Still not clear on the rules

[TNHarley]

Best avoid the religion section...I learned that lesson long ago

It can get rough. Thats for sure.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

It can get rough. Thats for sure.

Anytime you mix up atheists and people of faith nothing good is going to happen....throw in a biased mod? Utter disaster

 

[Natural Citizen]

I really think they're just trying to avoid this stuff...



Makes sense.

There's a couple of really good posters who frequent that section, though. Doesn't matter whether everyone finds them agreeable or not, I do find that they're capable of leading civil dialogue. So I do take time to read it, whenever I see those. Though I rarely comment. I'm not really all that intellectually qualified to be popping off in that section. Though I'd be comfortable in the ethics topicals.

It's up to them to set the example, realistically speaking.

Can they? We will see. The only problem I forsee is that there are also some really combative people who, in their own view, share the same cause as the civil ones.

So whether the civil ones can police their own is what to watch.

Getting back to that mirror TN rolled out in front of one of the worst offenders.

If you start bickering over whose God is bigger than the next guy's you're doomed to fail. America is, after all, a haven for pretty much all religions.

As far as trolls? There are no such things as trolls. Not really. Trolls can only exist if you empower them and provide them the opportunity to actually be trolls. Continue carrying yourselves in an adult manner and a so-called troll simply won't get to be a troll. They're not interested in civil discussion. When they realize they're not going to be fed, they do tend to naturally fade away.


They end up just being a third wheel. And everybody just looks at them like they're dumb asses. Which defeats their whole purpose.

 

[Coyote]

I think there is a certain degree of subjectivity in what is considered trolling, and some of it comes down to intent. If it is off topic and designed to disrupt or derail the conversation that could be trolling.

Hang on sloopy said something relevant in that as long as there is some relevant content, then anything goes. That is sort of true, but not completely.

For example, if you have one line of content, and follow up with two paragraphs describing the peculiar life of a member and his unique ability to perform unlikely anatomical contortions, that might not fly.

Is the content merely added to provide a vehicle for the flaming/trolling, or is the flaming there to spice up the content? If you structure it in such a way to force us to guess, and many purposely do like to walk the fine line, then you might not agree with our take.

In religion (I don’t go there often) I think trolling is largely people posting stuff solely to disrupt or provoke a reaction rather than present a point of view. Sometimes the OP itself is purposefully inflammatory and provokes the same in return so perhaps those are better moved elsewhere.

 

[Devils_Advocate]

They are wanting to clean up the religion section so posters can feel safe posting in there ( while other sections get attacked daily ).

Personally I would avoid the area like it is the plague or Covid whore trying to kiss you when snot is pouring from her or his nose, but if you must know trolling will not be allowed at all by some mods.

Also if you give Will a tickle and a wink he might be nice but do not tell him I said that…

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

They are wanting to clean up the religion section so posters can feel safe posting in there

It's not about "feeling safe." It's about a group that shares a COMMON INTEREST having a DISCUSSION without gnats buzzing around WITH THE INTENT of DISRUPTING A CONVERSATION.

Seems everybody understands except the zombie followers of the cult of Atheism. Actually, we all know you understand, but the followers of that cult believe the only way to gain converts is by pissing on any thread that dares bring God into the conversation

 

[Natural Citizen]

Seems everybody understands except the zombie followers of the cult of Atheism. Actually, we all know you understand, but the followers of that cult believe the only way to gain converts is by pissing on any thread that dares bring God into the conversation

Oh, you're trying to convert people? Hm. Well. That's a bit different than just having casual conversation between like-minded people. Whatever, though.

Lemme tell you something. With that poor temperament you display so often, you're not going to be 'converting' anyone. All that does is chase people away. Nobody wants to be associated with an obnoxious asshole like that. And it works both ways. Self-control is very important when responding to bad actors. Reason being is that often their entire purpose is to simply bring the real you out for all to see, versus the impression of yourself that you're trying to relay onto others. You know, the old I'm not who I am, I'm who I think you think I am gag? The looking-glass self theory, I think it's called, maybe give it a read.

