Troll-friendly - Revision history

Troll64: delinking, to avoid involving this important concept with issues that are at least rather controversial and speculative, and have gotten quite personal.

2004-09-07T18:20:03Z

delinking, to avoid involving this important concept with issues that are at least rather controversial and speculative, and have gotten quite personal.

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:20, 7 September 2004
Line 32:		Line 32:
	These democratic values were listed by [[Bernard Crick]] as alternatives to [[ideology]] or any "absolute-sounding [[ethic]]".		These democratic values were listed by [[Bernard Crick]] as alternatives to [[ideology]] or any "absolute-sounding [[ethic]]".

	Very tellingly, [[w:political virtues\|the article that is supposed to explain this is a mere stub]] at [[Wikipedia]]. This will not surprise anyone familiar with their [[GodKing]] or [[sysop power structure]], which lacks very considerably in these virtues~~. Instead they have [[Wikimedia corruption]] which notably lacks these '''virtues''', indeed lacks any virtues whatsoever~~.		Very tellingly, [[w:political virtues\|the article that is supposed to explain this is a mere stub]] at [[Wikipedia]]. This will not surprise anyone familiar with their [[GodKing]] or [[sysop power structure]], which lacks very considerably in these virtues.

	=== trolling, trusting, process and forgiving ===		=== trolling, trusting, process and forgiving ===

Jukeboksi: minor non-sense fix. keep your stuff together 142.177.X.X

2004-08-23T06:36:32Z

minor non-sense fix. keep your stuff together 142.177.X.X

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:36, 23 August 2004
Line 1:		Line 1:
	An internet discussion forum is considered '''troll-friendly''' if it does not take steps to discourage [[trolling]]. ~~Such steps typically~~ include:		An internet discussion forum is considered '''troll-friendly''' if it does not take steps to discourage [[trolling]]. Troll-friendly policies include:
	*banning or moderating accused [[trolls]],		*not banning or moderating accused [[trolls]],
	*not preventing the forum being accessed from [[open proxy\|open proxies]],		*not preventing the forum being accessed from [[open proxy\|open proxies]],
	*allowing [[anonymous post]]ing or allowing easy creation of new accounts,		*allowing [[anonymous post]]ing or allowing easy creation of new accounts,

142.177.76.209: clearing up wording

2004-08-23T04:18:01Z

clearing up wording

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:18, 23 August 2004
Line 4:		Line 4:
	*allowing [[anonymous post]]ing or allowing easy creation of new accounts,		*allowing [[anonymous post]]ing or allowing easy creation of new accounts,
	*not permitting deletions of materials based solely on accusation of authorship		*not permitting deletions of materials based solely on accusation of authorship
	Being troll-friendly implies also controls on the [[sysop power structure]] such as to:		Being troll-friendly implies also controls on the [[sysop power structure]] such as to prevent or restrict any [[sysop]] acting alone from:
	*~~redefine~~ trolling as [[vandalism]] arbitrarily		*redefining trolling as [[vandalism]] arbitrarily
	*~~select~~ its own political labels on controversial topics		*selecting its own political labels on controversial topics
	*~~request~~ [[due process]] for any cases of [[outing]] or [[alleged or collective identity]] confusion		*subverting [[due process]] for any cases of [[outing]] or [[alleged and collective identity]] confusion, in particular, banning all "user X is user Y" class of comments as irrelevant or biasing

	Because controversies on these issues are common, usage of this phrase is very common:		Because controversies on these issues are common, usage of this phrase has also become very common:
	*"We also have troll friendly proxies," - [http://brawl-hall.com/pages/index2.php brawl-hall.com]		*"We also have troll friendly proxies," - [http://brawl-hall.com/pages/index2.php brawl-hall.com]
	*"VT is definitely a troll-friendly environment, but I make a habit		*"VT is definitely a troll-friendly environment, but I make a habit

142.177.76.209: complete definition putting new material first, the rest in subcategories in context

2004-08-23T04:13:58Z

complete definition putting new material first, the rest in subcategories in context

