ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Saturday, August 13, 2016

A new rule

Apparently this was insufficient warning for some commenters:

14. If you give a moderator reason to believe that you are not interested in honest, straightforward interaction, he will simply spam your comments. Continued attempts to post comments here will be considered harassment and dealt with accordingly. 

So, I'm adding a new Rule 17.

17. Speak for yourself, not for anyone else. If you falsely characterize or inaccurately summarize someone else's statements, arguments, or conclusions, your comments may be deleted and you may be banned. This is particularly true if you attempt to falsely characterize or inaccurately summarize something I have written.

I'm not going to be playing Summary Cop, so don't complain about this sort of thing at every possible opportunity. It's not a weapon for commenters to use against each other, it's intended to shut down a common professional troll tactic. The moderators and I will apply it judiciously, as we see fit.

You can speak your own opinion. You can criticize my opinion and the opinions of the other commenters. But what you are not permitted to do is to try to speak for others in order to set up straw men that you can criticize in lieu of their actual opinions.

And if you're not sure of what someone else is saying, the solution is eminently simple. Just ASK them for clarification. It's not that hard.

Labels:

72 Comments:

Blogger Verne August 13, 2016 9:43 AM  

That is going to far, you are now blatantly discriminating against the noble straw person of indeterminate gender

Blogger Unknown August 13, 2016 9:46 AM  

I apologize.

I should have asked for clarification of you argument rather than assume it and respond flippantly.

This will be my last post.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan August 13, 2016 9:51 AM  

Good, SJW are nothing but trolls, you never can get them to explain anything in any detail, basically just little gossipy bitches playing the female hierarchy game of petty meanness.

Just asking them to explain anything in any amount of detail is a micro aggression or whatever it's called. It is no wonder they will not debate anyone of any intelligence.

Anonymous Faceless August 13, 2016 10:03 AM  

The cantina band still plays the best tunes!!

Blogger Verne August 13, 2016 10:10 AM  

Let me complement you on the way you handle trolls. I watched my daughter's blog get over run with them. She gave them to much slack, then would block them. Then let discussion about the block take over the comments. They turned a very popular blog that addressed serious subjects into a drama fest. The goal of a troll is to become the subject of discussion. Ruthless but quite elimination of them is the best policy

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey August 13, 2016 10:11 AM  

That's a very sensible rule.

Anonymous Trevor163 August 13, 2016 10:17 AM  

Great rule!

Too often those who disagree with opinions of Alt Righters are entirely false characterized for any number of purposes.

Blogger Krul August 13, 2016 10:19 AM  

"You seem to be saying.."

Blogger JDC August 13, 2016 10:35 AM  

Great rule. I often hear this in the church setting, but the set up is a bit different, "People are upset about _______...I just wanted you to know about it."

Nine times out of ten the issue regards the person making the report.

Blogger VD August 13, 2016 10:42 AM  

I apologize.

I should have asked for clarification of you argument rather than assume it and respond flippantly.

This will be my last post.


It doesn't have to be. I've rescinded the ban on the basis of your being flippant rather than disruptive. However, this is a legitimate tactic being utilized by the professional trolls, so it's one that is ill-advised.

It's important to understand that there really are people commenting here who are being paid to try to disrupt the discourse and discredit the blog. Most of them, we are able to quickly ID and neutralize, but it makes it harder when legitimate commenters behave the same way because they are "just having fun or whatever".

Blogger VD August 13, 2016 10:48 AM  

Let me complement you on the way you handle trolls. I watched my daughter's blog get over run with them. She gave them to much slack, then would block them. Then let discussion about the block take over the comments. They turned a very popular blog that addressed serious subjects into a drama fest.

Grazie. As a veteran game developer, I have considerable experience dealing with griefers. Blog trolls are a piece of cake by comparison. The key is to understand that very little of the disruption and drama is unintended.

The goal of a troll is to become the subject of discussion.

Exactly. There are a number of commenters to whom I pay particular attention because they always tend to bring the discussion around to themselves. Or, alternatively, to me.

When it looks like I am responding with a knee-jerk reaction, it is usually a long-overdue response to someone on whom I have had my eye for a while finally crossing a clear line.

Blogger Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus August 13, 2016 10:49 AM  

So I can't post and pretend to be Donald Trump?

Well, there goes that.

Blogger Robert What? August 13, 2016 10:49 AM  

I'd like to summarize what Vox thinks about several subjects ...

Blogger Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus August 13, 2016 10:52 AM  

Great rule. I often hear this in the church setting, but the set up is a bit different, "People are upset about _______...I just wanted you to know about it."

"Then have them come to me directly."