Why do you think the pews have been thinning out over recent years? Duh.

I've read your posts. You're more of a liability to their cause than an asset, observably. You need to be supervised. Heck, I wouldn't let you lead a lunch line. It's like every day is a case of the Modays with you. Respectfully speaking. There are capable people who post in that section. Perhaps observe and learn from them how to effectively communicate with others. Follow their lead. Or something. But your way just will not do. Huh uh. You make them look bad. Consistently. They're likely not gonna tell you that. So, jerks like me have to. But I do so for your own good, whether I accept or reject your beliefs.

Putting that aside, yes, there certainly are atheists who act just like you, calling the other side zombie followers of a cult or whatever. Nobody is denying that. And it's not very nice. But not all non-believers act like that. Maybe some people are not atheists at all and just want to ask questions. What, they're not allowed? Or is it more so that you aren't interested in putting any effort into your 'conversions'? Is it just easier to run to a mod and call someone a cultist when you feel a little challenged? Confident men tend to welcome a good challenge if they truly believe in their cause. They believe in their own ability to support their arguments, no matter what. Just because someone is challenging your views in a way that makes you uncomfortable doesn't mean they're trying to tear down your beliefs. It doesn't mean they're zombie cultists. I'm sure as heck not gonna buy anything from a feller who doesn't think he has to put any effort into selling his warez and who just feels that he's entitled to the sale. Ever consider that maybe the mods are just as tired of you whining as they are those you're kicking around? Perhaps even more so?

Now, again, I'm telling you this as respectfully as I can. I'm not yelling at you. I'm not all mad and stuff. I'm just putting it out there.

Do you think everything's supposed to just be easy?

 

[Natural Citizen]

It's not about "feeling safe." It's about a group that shares a COMMON INTEREST having a DISCUSSION without gnats buzzing around WITH THE INTENT of DISRUPTING A CONVERSATION.

Make up your mind. Are you actively 'converting' or are you sharing a common interest in discussion? It's important to make a distinction there, or at least be clear and intellectually honest in your intent, before just throwing up your victim status card there since moderation seems to be the topic here. Do you feel that moderation should serve as an asset or a utiluty to your efforts of conversion, asuming that's you're intent? Or do you just want them to break up fights when you call atheists a cult and when they call you a cult?

Or better yet...maybe just forgive them if they peeve you?

And say it, don't spray it. Gosh, you're so mad all the time.

 

[Moonglow]

Seems 2 mods have disagreements about what "trolling" even means. One mod says its ok as long as you are trying to have a decent convo. The other says if your not jerking off the OP, its trolling. So I am confused. I guess the "trolling" definition is subjective? News to me.
I am not questioning mods actions. I am clarifying the rules. We ALL need to know them, right?

They zap when you are not trolling and don't when you do. It's very clear.

 

[Hang on Sloopy]

I think there is a certain degree of subjectivity in what is considered trolling, and some of it comes down to intent. If it is off topic and designed to disrupt or derail the conversation that could be trolling.

Hang on sloopy said something relevant in that as long as there is some relevant content, then anything goes. That is sort of true, but not completely.

For example, if you have one line of content, and follow up with two paragraphs describing the peculiar life of a member and his unique ability to perform unlikely anatomical contortions, that might not fly.

Is the content merely added to provide a vehicle for the flaming/trolling, or is the flaming there to spice up the content? If you structure it in such a way to force us to guess, and many purposely do like to walk the fine line, then you might not agree with our take.

In religion (I don’t go there often) I think trolling is largely people posting stuff solely to disrupt or provoke a reaction rather than present a point of view. Sometimes the OP itself is purposefully inflammatory and provokes the same in return so perhaps those are better moved elsewhere.

Thank You Cayote, our dedicated moderator who strives for the best in every ones posting experience.

I will add all flaming and cursing should be done in 3 sentences or less. In fact most posts should be 4 sentences or less. If ya can't say sumptin in 4 sentences you can't say shit

Let's face it. I bet half of you post on your employers dime amiright? Stealing away looking busy with your hands in your panties....................No one has time or the attention span to read anything lengthy here. Good God

 

[Sunsettommy]

To me it is the INTENT of the suspected troll who should be stopped rapidly or the thread collapses in a mess, it what they do, they sow problems, which a good Moderation team should be united in stopping, this isn't censoring here because the trolls are not into mature discussion, they are here to disrupt.