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:13, 23 August 2004
Line 1:		Line 1:
	An internet discussion forum is considered [[troll]] friendly if it does not take steps to discourage trolling ~~such as~~ banning or moderating trolls, preventing the forum being accessed from open ~~proxys~~, ~~not~~ allowing anonymous ~~posting~~ or ~~adding barriers~~ to the ~~creation~~ of ~~many accounts~~ by ~~individuals~~.		An internet discussion forum is considered '''troll-friendly''' if it does not take steps to discourage [[trolling]]. Such steps typically include:
			*banning or moderating accused [[trolls]],
			*not preventing the forum being accessed from [[open proxy\|open proxies]],
			*allowing [[anonymous post]]ing or allowing easy creation of new accounts,
			*not permitting deletions of materials based solely on accusation of authorship
			Being troll-friendly implies also controls on the [[sysop power structure]] such as to:
			*redefine trolling as [[vandalism]] arbitrarily
			*select its own political labels on controversial topics
			*request [[due process]] for any cases of [[outing]] or [[alleged or collective identity]] confusion

			Because controversies on these issues are common, usage of this phrase is very common:
			*"We also have troll friendly proxies," - [http://brawl-hall.com/pages/index2.php brawl-hall.com]
			*"VT is definitely a troll-friendly environment, but I make a habit
			of using the report option when they get too far out of line." - [http://www.funmac.com/showthread.php?t=6971 re: VersionTracker]
			*" Fanhome is a Troll friendly environment. ... Yet here you are. Like I said,
			Fanhome is Troll-friendly." - [http://mb3.theinsiders.com/fvancouvercanucksfrm1.showMessageRange?topicID=2963.topic&start=21&stop=31 Vancouver Canucks "FanHome" site]

			Some services say as explicit matter of policy that they are '''not troll-friendly'''. For instance, [[Wikipedia]] goes on [[wiki witchhunt]]s against presumed trolls who question its [[sysop power structure]]. The term troll-friendly is quite common:
			*"We are not Troll friendly. Postings that have been placed on the boards to disrupt the flow of conversation will be removed..." - [http://www.cruise-addicts.com/forumguide.html CruiseAddicts.com forum guidelines]

			=== '''troll-friendly''' [[politics as usual]] ===

			Troll-friendly [[wiki management]] [[Wiki best practices\|practices]] are designed to accomodate the [[New Troll point of view]] as much as possible. Rather than attempting to classify, categorize, restrict and challenge what [[trolls]] do, it attempts instead to engage them using [[political virtues]]:

			*prudence,
			*conciliation,
			*compromise,
			*variety,
			*adaptability, and
			*liveliness.

			These democratic values were listed by [[Bernard Crick]] as alternatives to [[ideology]] or any "absolute-sounding [[ethic]]".

			Very tellingly, [[w:political virtues\|the article that is supposed to explain this is a mere stub]] at [[Wikipedia]]. This will not surprise anyone familiar with their [[GodKing]] or [[sysop power structure]], which lacks very considerably in these virtues. Instead they have [[Wikimedia corruption]] which notably lacks these '''virtues''', indeed lacks any virtues whatsoever.

			=== trolling, trusting, process and forgiving ===

			Any '''[[troll]]-friendly''' [[system]] or [[social software]]-based service assumes that [[built trust]] is very low, [[found trust]] is very high. It further assumes that [[grown trust]] will not happen unless a degree of [[politics as usual]] is allowed to apply in that system. ''This seems to be one motivation for proposing explicit [[faction]] support.''

			The main motive for troll-friendly policy is that consensus has to form on the basis of strict [[due process]]. Low-integrity editors must be "driven off":

			[[Trolls]] believe that when someone has actively participated in building a [[sysop power structure]] that engages in [[ad hominem revert]], [[ad hominem delete]], [[witch-hunt]], [[inquisitor]], [[psychiatry]], [[libel]] and [[echo chamber]] tactics, under the same identity, they ''should'' be ''actively'' [[driven off by trolls]], and good riddance. If they wish this not to happen, they should make a new identity, and change their behaviour under the old one on any [[large public wiki]] where they are known for this inexcusable [[sysop vandalism]] - probably also giving up any position in the [[sysop power structure]] as well.

			If they do all this and become an advocate for true [[soft security]] at least in cases other than [[simple vandalism]], and become widely known for changing their spots, at that point, [[trolls]] usually say it is the obligation of any '''troll-friendly''' wiki to not only accept them back, but honour their conversion to the ways of trolls...

			=== Implications for [[Consumerium Services]] ===

			For consumerium, this means [[sysop]]s should not push their luck or assume they are in charge of every [[faction]] or can resolve [[political dispute]] when people devote their lives to that in the real world and fail. In the long term it means that the [[Consumerium social club]] shouldn't over-ride [[consensus]] rules. It pays to push this process out to [[user-land]] to support a reliable [[Consumerium buying signal]].

Ziv: spelling and grammer

2004-08-22T19:42:36Z

spelling and grammer

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:42, 22 August 2004
Line 1:		Line 1:
	An internet discussion forum is considered [[troll]] friendly if it does not take steps to discourage trolling such as banning or moderating trolls, ~~not~~ preventing the forum being ~~access~~ from open proxys, allowing anonymous posting or ~~allowing easy~~ creation of ~~new~~ accounts.		An internet discussion forum is considered [[troll]] friendly if it does not take steps to discourage trolling such as banning or moderating trolls, preventing the forum being accessed from open proxys, not allowing anonymous posting or adding barriers to the creation of many accounts by individuals.

Ziv: different definition

2004-08-22T19:35:00Z

different definition

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:35, 22 August 2004
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~A '''~~[[troll]]-friendly''' [[system]] or [[social software]]-based service (like the [[opinion wiki]] or this [[R&D wiki]]) assumes that [[built trust]] is very low, [[found trust]] is very high, and that [[grown trust]] will not happen unless a degree of [[politics as usual]] is allowed to apply in that system. ''This seems to be one motivation for proposing explicit [[faction]] support.''		An internet discussion forum is considered [[troll]] friendly if it does not take steps to discourage trolling such as banning or moderating trolls, not preventing the forum being access from open proxys, allowing anonymous posting or allowing easy creation of new accounts.

	For consumerium, this means [[sysop]]s should not push their luck or assume they are in charge of every [[faction]] or can resolve [[political dispute]] when people devote their lives to that in the real world and fail. In the long term it means that the [[Consumerium social club]] shouldn't over-ride [[consensus]] rules. It pays to push this process out to [[user-land]]. But it also means that the consensus has to form on the basis of strict [[due process]] that in the long term will support a reliable [[Consumerium buying signal]]. Low-integrity editors must be "driven off":

	When someone has actively participated in building a [[sysop power structure]] that engages in [[ad hominem revert]], [[ad hominem delete]], [[witch-hunt]], [[inquisitor]], [[psychiatry]], [[libel]] and [[echo chamber]] tactics, under the same identity, they ''should'' be ''actively'' [[driven off by trolls]], and good riddance. If they wish this not to happen, they should make a new identity, and change their behaviour under the old one on any [[large public wiki]] where they are known for this inexcusable [[sysop vandalism]] - probably also giving up any position in the [[sysop power structure]] as ~~well.~~ If they do all this and become an advocate for true [[soft security]] at least in cases other than [[simple vandalism]], and become widely known for changing their spots, at that point, it is the obligation of any '''troll-friendly''' wiki to not only accept them back, but honour their conversion to the ways of trolls~~...~~

	~~Usage of this phrase is very common:~~
	*"We also have troll friendly proxies," - [http://brawl-hall.com/pages/index2.php brawl-hall.com]
	*"VT is definitely a troll-friendly environment, but I make a habit
	~~of using the report option when they get too far out of line." - [http://www.funmac.com/showthread.php?t=6971 re: VersionTracker]~~
	*" Fanhome is a Troll friendly environment. ... Yet here you are. Like I said,
	~~Fanhome is Troll-friendly." - [http://mb3.theinsiders.com/fvancouvercanucksfrm1.showMessageRange?topicID=2963.topic&start=21&stop=31 Vancouver Canucks "FanHome" site]~~

	~~Some services say as explicit matter of policy that they are '''~~not ~~troll-friendly'''. For instance, [[Wikipedia]] goes on [[wiki witchhunt]]s against presumed trolls who question its [[sysop power structure]]. The term troll-friendly is quite common:~~
	*"We are not Troll friendly. Postings that have been placed on the boards to disrupt the ~~flow of conversation will be removed..." - [http://www.cruise-addicts.com/forumguide.html CruiseAddicts.com~~ forum ~~guidelines]~~

	Troll-friendly [[wiki management]] [[Wiki best practices\|practices]] are designed to accomodate the [[New Troll point of view]] as much as possible. Rather than attempting to classify, categorize, restrict and challenge what [[trolls]] do, it attempts instead to engage them using [[political virtues]]:

	*prudence,
	*conciliation,
	*compromise,
	*variety,
	*adaptability, and
	*liveliness.

	~~These democratic values were listed by [[Bernard Crick]] as alternatives to [[ideology]] or any "absolute-sounding [[ethic]]".~~

	~~Very tellingly~~, ~~[[w:political virtues\|the article that is supposed to explain this is a mere stub]] at [[Wikipedia]]. This will not surprise anyone familiar with their [[GodKing]]~~ or ~~[[sysop power structure]], which lacks very considerably in these virtues. Instead they have [[Wikimedia corruption]] which notably lacks these '''virtues''', indeed lacks any virtues whatsoever~~.

142.177.103.132: fixed unclear paragraph

2004-08-16T17:40:42Z

fixed unclear paragraph

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:40, 16 August 2004
Line 26:		Line 26:
	These democratic values were listed by [[Bernard Crick]] as alternatives to [[ideology]] or any "absolute-sounding [[ethic]]".		These democratic values were listed by [[Bernard Crick]] as alternatives to [[ideology]] or any "absolute-sounding [[ethic]]".

	Very tellingly, ~~"This~~ article is a stub" at [[Wikipedia]]. This will not surprise anyone familiar with their [[GodKing]] or [[sysop power structure]], which lacks very considerably in these virtues.		Very tellingly, [[w:political virtues\|the article that is supposed to explain this is a mere stub]] at [[Wikipedia]]. This will not surprise anyone familiar with their [[GodKing]] or [[sysop power structure]], which lacks very considerably in these virtues. Instead they have [[Wikimedia corruption]] which notably lacks these '''virtues''', indeed lacks any virtues whatsoever.

Jukeboksi: rm broken and confusing link, this seems to leave the sentence broken still

2004-08-16T11:20:50Z

rm broken and confusing link, this seems to leave the sentence broken still

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:20, 16 August 2004
Line 26:		Line 26:
	These democratic values were listed by [[Bernard Crick]] as alternatives to [[ideology]] or any "absolute-sounding [[ethic]]".		These democratic values were listed by [[Bernard Crick]] as alternatives to [[ideology]] or any "absolute-sounding [[ethic]]".

	Very tellingly, "~~[[w:political vrtues\|~~This article is a stub]]" at [[Wikipedia]]. This will not surprise anyone familiar with their [[GodKing]] or [[sysop power structure]], which lacks very considerably in these virtues.		Very tellingly, "This article is a stub" at [[Wikipedia]]. This will not surprise anyone familiar with their [[GodKing]] or [[sysop power structure]], which lacks very considerably in these virtues.

Support a unified GFDL Corpus at 14:44, 15 August 2004

2004-08-15T14:44:18Z

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-A '''[[troll]]-friendly''' [[system]] or [[social software]]-based service (like the [[opinion wiki]] or this [[R&D wiki]]) assumes that [[built trust]] is very low, [[found trust]] is very high, and that [[grown trust]] will not happen unless a degree of [[politics as usual]] is allowed to apply in that system.
+A '''[[troll]]-friendly''' [[system]] or [[social software]]-based service (like the [[opinion wiki]] or this [[R&D wiki]]) assumes that [[built trust]] is very low, [[found trust]] is very high, and that [[grown trust]] will not happen unless a degree of [[politics as usual]] is allowed to apply in that system. ''This seems to be one motivation for proposing explicit [[faction]] support.''
 For consumerium, this means [[sysop]]s should not push their luck or assume they are in charge of every [[faction]] or can resolve [[political dispute]] when people devote their lives to that in the real world and fail.  In the long term it means that the [[Consumerium social club]] shouldn't over-ride [[consensus]] rules. It pays to push this process out to [[user-land]].  But it also means that the consensus has to form on the basis of strict [[due process]] that in the long term will support a reliable [[Consumerium buying signal]].  Low-integrity editors must be "driven off":
@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 Some services say as explicit matter of policy that they are '''not troll-friendly'''.  For instance, [[Wikipedia]] goes on [[wiki witchhunt]]s against presumed trolls who question its [[sysop power structure]].  The term troll-friendly is quite common:
 *"We are not Troll friendly.  Postings that have been placed on the boards to disrupt the flow of conversation will be removed..." - [http://www.cruise-addicts.com/forumguide.html CruiseAddicts.com forum guidelines]

142.177.79.135: examples of term in common use

2004-05-31T16:58:50Z

examples of term in common use

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:58, 31 May 2004
Line 4:		Line 4:

	When someone has actively participated in building a [[sysop power structure]] that engages in [[ad hominem revert]], [[ad hominem delete]], [[witch-hunt]], [[inquisitor]], [[psychiatry]], [[libel]] and [[echo chamber]] tactics, under the same identity, they ''should'' be ''actively'' [[driven off by trolls]], and good riddance. If they wish this not to happen, they should make a new identity, and change their behaviour under the old one on any [[large public wiki]] where they are known for this inexcusable [[sysop vandalism]] - probably also giving up any position in the [[sysop power structure]] as well. If they do all this and become an advocate for true [[soft security]] at least in cases other than [[simple vandalism]], and become widely known for changing their spots, at that point, it is the obligation of any '''troll-friendly''' wiki to not only accept them back, but honour their conversion to the ways of trolls...		When someone has actively participated in building a [[sysop power structure]] that engages in [[ad hominem revert]], [[ad hominem delete]], [[witch-hunt]], [[inquisitor]], [[psychiatry]], [[libel]] and [[echo chamber]] tactics, under the same identity, they ''should'' be ''actively'' [[driven off by trolls]], and good riddance. If they wish this not to happen, they should make a new identity, and change their behaviour under the old one on any [[large public wiki]] where they are known for this inexcusable [[sysop vandalism]] - probably also giving up any position in the [[sysop power structure]] as well. If they do all this and become an advocate for true [[soft security]] at least in cases other than [[simple vandalism]], and become widely known for changing their spots, at that point, it is the obligation of any '''troll-friendly''' wiki to not only accept them back, but honour their conversion to the ways of trolls...

			Usage of this phrase is very common:
			*"We also have troll friendly proxies," - [http://brawl-hall.com/pages/index2.php brawl-hall.com]
			*"VT is definitely a troll-friendly environment, but I make a habit
			of using the report option when they get too far out of line." - [http://www.funmac.com/showthread.php?t=6971 re: VersionTracker]
			*" Fanhome is a Troll friendly environment. ... Yet here you are. Like I said,
			Fanhome is Troll-friendly." - [http://mb3.theinsiders.com/fvancouvercanucksfrm1.showMessageRange?topicID=2963.topic&start=21&stop=31 Vancouver Canucks "FanHome" site]

			Some services say as explicit matter of policy that they are '''not troll-friendly'''. For instance, [[Wikipedia]] goes on [[wiki witchhunt]]s against presumed trolls who question its [[sysop power structure]]. The term troll-friendly is quite common:
			*"We are not Troll friendly. Postings that have been placed on the boards to disrupt the flow of conversation will be removed..." - [http://www.cruise-addicts.com/forumguide.html CruiseAddicts.com forum guidelines]