That'll usually be the last you hear of it.

Blogger JDC August 13, 2016 11:02 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Were-Puppy August 13, 2016 11:08 AM  

Hi Vox,

I found an interesting link about pro trolls the other day, not sure if you have seen it. Describes how they work in real life, as well as how they can disrupt message boards.

http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/01/27/disinformation-part-1-how-trolls-control-an-internet-forum/

http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/02/02/disinformation-part-2-detailed-tips-for-trolls/

http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/02/11/disinformation-part-3-cointelpro-up-close-and-personal/


There are some larger corporations that also engage in this activity, at the least just to gather intel on their opponents.

Blogger Unknown August 13, 2016 11:11 AM  

VD wrote:It doesn't have to be. I've rescinded the ban on the basis of your being flippant rather than disruptive. However, this is a legitimate tactic being utilized by the professional trolls, so it's one that is ill-advised.

I saw your acceptance of my apology in the other thread. Thank you.

Blogger JDC August 13, 2016 11:13 AM  

"Then have them come to me directly."

Excellent advice sir. I use a similar approach. I inform them that unless I can speak to the person directly, I am unable to address the situation properly. Often, they will add, "The person asked me to keep their name confidential."

To which I respond, "Then there's nothing I can do. Thank you." I have also learned to immediately trash any unsigned letters, once I have determined they are of the complaint type. Too often people want to simply dump their garbage and leave, and aren't interested in discussion or a resolution to their problem. Which is usually regarding something trivial.

Blogger Nick S August 13, 2016 11:17 AM  

There's rules?

Blogger Doom August 13, 2016 11:27 AM  

All I will ask is, if I cross the line that you give me a warning. It probably means an end, I'd rather go than get booted. I'll bet you were surprised when I left your ss gaming site? I told you, and I left. And, to be honest, you were right. Still... Give me a warning first. Yeah... I push the line. There are several types who do that. Which I am is... I have no clue or care. But I do push the line.

Anonymous Cadwallander J August 13, 2016 11:28 AM  

Sorry to be OT, on troll thread no less, but looking for Vox and Ilk advice:

I'm going to have a chance to speak to Trump at an upcoming fundraiser. If you had one sentence you deliver to him to encourage and support his candidacy, what would it be?

Anonymous The Ramones August 13, 2016 11:33 AM  

Rule Number 6: There is nooooooooooo Rule Number 6.

Also, there is NO cannibalism in the Royal Navy. Now get that leg out of here.

Anonymous Instasetting August 13, 2016 11:33 AM  

Back in the day there was this sister Saint who when you gossipped to her would ask you to come with her to go talk to the person being targetted, or retract. If you refused, she'd grab you by the ear, and haul you over to the person you just gossipped about.

Anonymous Susan August 13, 2016 11:36 AM  

Excellent post. I am pleased to see that you and several other of my favorite blogs are dealing with the weeding and troll stomping in a more direct fashion.

Not doing so, in large part to the policies of when the Chickenhawk and a couple of RINOS were in charge of Breitbart, is why so many good commenters went elsewhere. They have a real problem on that site with very aggressive trolls and a serious lack of moderation.

Blogger Were-Puppy August 13, 2016 11:40 AM  

@21 Cadwallander J

I'm going to have a chance to speak to Trump at an upcoming fundraiser. If you had one sentence you deliver to him to encourage and support his candidacy, what would it be?
---

Help us Trumpiwan, you're our only hope

Blogger Were-Puppy August 13, 2016 11:43 AM  

@24 Susan

Not doing so, in large part to the policies of when the Chickenhawk and a couple of RINOS were in charge of Breitbart, is why so many good commenters went elsewhere. They have a real problem on that site with very aggressive trolls and a serious lack of moderation.
---

BB has a very fun comment section. The trolls have dropped in quality big time since they went Clinton. It's a great place for people to practice and learn to battle trolls and defend their positions.

If you see my comments there, it is mostly me trying rhetoric and memes out.

I can report that a lot of them just disappear if you challenge them in the slightest.

Anonymous DT August 13, 2016 11:58 AM  

@19 - There's rules?

Of course there's rules.

This is not 'Nam.

Anonymous Frankenstein McBadperson August 13, 2016 12:07 PM  

"If you had one sentence you deliver to [Trump] to encourage and support his candidacy, what would it be?"

--After you win the election, treat "The GULAG Archipelago" as an instruction manual.

Blogger VD August 13, 2016 12:17 PM  

All I will ask is, if I cross the line that you give me a warning.

I almost always give people a warning, particularly known quantities. It's only when it is a new name who is showing recognizable signs of being a known troll that I don't bother.

