tone of your posts. If he says your doing a great job, well just ignore me and your other critics and roll with it, if he has some suggestions or comments, listen to what he says.

CStanley,
This is the first time I've seen him write an article directed at the commenters on the site. He seems to usually heap is scorn on the usual suspects: Bush, Cheney, McCain, and more recently John Edwards. And even if his posts are emotional, they are usually based around a recent revelation in the news.

If you draw opposite reactions from the news, respond and say why. Hell, you should be just as emotional, but you don't have to direct that at Shaun personally. I don't see how it's constructive or necessary.

Chris, I'd say that when I do bother to read and comment on Shaun's post, I generally do exactly as you suggest (I'd hazard a guess that Shaun doesn't consider me a troll, but I neither know that for certain nor care.) But what I find laughable is that when I do post responses like that, I in turn get responded to with comments that are every bit as substance-free as the ones Shaun's complaining of, yet Shaun feels the need to defend himself without mentioning the fact that there are partisan denigrades of all stripes who show up in the comment section.

"Where did you find that picture?"

In a Move On or Code Pink, etc., commemerative anti-war demo photo album?

Shaun,

There’s nothing wrong with being hyperpartisan and myopically dedicated to a cause.

The reason people don’t take you seriously is the same reason left-wing talk radio failed so miserably while people like Rush Limbaugh thrive. Every topic has a set of facts. You need to be able to deal with these facts in a logical manner without ignoring or dismissing the ones that don’t suit you or the ones that prevent you from reaching a forgone conclusion.

Authors and talk hosts need to be able to take their audience from point “A” to point “B” without the help of clichés or stereotypes. (These are generic examples, not actual quotes)

“Republicans don’t want affirmative action because they are racists”

“Republicans don’t care about old people, children, etc. etc.”

Where is the logic? Where is the intellect?

You claim to have been a journalist at some point. Try to find whatever skills you had previously and use them to make a new start.

No amount of Gramm crackers, with or without milk, will wrest the list of Ad Hominem Trolls from my grubby mitts.

CStanley said: "For the last few days, one commenter has been repeatedly making comments about the exodus of a couple of right leaning bloggers that happened a while back, and falsely claiming that those bloggers left because they desired more censorship in the comment section."

I'd ask Jason to help you out there CStanley but it seems he's busy just now...

Jason, Managing Editor
September 4, 2008 @ 8:35 pm CEST

I would still call it censorship simply because it reminds you that there are some dangers involved.

The best way to guard against that is to constantly be slightly uncomfortable with what you are doing.

I would caution against getting overly dramatic here. Whenever we do delete a comment, it doesn’t mean that the person is being stopped from expressing a viewpoint. It only means that they are not allowed to express that viewpoint in that way HERE. They remain free to avail themselves of the seemingly infinite number of other forums.

This is just a relatively small blog. Let’s not pretend that it is anyone’s sole source of news or anyone’s sole outlet for personal political expression.

I won't post a link but you know where to look CStanley if you question the accuracy of the quote.

Jazz,

Here is a the pic you liked:

http://bp2.blogger.com/_S7VnD0PV1GY/RxZlcS_9D0I...

Enjoy

I know for a fact that some of the talking heads on television media outlets are furious that this site doesn't hand-pick comments like over at Huffington Post.

Their bid is for censorship. And it would make sense that a couple of them went whining off all pissy because they couldn't coerce the mods to hand pick the "truth". The truth will seep through the cracks of a din of voices.

Let me guess....I was one of the posters they wanted censored?

I could be wrong...just a hunch...

SteveK, I assume you are familiar with the comment policy of this site, specifically rules #5 and #6 which also explicitly describes a policy of censorship. The bloggers who left here felt that that policy was being enforced for some of the bloggers but not uniformly for others. Whether or not that's the case is a matter of opinion, and I'm sure you and I would differ on that opinion. I find it really juvenile, though, that people like you continue to want to gloat over 'running them off' or insulting them as you do, rather than just taking Joe's lead when he says that there was simply unreconcilable differences and those bloggers moved on to their own venues.

