[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by Alexander Turcic

Alas, it is not that easy. For instance, in this particular thread, the last user who has been interrupting the discussion with racist remarks has been a member here for almost two years, and he has made normal posts in the past. While restricting access may turn away the most obvious of trolls, it's not a solution to prevent some individuals from showing their worst when disagreeing with a topic.

Like I said, we're looking into this and contemplating solutions.

it is indeed unfortunate that it was a member of long standing. perhaps the most recent silliness provoked some anger issues and the person felt they needed to act out.

Originally Posted by Worldwalker

Would it be possible to restrict access on a per-user basis? For example, if someone has given helpful answers in the Kindle forum, but keeps trolling in the Lounge, shut him out of the Lounge, either temporarily or permanently?

I think that when someone starts acting out the way these most recent ones have, they are going to act out anywhere/everywhere.
The reason people respond to trolls, by the way, is this: Right now in MobileRead there are 112 registered users and 709 guests. Nobody, at least nobody who thinks about it, expects to tell a troll anything. That's kind of the point of trolling; they'd say the sun was purple if it would get people wound up. Rather, people are talking to the lurkers -- 6x as many, in this case, as active users. If people leave a troll's statements unchallenged (especially if they're carefully couched to sound not too outrageous at first read) then that appears to be the consensus of forum users to outsiders, visitors, Google, and so on. People can't leave a statement they find abhorrent ("all ereaders should be burned") unanswered for that reason.
when it seems that it truly is trolling/spam, I have taken to responding to "spamtasitc" or "spamalicious" mainly because of that statement... to let new people or outside observers know that this is not what we expect or normally experience/allow
It's a bad situation, and one trolls thrive on: on one hand, you don't want to feed the trolls, and thereby encourage them, but on the other hand, you don't want to leave the trolls unchallenged ... and thereby encourage them. The only thing in my experience that discourages trolling is early and active deletion of their posts I think it would help a LOT if there was more deleting of posts (and a warning to the offender) than the locking of threads. along those lines a standard could be set up of say; three warnings and a (week?) suspension, another three and a (month?) another three and a (year?) or something like thatand banning of their accounts, and that brings in the nasty, tangled, grotty hairball of defining exactly what is a troll, how you know they're a troll, what posts should be deleted, and who decides who is allowed on the forums and what they're allowed to say. There is no easy answer for the troll problem, which is exactly why there are so many, and such effective, trolls.

Originally Posted by nohmi2

People like myself seem to feel that it's 'wimpish' to alert Mods if they are unfairly attacked. This will now change........big time.

Trolls and bullies have no place on MR.

We should be able to debate and have disagreements without the fear of attack.

Cheers.
PS Yikes!! Being a Mod would be too stressful for me.

I have and will have a hard time reporting personal attacks ON me. I think I only did it once I perceived it to be an issue in an ongoing argument. on the other hand if someone is being a jerk to someone else I have more of a tendency to report it or at least say something myself. I come from a culture of that's "tattling" when it is done to me, and if you can't stick up for yourself, you have no business being at the party

Originally Posted by FizzyWater

I see that Alex has shared that the moderators are looking at the issue to try to come up with ways to combat it.

yeah, he is now. one of the reasons why I started the thread. I felt it needed some dialogue
One other thought I have is that there are legitimate "newbies" here, as well as long-timers. Those newbies haven't been around long enough to know what the "normal" atmosphere is here. They may feel intimidated and never come back. Hell, they may jump into the fray and feel confused when they're reprimanded for doing what to them seemed like common behavior.

that's one of the reasons why I have suggested keeping the lounge as a place to look forward to joining after one has been here for a little while. newbies come into the individual advice forums, the news, reading recs. and so on, get a lay of the land, start to know the forum, the tone the posters, etc. and after they have their feet under them be allowed into the lounge. along the lines of you don't bring your date to meet your family the first time out

Originally Posted by montsnmags

Worldwalker, they are my thoughts on trolls too.

I have a problem with the label "trolls" because it is too easy to use. For my mind, a troll is intentionally trying to goad people. A couple of the recent bannings could be hypothesized as being trolls, but as longer-termers they could also be just expressing their actual views. In which case calling them "trolls" is almost as unhelpful as the views themselves, as it is, to me, another form of namecalling, which always degrades discussion.

This, of course, doesn't preclude there being actual trouble-making trolls - brand new folk (as KK is talking about) or post-ban sockpuppets (again as KK is talking about) who are playing the "Obvious troll is obvious" game (even though they don't realize how obvious they are, at least most don't). That's what, I think, KK is specifically talking about seeing as, for instance, a couple of the recently-banned would have been able to post in The Lounge under the suggested conditions. yep, that is mostly what I am talking about, also, as I mentioned above that just maybe the whole temperment in the lounge from the real trolls and socks pushed some folks over the edge.My issue is that I think The Lounge is the room after the Introduce Yourself anteroom, where new folk can get an "in" quickly and with fewer parameters and topic-knowledge requirements. I worry that setting any "qualification" on the more casual Lounge may have a greater impact in MR (by discouraging new member participation) than any troll or sockpuppet issues do.and I think it can be a matter of encouraging people to stay and get to know people better. "after X amount of time, you get to go to the lounge! woo-hoo!

*snip*

Which is all to say, perhaps the problem with the sockpuppets and trolls, and with topics going skewed, is less about the people permitted to post and more about the topic posted. Perhaps noting it's a risky topic at the start, offering direction, or just stopping it early, would in many cases be more effective, without precluding newbie presence in the (generally very friendly) Lounge. IMO, those topics should not have got to where they did if the Guideline on religion was acknowledged/enforced. (I do not comment on the Guideline itself - but only that it is a Guideline)

once again, in both threads, I think we were behaving admirably well in comparison to some episodes in the past. I think that a) keeping new trolls out would have helped, b) judicious use of POST deletion and c) warnings to guilty parties, would have kept things much more in control

Cheers,
Marc