Anonymous Wyrd August 13, 2016 12:22 PM  

--After you win the election, treat "The GULAG Archipelago" as an instruction manual.

As someone who's read all of The Gulag Archipelago, all I can say is "da fuk?!"

Blogger Dave August 13, 2016 12:29 PM  

I'm going to have a chance to speak to Trump at an upcoming fundraiser. If you had one sentence you deliver to him to encourage and support his candidacy, what would it be?


"I really like your hair?"

"Can you get me a free room at Trump Taj Mahal for the the weekend?"

"Does your wife have any younger sisters?"

That's just a few off the top of my head.

Anonymous Frankenstein McBadperson August 13, 2016 12:31 PM  

"As someone who's read all of The Gulag Archipelago, all I can say is "da fuk?!"

There's an old joke that Orwell wrote 1984 and Animal Farm as warnings, but the Left treats them as instruction manuals. I wasn't referring to the specific content of Solzhenitsyn (sp?), but that there's roughly a million and a half people in this country who deserve a very long vacation in Alaska. And I'm not talking about street criminals.

Anonymous Cadwallander J August 13, 2016 12:38 PM  

@25, @28, @31

Knew it - as soon as I hit publish. My pre-post sarcastic:serious ratio prediction was 10:1. I just thought Nate and Josh would be leading the charge.

Anonymous Wyrd August 13, 2016 12:39 PM  

There's an old joke that Orwell wrote 1984 and Animal Farm as warnings, but the Left treats them as instruction manuals.

My personal quip is the Left considers them spank material. Thanks for the clarification.

Blogger Doom August 13, 2016 12:42 PM  

McBadperson,

Sort of ot, but not completely. I like the notion. The numbers may be a little anemic. Though, I think if vacations were dispensed without warning, and with a very simple but accurate formula, the others would realize their mistake. Now, I can't remember if those vacations were actually murders. Which I wouldn't support, not directly or by this nation. Deserved? Maybe. Probably for some. As well, it wouldn't be Alaska. For a small handling fee I am betting Nork, China, Russia, and some others, would gladly take some folk who support their ideology in. Of course, we would have to understand that, in spite of those sent supporting those regimes, they would need reeducation. And, as well, we understand that some, especially those types we would be sending, do not educate well... so... there would be some losses. However, it would be seen as the price of repatriation, not as a loss sum total. Cracking eggs? Uhrm, if they insist. Only keep it to them and theirs and let them enjoy. Just... some thoughts.

Blogger Dave August 13, 2016 12:43 PM  

My pre-post sarcastic:serious ratio prediction was 10:1.

So if mine count as three plus the other two; then one of the next five might be serious.

Anonymous NorthernHamlet August 13, 2016 12:55 PM  

We have 17 rules?

And here I thought the only one was don't say you like glocks. ...or scotch.

(Slowly sips an 18 year highland.)

Blogger Dave August 13, 2016 1:04 PM  

Help us Trumpiwan, you're our only hope

What Were-Puppy wrote is really the gist of it. Is there one definitive sentence that will carry Trump the next three months?

If it were the left it would be easy; Hillary would tell us that at almost every campaign stop, a precocious child would bashfully approach and tell her: "Mrs. Clinton, you have to win because Trump is Hitler."

Blogger Josh August 13, 2016 1:20 PM  

What Were-Puppy wrote is really the gist of it. Is there one definitive sentence that will carry Trump the next three months?

Yes. "stay on target."

Anonymous Frankenstein McBadperson August 13, 2016 1:29 PM  

Actually, Trump himself said the best thing about his campaign. (For all the nastiness he gets, he's actually a surprisingly effective public speaker, he's very good to listen to after the banalities of Hitlery and Romney, the pompous windbag nonsense of Obama, and the sheer clumsiness and idiocy of George Bush.)

What Trump said in one of his speeches was, "Hitlery's slogan is 'I'm with her.' My thinking is, 'I'm with YOU.'"

Cool beans.

Anonymous Wyrd August 13, 2016 1:35 PM  

Trump has taken our political talk from weak-sauce rhetoric to directly drinking from the fire-hose (Weird Al's UHF reference from those playing from home). A lot of people can't stand the Gs.

Blogger Jim Carroll August 13, 2016 1:56 PM  

I'm surprised by the details that resulted in this post. It's possible this is because the pertinent comments have been removed or the fact that I, admittedly, have no experience trying to police trolls.