Unfortunately trolls are an all too common phenomenon in forums and blogs, and they are easily identified by their M.O. which is to provide much heat and very little light. It's amazing in fact how much they have in common, and I say that based on other political forums I've taken part in. These troll are often amazingly interchangeable. In some ways I suppose you could say it's a metaphor for the larger political scene, but we don't have to go that far afield to get the picture. Too bad there isn't some physiological auto-disconnect between the ability to type and the inability to communicate in a mature, rational and respectful way.

"so how is one to respond to an emotional diatribe that contains no factual content?"

Maybe just don't comment. Look, almost all of Shaun's posts at this point are basically the same. I don't even read them most of the time, unless I'm in the mood for some blind partisanship. It's almost like there are a set of people (not naming names) who sit around waiting for Shaun to post so they can try and throw out some anti-left zingers. Kinda boring in my opinion.

It's like when my younger brother used to annoy me. My mom would always tell me to ignore him. I would and he would stop.

CStanley : "...there are partisan denigrades of all stripes who show up in the comment section"

I assume you meant to say "denigrates" - meaning, "to charge falsely or with malicious intent" - in which case I would say we have one such person who shows up in the comments section on a very regular basis. I also think most of us know who this is. Passionate belief and animated conversation is one thing, but intentional disrespect and deliberate insult are quite another.

One other comment here, and this is in response to some of the criticism coming toward Shaun from the rightward direction. There is a difference between disagreement with someone because they subscribe to a different philosophy or ideology - and disagreeing with someone because they tend to be direct and cut to the chase. I'm more concerned about respect for factual content than I am about how gently those facts are delivered.

I'd expect this sort of post from you, jerk-off!!!1!

Okay all kidding aside, trolling is a part of modern life. Clearly some people can't help themselves. At this point I get more upset when I see otherwise intelligent people feeding trolls, y'know?

(I briefly considered writing this in all-caps.)

To me, Jspencer, the issue isn't directness, it's the completely emotional tenor which treats opinion as a foregone conclusion and does nothing other than insult anyone who might hold a different opinion (IOW, there's a lack of any supporting evidence for the opinion that's being expressed.)

Chriswww mentioned earlier that he feels that people should just feel free to respond in kind, with passion and emotion. Well, I disagree; it's not that there's not a place for passionate opinion, but when it's devoid of any intellectual basis then it exacerbates the divisive political atmosphere. It's the phenomenon that we see all the time now (so much so that I think a lot of people aren't even aware when they're doing it) of impugning motives of their political opponents instead of debating ideas.

By they way, shout out to the folks in this thread who have positive disqus ratings. (There goes mine!)

Good one Janine. You should have done the caps. ;-)

I am now a troll! Given the source of the charge, I am honored.

BTW - re: your last post before this one, Shaun. What was that, except a rambling diatribe of vilely expressed spittle? How in the world can an intelligent reply be made to that drivel?

I have often shown that when I desire, and reciprocated, I am more than capable of being involved in reasonable discourse, even with those I disagree with. Just rarely with you, as you are equally unreasonable as I can be. I just don't hide behind the shadow of my old, but now failed, career are a journalist to pretend I am being something that I am not.

Talk about poking-the-bear Shaun. I believe the post you speak of was one that didn't have much substance. Are you trying to claim it was a test to bring out the trolls? PLEASE, I don't even believe that.

There are some "left of center trolls" here too Shaun, but did you mention them?

Just because someone is right-of-center from me I don't think they are automatically a troll: CStanly, Jazz, AR, and others come to mind. I may not agree with them, but I do enjoy reading their posts. I try [NOT] to insult their beliefs as I'd hope they would give me the same courtesy.

Real trolls are here, but not as many as you seem to imply in this post.

Jainedm - I don't worry about my rating (obviously), but other than CS (Jazz, too), is there one other right-leaning commentator here that has a positive rating? If there are, do any of them have a rating over 50?

Meanwhile, ChrisWWW, who can give as good as he gets in the attack department, and others have ratings in the hundreds.

No left-leaning bias here you looky-loos. Move along.

There's a rating system? Who knew?

