##Members Please Read##: Ending the Political Trolling

reply to post by AstroD


...and did you bother to alert those posts?

It's been said, rather often, that the staff can't see everything. We rely upon you to help us out with this. You see a post that's an attack upon another member, alert it. That's not asking a great deal.

Trolling is an issue in many forums. I've never subscribed to right-left politics, so I don't even read that stuff, but I've seen troll posters and trolls in comments. What do you call those who don't read the original post, but make jokes based on the title? They aren't trolls, but I bet there's a name for them. They are the antithesis of "Defy Ignorance".

Originally posted by TrueAmerican

Originally posted by seagull
So, too, will the passionate debate (if one can call it that currently...) here on ATS over which candidate is the best, and which one is the Beast.

I don't see why any further debate on that is of concern at all. We already know which candidate is the best, and which is the Beast. Only problem I see with your statement is you forgot to make "Beast" plural.

There is no doubt in my mind which candidate looks to be the best for America but I don't believe that our system is capable of changing anything! Even if he gets elected which is doubtful! The reason being is because many people don't believe he is going to win and so they feel as if their votes would be wasted! Then there is his stance on Abortion! Maybe Paul should have stayed out of that and let people choose for themselves! Finally
there is the issue of voter fraud; After what happened in the 2000 election I can't say i have any trust for the electoral system! I also hear that we will have electronic voting machines though I havent voted since Ross Perot was running Because of the extreme dislike i have for most political candidates!
As for the trolls; If we are edjucated on the truth then anything these people say should not be able to sway our convictions, censoring them or anyone for that matter is wrong unless they are true trolls and don't bring anything to the conversations and instead just criticize, someones spelling, beliefs like religion and their country!
We need to be careful in our finger pointing which can sometimes take away from the issues themselves! If we are to see how people truely are then we must talk in public! I'm sure that in public we would tend to be alot more agreeable and selfless! Which can be both good and bad because they would be less honest with each other but at least there would be alot fewer trolls!

I hope everyone will pay attention and choose the right candidate. There is only one who is different than all others.

How bout a definition of trolling? I originally believed trolling to be someone enlisted in the practice of scanning websites in order to spread info which contradicts the oppositions line of thinking, basically creating propaganda for their cause. It seems to me like people just claim to be "trolled" when someone continually pisses them off with a contradictory opinion. Does it have anything to do with not having a developed opinion and just using a one line jab at a poster? I am still not sure, because each time someone starts crying troll, troll, mostly it is just someone disagreeing with them wholeheartedly.

reply to post by yamammasamonkey


Yea, I reckon if you don't define it then it gives you the self justification of removing whatever you don't want to hear. Your site your rules, just glad you have made it clear.

My impression is its a similar destruction of what ATS has so far been. Trolls are common, and personal insults are obvious. But to construe that anyone but idiot can see ____... is similar to the "promotion of drugs" policy line (while 1/4 the USA is on OPIUM via Dr Pusher).

Freedom of speach is getting stopped. JESUS CHRIST!

Oh will that get me banned? Well at least I know where the $$$/### I'm going.

With the silly season now underway, it would behoove us all to understand that emotions are going to begin to run at high pressure, and it won't take much for things to rupture...

Whether you're a Ron Paul supporter, or Pres. Obama's your guy, or you think Romney is the bee's knees, or your idea of a great candidate is none of the above, please remember, and respect, that others may not share your views.

Someone says something in support of one of them, and your first impulse is to say something that defames that member, please resist said impulse.

If you want to call the candidate a pawn of the New World Order, that's fine; but a member is out of bounds. ...and even the candidate is worthy of a bit of polite respect.

The staff takes absolutely no joy in having to deal with accusations of trollery from amongst you lot. We'll do it, because when we were asked to join staff, this is what we said we'd do.

Politeness, and respect is what we want.

I know many of you want a working definition of what constitutes political trolling.

I wish like all get out I could give you one. The only one I can really give you is this: If you were talking to a friend face to face, how would you talk to them? Assuming, for the sake of conversation, you want that person to remain a friend.

That's sort of a restatement of the Golden Rule. Post unto others, as you would have others post unto you.

Click here for more information.

I don't see why any further debate on that is of concern at all. We already know which candidate is the best, and which is the Beast. Only problem I see with your statement is you forgot to make "Beast" plural.

OK Im done, just posted my last "I hate Obomney thread"

reply to post by lindaopa


right on fellow ats'er

reply to post by seagull


Can we have a politics free forum? LOL

if you mention one politician, party, superpac, commercials, you get disowned, lol.

Trolling is only trolling when one does not point out logical fallacies. If so then trolling becomes a logic fail…

"Do not reply to this U2U. "

Then to whom do I get the details about what constitutes "Political Trolling" in my post?

And how did I get 2 warnings from a single post?

How can anyone be assured that this is simply not draconian and arbitrary, or a result of many who's bull has been gored, retaliating by reporting and attempting to silence dissent?

Is the reason to characterise my post as "Political Trolling" so weak it cannot bear examination or challenge?

Or is the abusive reporting of posts that you don't like encouraged here on ATS?

TheWrightWing
"Do not reply to this U2U. "

Then to whom do I get the details about what constitutes "Political Trolling" in my post?

That u2u will tell you who the moderator was that actioned the post. You can contact that mod via a separate u2u. Or, you may file a complaint to the staff in general. Either way works.

And how did I get 2 warnings from a single post?

A political trolling action automatically gets a double warning. That's usually because a ptroll, though not always, is rather mean spirited name calling, or designed to totally disrupt conversation.

How can anyone be assured that this is simply not draconian and arbitrary, or a result of many who's bull has been gored, retaliating by reporting and attempting to silence dissent?

That's why, unless it's a totally off the charts post, the staff discusses it before actioning it. You'd be shocked, I think, if you knew just how many complaints from members we get on a daily basis, and just how few of them get removed/edited.

Is the reason to characterise my post as "Political Trolling" so weak it cannot bear examination or challenge?

File a complaint, and it'll be looked at. without knowing any of the details, I can't answer that, nor would I in this thread. Contact the mod, or the staff.

Or is the abusive reporting of posts that you don't like encouraged here on ATS?

Really? If you think that, why are you even asking?

Thankyou! I brought this up on the board suggestion forum a while back but got completely shutdown. The political trolling has gotten completely out of hand. It even swept me up into it for a little while before I had to take a step back and a breather from it all.

I find it rather pathetic that a forum that purports to be an open place for people to express alternative thinking is turning more and more to censorship. Even in the interest of maintaining pretentious civility.

What it will do is effectively lock out people with the most unpopular opinions. Those are usually the ones who need to be heard.

reply to post by BrianFlanders


It has nothing to do with popular vs unpopular opinions and everything to do with schoolyard name calling. We'd prefer to be a discussion venue. There are only a few million sites out there where you can be abusive and name call to your heart's content. I don't think those with a desire to do that are being deprived by not being able to do it here.