Based on the Unknown's comments that still remain, I would have predicted that he would immediately apologize when confronted with something like what he apparently did (as the comments have been removed - or I simply missed them). When I read his (remaining) comments the tone seem respectful, even in the face of other's abuse (which, from my perspective, is an invitation to respond in kind). Also, at times he seemed to concede points (e.g. agreeing with points in the post).

Compare this to Trevor163 who I would have immediately pegged as a troll. Not that I don't understand the points he's trying to make, but because he clearly doesn't care about having a discussion or understanding where the people he's mocking are coming from.

Anonymous Fried Baloney August 13, 2016 2:01 PM  

" If you had one sentence you deliver to him to encourage and support his candidacy, what would it be?"

Stick to the issues and ignore some of the personal salvos. (translation: quit shooting off your mouth)

Blogger tublecane August 13, 2016 2:16 PM  

@16-I wish someone would translate that from whatever-ese into Plain English.

Blogger LurkingPuppy August 13, 2016 2:27 PM  

Jim Carroll wrote:Based on the Unknown's comments that still remain, I would have predicted that he would immediately apologize when confronted
The comment in which he/she/it broke this not-yet-written rule was deleted. This new rule is a warning to keep good commenters like this particular guy commenting as ‘Unknown’ (there has been more than one because, like “Anonymous”, “Unknown” is a default name) from looking like trolls.

Jim Carroll wrote:Compare this to Trevor163 who I would have immediately pegged as a troll.
There's nothing for the moderators to do about a blatant troll like that beyond (a) spam him immediately when they wake up and notice him, and (b) possibly spank the regulars who took the bait after he became obvious.

Blogger Nate August 13, 2016 2:30 PM  

"This is not 'Nam."

mark it zero.

Anonymous Bob August 13, 2016 2:31 PM  

" If you had one sentence you deliver to him to encourage and support his candidacy, what would it be?"

Get your VP out there with the less-than-effective rhetoric that appeals to the Cruz types.

Blogger Jim Carroll August 13, 2016 2:33 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Jim Carroll August 13, 2016 2:34 PM  

LurkingPuppy, Don't know what happened to your comment but thanks. That makes sense.

Anonymous Emmanuel M August 13, 2016 2:34 PM  

As you add further rules, rule 34 will be reached.

No exceptions :)

Blogger Nate August 13, 2016 2:36 PM  

"(Slowly sips an 18 year highland.) "

fag.

Blogger Nate August 13, 2016 2:38 PM  

"And here I thought the only one was don't say you like glocks. ...or scotch."

One of the great moments in the history of this blog was the time Big Gay Steve commented on that SJW site that we were very welcoming to him and the only thing anyone had given him crap about was owning a Glock.

Blogger rcocean August 13, 2016 2:42 PM  

So what Vox Day seems to be saying is that Rcocean is the greatest commentator here.

Thanks Vox!

Blogger tublecane August 13, 2016 2:43 PM  

@16-I wish someone would translate that from whatever-ese into Plain English.

Anonymous Frankenstein McBadperson August 13, 2016 3:12 PM  

@Jim Carroll -- Great handle. I loved "Living at the Movies". That and "The Palm at the End of the Mind" (and maybe Catullus) kept me sane as a teenager. Didn't like Jim's later work, but LATM was all he needed to secure his reputation. And he wrote most of it when he was like 19.

look out Manhattan
your prince's sorrow
might be back
again
tomorrow.

requiescet in pace, my friend. I owe you.

Blogger Jim Carroll August 13, 2016 3:17 PM  

@54 Frankenstein , That's actually my name. :-)

Blogger Anthony August 13, 2016 3:31 PM  

You Nazi! Us ###Persons of Straw### (as we prefer to be called) will not stand for your naked attempt to make this blog Strohmannfrei.

Blogger Raggededge August 13, 2016 4:03 PM  

One of the great moments in the history of this blog was the time Big Gay Steve commented on that SJW site that we were very welcoming to him and the only thing anyone had given him crap about was owning a Glock.

In fairness, Steve's is Glock is pink. So stereotypically gay.

Blogger newanubis August 13, 2016 5:55 PM  

Wonder how long before mcrapey bastardizes this (proper) parameter to malign VP as the blog of speech suppression?
"See,see--he, well he just can't tolerate dissenting opinion and here it is- my vindication in black and white"

Anonymous JI August 13, 2016 6:05 PM  

"17. Speak for anyone else. If you characterize or accurately summarize someone else's statements, arguments, or conclusions, your comments may be deleted and you may be banned. This is particularly true if you attempt to characterize or accurately summarize something I have written."

What??!! This is an outrage!!

Blogger SemiSpook37 August 13, 2016 6:44 PM  

Raggededge wrote:In fairness, Steve's is Glock is pink. So stereotypically gay.