Rambie-hear, hear, and right back at ya. There are certain people here who keep me coming back, and I often have the image of the Warner Bros. cartoon with the sheepdog and the wolf- it's like we punch our timecards and go at it, but at the end of the day we punch out and say, "see ya in the morning."

AR,
I was wondering when someone would bring that up. +1 :-)

LOL, now that I look at the various ratings, they're hilarious! How does one earn these points, anyway? Looks like I'm slightly ahead of you, SteveK- but chriswww is blowing everyone out of the water.

So how can I fluff up my points? Might be kind of fun to be voted "Miss Congeniality of TMV."

CStanley,
It's because I waste inexcusable amounts of time here. But back when I also wasted my time at Captain Ed's my rating was like -70 ;-)

+1 for your trouble.

Seriously, what does one's disqus rating reflect? And who gives them to you?

BTW - ChrisWWW, don't tell anyone, but I enjoy sparring with you. Good wit.

AR,
Same here. I have hope for American conservatism when I argue with you and CStanley.

Rico,
http://disqus.com/docs/help/#faq-11

I am rated here at something like negative 273 last time I checked...lol......just checked again...-239 now... heh... Did I receive some strokes I didn't know about?

**
"Chriswww mentioned earlier that he feels that people should just feel free to respond in kind, with passion and emotion. Well, I disagree; it's not that there's not a place for passionate opinion, but when it's devoid of any intellectual basis then it exacerbates the divisive political atmosphere. It's the phenomenon that we see all the time now (so much so that I think a lot of people aren't even aware when they're doing it)"~ CStanley
******

Yes and encouraging "emotions" (read: emotional flame wars) is an excellent distraction from real issues we should be calmly and strategically discussing.

I've noticed that Chriswww does like to divert..among other things..

CStanley, great analogy - the sheepdog and wolf punching timecards. I made the same observation in a different politcal forum once and wasn't sure anyone there would get the reference. As for the "ratings", I don't pay much attention to them.

You never noticed? You rate each other with those little arrows. The fun thing is that the disqus has legs. Most people with tumblrs, for example use disqus. So a goo rating doesn't necessarily make you the nobility of TMV. Now that I've pointed that out, I want you to be cool, everybody.

To be honest, I'm slanted towards the left, so some offensive stuff very likely gets past me, but I don't like trolling on either side. It's actually very embarrassing when a troll shares my views.

That said, it doesn't look like honest facts and public opinions do not favor the Right right now. Don't blame me, Republican politicians betrayed you, not me. I didn't create unfortunate facts about the economy, torture, civil liberties, the constitution, etc. But if I decide to use them, even in defiance, we can't pretend that, say, Rev. Wright is a decent comeback. However, I defend anyone's right to post whatever they want, especially ones that make me look right-er, which is, like, all of them. ; )

Using Shaun as a piñata has proven so popular with the TMV crowd, I believe we should make this a weekly feature.

This all gets a little absurd after awhile. Each of us believes our views to be correct and my experience is that few people here are very likely to change the way they think. A little more effort toward respect and honesty might be the most we can hope for.

hello there everyone: Just a few clarifications, coming in here hopefully a little under the radar. We editors and assistant editors and columnists do not talk over commenters' comments, nor discuss people's motives or worth as human beings. We generally do not edit comments normally, sometimes allowing really long essays as 'comments' which as our readership continues to climb and comments grow, we may have to edit down because it takes up so much space. But it's not for agreement or disagreement with the comment or commenter

I'm with CStanley and others who dont grok the Disqus 'rating system,' which I think, not sure, appears that anyone from anywhere can load up negs or positives toward anyone just by hitting a button. I would say 'the ratings' hold as much importance as a slam book in high school, in other words, an outlet for some people's energy, rather than accurate portrayal. Personally,I find that aspect of Disqus un-useful. We had to change from our old comment system to a new one in order to carry the increasingly heavy load of comments each day. There are worse ones, and Disqus is one of the better ones for load and range of features for the commenter... you can, for instance, order the comments as you would like to read them.. oldest or youngest first, re-edit if you made an error or typo, etc.

The only time we discuss a comment/commenter amongst the editors is when a person consistently attacks others with threats of harm, or ad hominem attacks, or attempting often to hijack the thread into their personal screed-fest. Then we do discuss that. Often, the editor in chief sends an email to the person telling them to cease. In the very few cases I've seen over the 18 mos I've been at TMV, I've seen one person banned who insisted, despite repeated notice, to continue using vulgar language attacking other commenters relentlessly, using the forums to not comment on the articles, but about themselves.

Many days, several of us assistant editors 'cruise' the comments sections of our own articles, (and some days, the entire site) just to see that people are not trying to silence each other with personal attacks... or in other ways do more than discuss, debate, teach, opine

Though I feel qualms always about taking on an angry commenter who has gotten 'out there' and is violating the rules of the blogsite, I do, as many of you have seen, show up a little like a prairie dog, and ask commenters to return to the topic at hand, and /or to cease bashing people personally... to return, hopefully, to discussing the issues in the article. Then, like said prairie dog, I jump back into my burrow

Personally, I find that commenters who have gotten a little to a lot into slapping others around, will cease when asked in a civil tone.

As Shaun says, there are a jillion places online for people to unleash attacks rather than debate. I would agree that there are many sites that are pages and pages of comments by persons who seem to have agendas different than that at TMV

I dont know if it is germaine to say here that I find value in each of my co-bloggers here, and in the commenters as well. And I learn a great deal from our commenters also. Neoncon, for instance, knows huge amounts about internet dams and open roads, and has left long comments detailing his knowledge. I read to learn, more than I read to fight for a point of view, although I can see the art in that also. I read to find the places to perhaps say something useful in repsonse. I find that people read and comment for many complicated reasons, and this is just my two cents worth. My co-bloggers all have individual opinions and ideas about the blogosphere culture which we all write about from time to time

Mainly I wanted to clarify that here at TMV, we dont have some kind of hierarchy of 'bad commenters' versus 'good commenters.

We do notice that our commenters are articulate, passionate, all bringing different experiences to the discussions, often filled with humor (which I particularly appreciate, many of you make my day --and prob many others' too-- with your funny or silly comments that are right on...lots of coffee-spewing some days. lol) as well as realtime insightful and critical info

So, that's just the lay of the land as I know it. TMV values its cobloggers and its commenters. And sometimes, it is true, that the lean is hard on negativity... I do know that because at TMV we all write without pay that an occasional atta boy or atta girl can mean a lot to us. That's not at all to say anyone here is a wuss. Most of us are hugely battle-scarred. But also take nourishment as we trudge forward, even hardtack, as a good thing

just my very two cents worth.

And if everyone would insist, I think we could have a "I'm the Real Troll" contest, but I'd rather just have a comraderie at TMV... every family has their strange wonderful and odd people; their smart, uncanny, factual, dreaming people. That's TMV also; writers and commenters, all.

dr.e
assistant editor, tmv columnist

“…….every family has their strange wonderful and odd people…….”

It wasn’t that many years ago that families would keep their “odd” members secluded in an attic.

Now, they get keyboards and write of trolls.

"You never noticed? You rate each other with those little arrows."

I guess I had blinders on, no I never paid attention to them before. Didn't know what the points were really for nor really care, I had 15+ score.

shaun:

i for one, would like to apologize for any unnecessarily acid comments or replies i may have left here. personally, i like the mix of views, left and right; i was a reader here long before becoming a commenter.

i think, tho, that we will always see this kind of thing during electoral seasons: just as many sports fan come to cheer on their team, many folks who are typically uninterested in politics come out of the woodwork, and, unfortunately, very few of the part-timers have any real clue as to the "facts" they are "cheering".

I would agree we have issues with trolls from time to time but would not limit them to one particular partisan viewpoint.

We've got many many wonderful posters from the left and the right.

We've got a few trolls, also from both the left and the right.

atta girl, Dr. E!

When it comes to penis enlargement or marire penis most people tend to buy different accessories which really work (some better than others) but I don't get it with the pills. Would people really expect to grow their equipment with pills ?

I am Very thank full the owner of this blog. Because of this blog is very imformative for me, - Best Penis Enlargement - We list and review the Top Penis Enlargement in market