NationStates Jolt Archive


Declared intentional trolling.

Alien Born
13-06-2005, 19:31
Normally I am a pretty tolerant sort of forumite. However ther is one poster that particularly gets my back up. I had not been able to work out why until this was posted.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9057713&postcount=681

I have considered whether my bad reaction to his posts are justified, and I feel that they are. In this one thread alone he has managed to antagonise at least half a dozen people.
Alien Born
14-06-2005, 20:07
Is some kind of response to this likely?
Kryozerkia
14-06-2005, 20:18
Hi and welcome to the real world ;)
Frisbeeteria
14-06-2005, 23:21
Post # 681 by AnarchyeL, right? There are no nearby deleted posts to throw off the count, as far as I saw. I don't see anything illegal or actionable about anything in that post. Am I looking at the right one?

Passive aggressiveness and pedantry are not against site rules. Sorry.
Lacadaemon
14-06-2005, 23:51
Passive aggressiveness and pedantry are not against site rules. Sorry.


Good to know.
Alien Born
15-06-2005, 00:17
To be insulting is irrational, unless it is your purpose to anger others and alienate yourself. Is that it?


Maybe... sometimes you only really get to know a person when you see how they behave when they are angry. Some people sublimate their anger into a forcefully rational attack on their opponent's ideas. Others whimper about their hurt feelings.

combined with your own definition of trolling:

Trolling: Posts that are made with the aim of angering people.

makes a pretty clear cut admission of trolling I would say. How do you see nothing wrong with it Fris?
Alien Born
17-06-2005, 03:15
Bump for a reply (again :( )
Frisbeeteria
17-06-2005, 04:10
sometimes you only really get to know a person when you see how they behave when they are angry... is a statement of opinion. That's the post you linked, and that's the post I ruled on. A link on 'admission of trolling' is pointless without any actual trolling. You didn't link to any trolling posts, and I didn't have the patience or the interest in getting the gestalt of the entire 700+ post thread.

I went back 40 posts and read up to that one, and I saw an exchange of arrogance mixed with content from both parties. Since that pretty much defines 90% of the non-spam posts on this forum, I didn't see it as actionable.

By the way, I didn't write the definition of trolling, I gathered it from prior mod posts and rulings. Trolling is always subjective, and I prefer to err on the side of freedom of expression. Another mod could have read and ruled differently.