|
Chris Maunder wrote: Use their heads and just walk away
That's what I've been trying to get across.
|
|
|
|
|
Would it be possible to somehow allow high-rep users to mark someone as a troll, which would then cause the site to
0) Disallow responses to that person's posts
1) Still allow votes on their posts
2) Disallow that person from voting
In effect, this would be a suspension of sorts that would last for x-number of days No notifications need to be sent out to anyone, except maybe site admins, and business continues unabated with nobody being the wiser.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
|
|
|
|
|
Even better, they could make it appear to the troll that the votes are applying, but only the troll sees their own votes and they have no effects on reputation. And the troll never knows they're a troll (unless they log out and see all the posts they univoted aren't actually univoted).
|
|
|
|
|
IMO...A lot of the one votes are from moderate to senior level members and not from trolls. I think having a moderator that is very active in the forums is a bad idea only because it would become personal.
|
|
|
|
|
Pete, I shall put a link to a Troll List.
As soon as anyone notifies me of Trollish Activities, there shall be a entry made!
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
CCC League Table Link
CCC Link[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
Dalek Dave wrote: I shall put a link to a Troll List.
Like CCC Link in your signature? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I ignored. Also I remember the quote in your signature(Which I have added in my CP collection quotes).
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: Forgive your enemies - it messes with their heads
|
|
|
|
|
Rajesh,
Dealing with trolls is particularly hard. They don't operate on normal psychology, most want attention and do everything the do for their own amusement. By banning them, they get the attention and know they are getting to someone, just what they want. Counter logically they see this as power because they have manipulated someone into a reaction. The persistent ones will leave it a while, and set up a new account so just letting their "amusement stream" (read replies) to die is the most effective way of dealing with them.
See http://www.angelfire.com/space/usenet/[^] for a description of the troll mind, the best article I have read, with some decent links IIRC.
It looks like the account has been suspended: not because of the trolling I assume, but because he broke the T&Cs of the lounge in his final post there. The only thing you can do with these people is be patient.
|
|
|
|
|
I missed his last post. A doozie, was it?
|
|
|
|
|
Oh yes. It was all written in textspeak, started with an exhortation that we should all go and have sex with ourselves (misspelled *uk rather than *uck) and he let us all know that we are a bunch of unhappy nerds. Like nerd is an insult round here.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh dear oh dear oh dear. Anyway, I'm not a nerd, I'm a geek.
|
|
|
|
|
With this thread, I've made it look like I'm the one who's interested in what should be done with the troll. Seriously though, I've never been responding to, or entertaining the troll in anyways.
I created this thread because I was simply concerned that too many people are responding to the troll, and that created unwanted chaos in the forum. If the site administrators are to always leave what's to be done with the trolls to the public, that should be fine with me. I'm not responding to any of the trolls anyway.
"Real men drive manual transmission" - Rajesh.
|
|
|
|
|
You misunderstand the purpose of my reply. I'm sure you've never responded to trolling, but dealing with them is horrifically complicated. Any kind of response just "feeds" them and the get the kick out of [what they see as] controlling people by getting them to respond.
If you ban them they register a new account, and start again, this would leave the admins banning accounts time and time again (Hence Chris's reference to whack-a-mole). We've a couple of very persistent ones. I really suggest you read the article in my last post, it explains why inaction is the correct course of action for trolls. They don'y think like normal people, so normal methods won't work.
We'd all like to see these people somehow permanently banned, but it can't work, they'll just come back and they'll want to as they are getting the reaction they want.
|
|
|
|
|
Would it be possible to add a search by Date to the search page as one of the search criteria? Now and again I'd like to be able to see the search return the result sorted only by date so that I can see what the latest article is against my search.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair.
nils illegitimus carborundum
me, me, me
|
|
|
|
|
There is an order by "Relevancy / date" option in the advanced search... does that work for you? Also, it allows you to restrict search results to within a specified date range.
|
|
|
|
|
Nope: still doesn't sort by date first which is what I'd like: I want to quickly see which is the newest article in the list.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair.
nils illegitimus carborundum
me, me, me
|
|
|
|
|
If you feel like banning a member, here is your chance. The Lounge has been blanketed with univotes for no good reason.
|
|
|
|
|
You can't ban a member for waking up one morning and deciding to uni-vote everyone. However, I am all for a "punishment" system for repeat offenders going from a warning to suspension to complete banning of the account and associated IP address. Some of these uni-vote rampages are from senior members here and not from some tooly troll. 
|
|
|
|
|
I know this is probably something to do with a missed browser setting on my end, but need to be sure.
When I use IE8 and paste a link into a Q&A answer, I get the link pasted as a link (with appropriate tags complete with href etc).
When I use IE9RC, the link gets pasted but the link tags just don't appear.
Any help, anyone?
The funniest thing about this particular signature is that by the time you realise it doesn't say anything it's too late to stop reading it.
|
|
|
|
|
We're not touching IE9 issues until it's fully baked.
I'm not saying I don't trust Microsoft to make sudden, radical and breaking changes to the rendering or CSS models or anything. I never said that. Wouldn't dream of saying that.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I've noticed the same issues in Opera as well.
(Dont know about Firefox or Chrome though).
The funniest thing about this particular signature is that by the time you realise it doesn't say anything it's too late to stop reading it.
|
|
|
|
|
Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way. - Tolstoy.
When it comes to the clipboard every browser is extremely unhappy.
In Opera's case I assume it's never had a large enough share of users on CP to justify Maunder bashing his head against it's miseries.
3x12=36
2x12=24
1x12=12
0x12=18
|
|
|
|
|
On the home page I see articles and tips/tricks needing approval:
http://img594.imageshack.us/img594/7043/regioncapture.png[^]
When I click an article, I go to it and see the button "Make Article Publicly Available."
When I click a tip/trick, I go to it and it's already published.
Steve Wellens
|
|
|
|
|
I've just fixed (but not yet published) a fix that was hiding the moderation control for alternate tips.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