Not necessarily. My wife has said on numerous occasions that she wouldn't mind owning a pink gun. As long as it operates properly, that's what's really important.

What gets me with the issue of trolls is this: how in [insert your deity's name here]'s name rightfully justify their existence? I learned long ago that talking smack on a relatively anonymous forum such as a comment area on a blog or a forum doesn't make you any tougher, it makes you a coward. If you're going to get into it with someone, do it in a forum where you're face to face with someone, and you'll get as good and honest of a reaction as you'll give. Plus, most normal people will respect you for it.

Blogger Patrick Wilson August 13, 2016 8:38 PM  

So I'm adding rule 17. Sorry can't help myself. Love your blog.

Blogger Were-Puppy August 13, 2016 9:23 PM  

@33 Cadwallander J

Knew it - as soon as I hit publish. My pre-post sarcastic:serious ratio prediction was 10:1. I just thought Nate and Josh would be leading the charge.
---

Sorry man, I was being silly, but that is a sentiment I get from a lot of people now. A lot of people I talk to are worried the CCF will get in and we'll finally go down the crapper.

Blogger Were-Puppy August 13, 2016 9:28 PM  

@44 tublecane
@16-I wish someone would translate that from whatever-ese into Plain English.
---

I thought they were pretty good, guess not for everybody

Blogger Were-Puppy August 13, 2016 9:33 PM  

@60 SemiSpook37

What gets me with the issue of trolls is this: how in [insert your deity's name here]'s name rightfully justify their existence?
---

Did you see this ?
http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/04/22/pro-hillary-pac-spending-1-million-to-hire-online-trolls/

Now that Sanders is gone, I'm sure they are going after Trump now.

Anonymous SciVo August 13, 2016 9:46 PM  

Cadwallander J wrote:I'm going to have a chance to speak to Trump at an upcoming fundraiser. If you had one sentence you deliver to him to encourage and support his candidacy, what would it be?

I would say that he gives me hope for peace in my lifetime, since you have to respect your own boundaries before you can respect anyone else's.

It's a little cheesy, but it's positive and hands him some good rhetoric on a platter, which at his level of skill he might even improve.

Blogger G-S. August 14, 2016 12:20 AM  

You can never have enough rules. Except when you are running a government. At that point rebellious people who don't like your rules can label themselves "patriots" or "commonsense-folk" or some such. And they will think your rules are stupid and anarchy and revolution are best.

Blogger Unknown August 14, 2016 1:07 AM  

Jim Carroll wrote:I'm surprised by the details that resulted in this post. It's possible this is because the pertinent comments have been removed or the fact that I, admittedly, have no experience trying to police trolls.



I think Vox believed I was a serial troll, a griefer.

I'm not a troll, but being flip and snarky with the host in my first response to him was well, dumb, and could have easily be seen as intentionally disruptive.

The posts that were deleted were either deleted by me because of misspelling or spammed because they were posted after the injunction, but before I saw the injunction. The tone and content of those posts was basically the same of those that remain.

Anonymous SciVo August 14, 2016 3:11 AM  

Speaking of navel-gazing, I'm attempting to source the site's tagline, "Success comes most swiftly and completely not to the greatest or perhaps even to the ablest men, but to those whose gifts are most completely in harmony with the taste of their times."

I got a hit (sans "most completely") from a book on the Renaissance by historian J.H. Plumb, but it was published in 2015; but then again, he was born in 1911. So I find it more likely that said book is derived from his Pelican Book of the Renaissance (1982) than that he got the sentiment from here... but why speculate when I can just ask:

Vox, where is that from?

Blogger The East Mercian August 14, 2016 6:01 AM  

The Daily Mail is supposed to be our right wing paper too.

Blogger Marty Johnson August 14, 2016 12:48 PM  

Anybody else notice, that the so-called "Alpha Males" of the internet have some of the thinnest skin and the most prissy little attitudes? I'm not naming names, I'm just observing...

Blogger SciVo August 14, 2016 6:02 PM  

Marty @71, high-SMV men don't tolerate disrespect because they don't have to, and that goes double in their own establishments. If you can't tell the difference between a high-status man who cuts ankle-biters out of his busy life and a thin-skinned priss who can't take a joke, then you're probably the latter.

It's okay if you're not the former. There is a third possibility.

I'm happy if I'm doing a good delta impersonation, and sure that means being able to tolerate a certain amount of friendly ribbing -- but it also means showing respect where it's due and mercy everywhere else. (Even with your peers, don't dish out anything that would actually tear them down, let alone more than you can take yourself.)

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts