Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Policy & Help >

Troll-whispering

Page: 1(2)3

*

21:30 / 17.05.07

There are definitely concerns. I would absolutely not be in favor of editing the content of someone's post to make it appear that they were saying something different. Editing the way the text looks does not seem to me like the same thing. There are times, though, when disemvoweling would lead to unparseable ambiguity.

As I've read the thread thus far, it seems like the idea is that an offensive post would be rendered more difficult, although not impossible, to read, and also made to look silly. Slowing down the reading of the text may make the offensive statements less emotionally impactful. Removing the vowels will certainly make trigger words less googleable. Making a troll look silly* shouldn't be underestimated as a tactic for reducing their impact, either. None of these things reduce the offensiveness, but could perhaps diffuse the impact.

*More obviously silly than they already do.

21:47 / 17.05.07

I would absolutely not be in favor of editing the content of someone's post to make it appear that they were saying something different. Editing the way the text looks does not seem to me like the same thing.

Likewise.

Less searchable M0rd4nt

22:23 / 17.05.07

We do have a sort-of precedent for disemvowelling in that we have asterisked out slurs in the past. Not sure how that might map onto more complex acts of eyehurt, where the offense is not summed up in a simple little slur.

12:59 / 18.05.07

OK, thinking reasonably about this -- this is a practice that has actually been used by plenty of other people in the field, right?

Why don't we look at some of those boards and see how it functions?

13:18 / 18.05.07

Having trouble finding a message board within 10 minutes or so -- seems to be a bigger thing on very active blogs, which can be message board-like.

Here is one example.

I also wonder if this practice can be traced to the Brblth n vwls thrd tht gt pstd n Bng-Bng, but that's just curiosity. Eh, apparently it gs bck t 2002.

Oh, and here is autodisemvowelling software designed for use, I think, on Moveable Type comments.

ONLY NICE THINGS

13:29 / 18.05.07

Specifically, we'll need to look at boards which have a distributed moderation system and a hand-cranked applications process, which is part of the difference with Barbelith. We don't actually _get_ trolls in the traditional sense very much at the moment - we get people with social issues, peple with reality issues and people with social and reality issues, but your standard flamer/controversialist has not actually been much in evidence of late.

So, taste test. Would one apply this to ShadowSax? 33? Paranoidwriter? Epop? Neomancer?

STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK

13:42 / 18.05.07

I'm still not sure about it, to be honest. Kitteh filter is basically just a more refined version of the old "banish with mockery" tactic, which I'm rather partial too. I'll have to think more about the vowels thing.

Apart from anything else, unless we're all decided we're not going to engage these people EVER (which I would imagine is far from a unanimous choice) it would make dialogue (which some of us still like to think could work, given that, as Haus said, it's not really TROLL trolls we're dealing with most of the time) bloody difficult, and even more unrewarding for the rest of us than it often already is.

14:00 / 18.05.07

While I know ahead of time I would probably never be the one to make the call (second, yes, but never initiate) on either disemvowelling or kitteh-filtration, in thinking of it in terms of how would I react to a post that offended me or a post of my own that offended others, both times I would find the humorous drop of the kitteh-filter or kitteh follow-up to be much more calming and force a less reactionary read/reaction-post.

A good and classic troll probably would not be slowed down or have a perspective-shift, no, but somebody just having a bad day/week? There do seem to be more of those than there are out and out trolls, mostly because of the registration process. I would assume someone who posts rationally and politely in say, eighty-seven threads over two years and then suddenly launches an assault of act like a whore get treated like one 'cause I'm bustin' up yer old outmoded reality tunnels with serious science!, is just having a bad patch and may still be retrievable as a useful poster. I would further assume that they could be prompted by a humorous pause into reevaluating what they posted and behave better, possibly even apologising or adjusting the angry/insulting posts.

Or, they turn out to be an Epop.

Disemvowelling seems likely to further infuriate the poster experiencing the disemvowelment, while calming/slowing down the read for the rest of us. Especially if they're going back to old posts to produce their case-winning super-proof and its all consonants. Angry people aren't likely to look on that rationally and get methodical enough to slowly tune into a rational headspace.

ONLY NICE THINGS

14:13 / 18.05.07

Indeed. Having said which, I don't know if Kitteh will have much effect on somebody having a bad day, because what seems like gentle humour to one person will often seem like offensive mockery to another, especially another who has already had a bad enough day to flame out.

So, back to my question. 33? Paranoidwriter? Epop? Shadowsax? Neuromancer?

STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK

14:29 / 18.05.07

what seems like gentle humour to one person will often seem like offensive mockery to another, especially another who has already had a bad enough day to flame out

Well yes, but that's always been the case with the "banish with mockery" strategy too. And yes, it's something there are differing viewpoints on, but it's something we already effectively do to an extent.

I don't think disemvowelling would have worked in those cases, really, no.

Less searchable M0rd4nt

14:35 / 18.05.07

Might work with a Scarlett or a Morph, but point--we haven't exactly had many trolls in the sense of windup merchants for a while now, and that's when this kind of tactic seems to be most effective.

15:18 / 18.05.07

As I understand it disemvowelling also serves as a signal to people being or potentially being hurt by a post that it is recognised as such by the larger community. Validation as well as defanging offensive content.

I'm thinking of the Kitteh filter as a community sanity check, or check in. A more moderate way of saying 'you're freaking me out with that' plus it wouldn't touch the orignal text at all.

So as 7's listed upstream perhaps a Kitteh filter alert without touching a post is an early way for any poster to signal extreme discomfort in relation to a problematic post. Disemvowelling maybe the next step taken by mods once the dispute is reviewed by cooler heads?

ONLY NICE THINGS

15:29 / 18.05.07

I can't shake the suspicion that this is likely to lead to a lot of confused people and annoyed people adding threadrot to threads. Also, that standardising these approaches will lead to people with a less firm handle on appropriate action being a little free with them. We are talking about putting a Kitteh picture in the Kitteh thrad, aren't we, rather than dropping it into the thread itself?

15:40 / 18.05.07

I think some people (at least, Id and I) are intending the kitteh thread as a repository of catch-all pics to drop in other threads as necessary.

I see where your coming from, Haus, with the confusion, though. It seems to me to be a good option, but for other people's reactions... Would to pause Epop? No. Scarlett? It might have/could. Would it get overused and abused? There does need to be a clear ruling who can or should use the methods, and if there isn't a general faith in whomever's moderators to the point where the secondary votes aren't reassuring people, maybe in understanding that it should only fall to a certain subset of moderator elite? With explanations in the FAQ and possibly elsewhere, to catch people up to speed.

STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK

15:50 / 18.05.07

See, this "it MIGHT have stopped Scarlett" thing seems a little tenuous to bring in a complicated new policy on the back of. I mean, yes, Scarlett WAS/IS irritating, but not to quite the extent where a whole new strategy was required- one that might not even have worked and could have been counterproductive.

STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK

15:51 / 18.05.07

(That's on the vowel thing, btw. I still don't see the Kittehs as being much different to what many already do. But with more kittens).

Less searchable M0rd4nt

16:00 / 18.05.07

Yeaahh... don't know about anyone else but I was thinking of the pidgin posts going in their own thread. I kind of think that while using cat macros as critique looks like a lot of fun in my brane it won't work as well in real life.

Darn real life.

16:00 / 18.05.07

don't see the Kittehs as being much different to what many already do. But with more kittens

There probably isn't one. It's the 'more kittens' that does it, I think.

And it may just enrage somebody even further. It can't be that cute to everyone.

ONLY NICE THINGS

16:02 / 18.05.07

Well, Scarlett was also not a troll, in the sense of having been banned for trolling. She just left, probably because Barbelith was not what she had wanted. The only real piece of trolling was the "Those Scrappy Brits" thread, but that was pretty low-impact. Scarlett may have been with her contributions a net negative, but there was never any serious suggestion that her behaviour was bannable, merely not really up to scratch.

I think some people (at least, Id and I) are intending the kitteh thread as a repository of catch-all pics to drop in other threads as necessary.

Hmm. For reference, on the off-chance that a genuinely interesting thread were to be started in the Head Shop, if somebody were to start posting cute kitten pictures to it I have a feeling I might be tempted to move them for deletion as threadrot.

19:15 / 18.05.07

Ok so there's a sense of the Kitteh filter being a bit like Barbe-annoy land where we comment in a meta thread about on going conflicts/weirdnesses?

Going back to disemvowelling for a minute, how do people feel about the 3 mod approval (if I understand as a non mod how the current Lith-ware works?)

I like the idea of something that can be disemvowelled in the non policy forum thread it sprouted in and pasted whole cloth into a policy thread for discussion by people who want to go get into it. This makes some sense to me as a disemvowelled post should be deconstructed/reviewed by the community in its problematic original form but elsewhere. The in-thread disemvowelling would hopefully be read as a supportive/validating action by the community and allow them to get on with the discussion.

STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK

19:39 / 18.05.07

I'm still not a fan, to be honest. I don't think it would have worked in the majority of cases we've had problems with, and its application could just cause more friction among the rest of the board, which is one of the worst outcomes any time this happens.

ONLY NICE THINGS

19:53 / 18.05.07

In technical terms, this would be a text moderation - that takes one person to propose and one to agree. Three votes is for deleting and locking topics, I think.

20:38 / 18.05.07

I personally don't like the idea of redacting very much unless something is really over the top, but I don't have the same sensitivities that others may (or I could say, others don't have the same insensitivities that I do). That's always the problem with these things. I want to be able to see the posts, what was said and why and how people respond, but I don't want someone else to have to suffer reading or posting in a thread that is tainted to them, has become hostile or ruined. No one has to read or post but if they want to be involved in the community then they do.
It's the same when talking about levels of dismay or frustration at dealing with tools at times like that, different people have different tolerances (at different times). Those who feel particularly offended can feel betrayed that others don't share the same levels (or maybe more explcitly, express the same levels) of offense.

But that's not directly the point, sorry. As policy, it seems that it would be a line to cross to de-vowelify someone's posts, wouldn't it? It's almost more humiliating to a potentially volatile poster to vandalize their stupid posts rather than removing it altogether. But I guess if they kept raging on,their posts would be increasingly furious and disemvowelled and silly.
I'll be interested to see someone being an ass being pelted with a barrage of kittenballs. I hope I never disturb anyone enough to warrant it.

13:17 / 19.05.07

I'd be very uncomfortable with posts just being disemvowelled, but hiding them behind a *warning* of the spoiler +/- button would be good if its offensive.

I was of the impression that if someone had been an idiot the kitteh filter kitten pic above could be used as a flag by a poster responding to the offensive post, preferably with some kind of 'this is why I find it offensive' text, or a 'please look at what you are saying as I don't think it is constructive' kind of comment. Although my very first impression was that the kitteh would be plonked in the offensive post/s and the text would be put behind a spoiler button, but that sounds more complicated.

13:47 / 19.05.07

I'd be just as happy to have posts (questionable/messy/face-stab) stuck behind spoiler hideys as disemvowelled. The aim for me would be to keep things from veering wildly off onto bold, new tangents without actually censoring or disappearing outright.

I'm not sure I understand why people would view disemvowellment with more hostility than a big picture of a kitten speaking that inhuman pidgin, but that seems to be what most people are saying here.

14:44 / 19.05.07

I'm glad grant suggested the spoiler function as a hide-the-offense mechanism. It probably is the best option.

Actually, it might be the best option for cleaning up after yourself, after a realization and a look back. Less retyping into consonants or kitteh, and no searching for and photoshopping an appropriate image, the image and hidey html combinations, and so.

It seems the kindest and the simplest method. Does anybody suspect they, personally, would be offended by one of their posts (or series of posts) being hidden behind a spoiler in this manner, even if they didn't feel the post was offensive?

STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK

15:07 / 19.05.07

Heh. It's funny, I was just thinking about how I could see the reasoning behind both the troll whispering AND the spoiler tags, but couldn't see either of them actually doing anything of any use to us in solving our problems.

Putting 'em together, as grant has suggested, may actually be useful!

Less searchable M0rd4nt

10:19 / 20.05.07

I think the spoiler tag function for eyebleed would be great. I mean I know we have the Ignore button, but I don't like to overuse it since I'm a mod.

STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK

11:05 / 20.05.07

Yeah, totally agree. I've never actually had to use the ignore button, and I'd rather not, really.

*

21:03 / 20.05.07

I just did something stupid in Temple. I'm sorry. Hope it doesn't make problems.

ONLY NICE THINGS

23:42 / 20.05.07

Do you mean that you confused the suggestion that offensive content be put behind these javascript tags with the discussion of funny cat pictures, and used the javascript to conceal a funny cat picture? The javascript itself seems to be working... although that might be because it has already been fixed.

*

02:58 / 21.05.07

No, I mean I was probably provocative and threadrotty and possibly offensive where if I hadn't been the person on the other end might have been willing to hear my reasoned critique of the colonialism inherent in magical tourism, in itself potentially valuable enough that it was probably a shame to throw it out the window in favor of a funny cat picture first, but thank you for your kindness. I don't want to annoy good people with lolcat methods.

03:31 / 21.05.07

Putting 'em together, as grant has suggested,

Actually, it was Happiest Dave/Continental 7s who did that.

ONLY NICE THINGS

07:51 / 21.05.07

Which does support my concern - id is one of the smartest and most thoughtful people here. He would almost certainly not just turn up in a thread and call somebody a magical tourist in plain text. The lure of the lol is mighty. Now imagine what happens when the technique appears legitimated. I have a suspicion it will not be pretty.

14:01 / 21.05.07

Though his (entity's) experiment seems to indicate the javascript seems pretty great for putting offensive text one level removed with the 'Lithware as is. Would it be a functional option for troll whispering or is the one clickness not enough distance? I do think it would make people feel supported by the community to have these tagged as problematic.

( I liked the lolcat but understand why it is problematic in context... can we preserve it in the Kitteh Filter thread?)

Page: 1(2)3