Here from Livewire a good coverage on Trolls and their trolling behaviors,

Livewire

Internet Trolling: How Do You Spot a Real Troll?​

What Is Internet Trolling?​

In simple terms, trolling is when someone comments or responds to something you post, usually in a confrontational way that is designed to garner a strong, emotional reaction. Although many people use the term in contexts where a sense of humor is appreciated, the truth is that internet trolling can get pretty nasty and isn't always a laughing matter.


The Urban Dictionary has a bunch of definitions under the term “trolling,” but the first one that pops up seems to define it as simply as possible. So, according to the Urban Dictionary’s top-rated definition for “trolling,” it can be defined as:

"the deliberate act, (by a Troll – noun or adjective), of making random unsolicited and/or controversial comments on various internet forums with the intent to provoke an emotional knee jerk reaction from unsuspecting readers to engage in a fight or argument."

LINK for the rest

 

[Sunsettommy]

I think there is a certain degree of subjectivity in what is considered trolling, and some of it comes down to intent. If it is off topic and designed to disrupt or derail the conversation that could be trolling.

Hang on sloopy said something relevant in that as long as there is some relevant content, then anything goes. That is sort of true, but not completely.

For example, if you have one line of content, and follow up with two paragraphs describing the peculiar life of a member and his unique ability to perform unlikely anatomical contortions, that might not fly.

Is the content merely added to provide a vehicle for the flaming/trolling, or is the flaming there to spice up the content? If you structure it in such a way to force us to guess, and many purposely do like to walk the fine line, then you might not agree with our take.

In religion (I don’t go there often) I think trolling is largely people posting stuff solely to disrupt or provoke a reaction rather than present a point of view. Sometimes the OP itself is purposefully inflammatory and provokes the same in return so perhaps those are better moved elsewhere.

Trolls don't care if it is off topic or not it is irrelevant anyway since their intention is to disrupt the thread with inflammatory statements and/or personal attacks that is why they do.

Trolling is not difficult to spot and isn't hard to see the damage it causes, it is the timidity of the Moderation of many forums is why it exist so much, the fear of being called a censor by members of the forum over material people post seems to slow them down.

I am always mystified in why Trolling posts seems so hard for Moderators to figure, it is one of the biggest failings of Moderators around the net, yet it is actually one of the easiest misbehavior to spot and stop.

I can spot it easily and delete it when I do my Moderation rounds, it is why the websites has a good reputation of keeping the threads intact.

I really don't understand why others can't figure it out..........

 

[Coyote]

Trolls don't care if it is off topic or not it is irrelevant anyway since their intention is to disrupt the thread with inflammatory statements and/or personal attacks that is why they do.

Trolling is not difficult to spot and isn't hard to see the damage it causes, it is the timidity of the Moderation of many forums is why it exist so much, the fear of being called a censor by members of the forum over material people post seems to slow them down.

I am always mystified in why Trolling posts seems so hard for Moderators to figure, it is one of the biggest failings of Moderators around the net, yet it is actually one of the easiest misbehavior to spot and stop.

I can spot it easily and delete it when I do my Moderation rounds, it is why the websites has a good reputation of keeping the threads intact.

I really don't understand why others can't figure it out..........

I think it is because we are caught between determining whether it is free speech or trolling...for me personallt, it isn't so cut and dry

 

[Sunsettommy]

I think it is because we are caught between determining whether it is free speech or trolling...for me personallt, it isn't so cut and dry

That fear of censoring over obvious trolling needs to stop, I never have that problem in forums I moderate and the people are happy since all that slime and sludge doesn't take root and the discussion goes on unabated.

One way is to keep this in mind when you wonder what to do:

"the deliberate act, (by a Troll – noun or adjective), of making random unsolicited and/or controversial comments on various internet forums with the intent to provoke an emotional knee jerk reaction from unsuspecting readers to engage in a fight or argument."

I posted a report on a comment that meets this trolling definition to a tee. The person injected Trump into it that had NOTHING to do with the article I posted and his demand that it be removed from History is absurd since there is a LOT of history in it and about a Country once called the USSR.....

I don't see how difficult it is to see it....

 

[TNHarley]

It's not about "feeling safe." It's about a group that shares a COMMON INTEREST having a DISCUSSION without gnats buzzing around WITH THE INTENT of DISRUPTING A CONVERSATION.

Seems everybody understands except the zombie followers of the cult of Atheism. Actually, we all know you understand, but the followers of that cult believe the only way to gain converts is by pissing on any thread that dares bring God into the conversation

Im not an atheist.
Why do you see EVERYTHING in a binary?
The world is so complex. Stop being so fucking stupid.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Apparently that isnt good enough in the religion section.

Isn't that the same as the shitlands?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Every time there is any attempt to discuss Islam, the moderation of USMB absolutely goes into overdrive to railroad the thread into a discussion of Christianity, instead. They absolutely DEMAND that people attack Christianiry in these threads and do everything in their power to prevent any discussion of the subject.

In one thread, I received multiple demands that I attack the Amish of all things, and when I refused because it was off topic, I was thread banned.

With this intend, I would say that the rules here are the same as they have always been. Mods do whatever they want to whover they want whenever they want and none of the other mods will ever confront them, no matter how utterly corrupt their behavior.

 

[iceberg]

Seems 2 mods have disagreements about what "trolling" even means. One mod says its ok as long as you are trying to have a decent convo. The other says if your not jerking off the OP, its trolling. So I am confused. I guess the "trolling" definition is subjective? News to me.
I am not questioning mods actions. I am clarifying the rules. We ALL need to know them, right?

it's not like it matters. you can be here for a week or less and in that time you'll see posters who are nothing BUT trolls in every single post.

 

[iceberg]

I think it is because we are caught between determining whether it is free speech or trolling...for me personallt, it isn't so cut and dry

and that is the hard part. i know what *I* consider trolling, but the world isn't about me. i would never want to be a mod and the 2 biggest reasons are - i *would* clamp down on people who simply drop snark time and time again and add nothing to the conversation.

many would view that as harsh but if you don't, boundaries get pushed. what used to be wrong suddenly becomes accepted simply for trying to appease too many. in time, the rules become very subjective and a whole new problem comes about.

people mad about the overall lack of control and what they view to be constant attacks on their posts. i know for a fact when i post something who will reply and attack me for it. while on ignore, sometimes in our moments of weakness we take that off and look to see what the reply was.

sure enough, nothing but "god you're stupid" in various forms and fashions. reporting it to date has changed nothing. it still happens. at most that person was banned from that thread that time. so they just joined in on the next one.

but those people make rational conversation impossible. hell, even "rational" becomes something we have to argue over what is or isn't. being human we have our own views and *all* tend to gravitate to that style. when things get real bad, we tend to categorize people into groups - person xyz said 123, ergo it's wrong.

we don't listen anymore, we wait to be heard. we don't ask questions for the sake of knowledge, we ask them for validation of our own views. our society has become very closed to anything new from anyone we don't already preapprove of and that is simply the most dangerous mindset i can think of these days.

but all of that makes having to determine what is trolling vs conversation. while the people i consider trolls may well be, that could also just be how they talk in general and i get quick to say "another one of THOSE mindsets" and i know i can do that. so i do try to back up and come at it from a neutral standpoint.

trouble is, you can't do that alone.

ANYWAY - point #2 of why i'd never mod is i can't put those people on ignore.

there. #2 was a much shorter answer.

 

[danielpalos]

Seems 2 mods have disagreements about what "trolling" even means. One mod says its ok as long as you are trying to have a decent convo. The other says if your not jerking off the OP, its trolling. So I am confused. I guess the "trolling" definition is subjective? News to me.
I am not questioning mods actions. I am clarifying the rules. We ALL need to know them, right?

Just plain fallacy would be trolling if I were a moderator.