tea.mathoverflow.net - Discussion Feed (Trolls and how to deal with them)

Andrew Stacey comments on "Trolls and how to deal with them" (476)

Andrew Stacey — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 23:37:51 -0800

Ah well, I was just trying to help. We're pretty good at dealing with trolls here in Norway.

Scott Morrison comments on "Trolls and how to deal with them" (473)

Scott Morrison — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 23:03:44 -0800

Andrew, unfortunately I think you need to wait until you reach the magic 10000 rep, when you get access to the moderator tools.

Andrew Stacey comments on "Trolls and how to deal with them" (469)

Andrew Stacey — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 13:25:46 -0800

Is it possible for non-moderators to be notified of flags? I couldn't see an obvious way to search for these. As Anton says, if a post gets 5 (ish) flags then it automatically gets deleted so those with a Sense of Civic Duty might want to keep an eye out - especially as the moderators are concentrated in the US.

Jon Awbrey comments on "Trolls and how to deal with them" (468)

Jon Awbrey — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 12:11:36 -0800

@Anton : Okay, then you must be doing a super good job, because I haven't seen any of those so far.

My personal policy on downvoting (which I hope is adopted by most of the MO community) is that if I downvote a post, I always leave a comment explaining why I did so and (if applicable) how the post can be improved, or if there is already such a comment which captures everything I'd like to say, I upvote it. That way, the user can do a better job next time.

I canst but will that maxim were acted on as a Categorical Imperative.

Jon

Anton Geraschenko comments on "Trolls and how to deal with them" (466)

Anton Geraschenko — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 11:30:07 -0800

@Jon: The blatantly inflammatory posts are usually deleted by moderators fairly quickly, so hopefully not many people have to see them, but they do happen. These users do not use a real name (not surprisingly), there are often multiple troll users coming from the same IP, and I suspect they are usually hiding behind an anonymous proxy. I assure you that under most circumstances, it is very easy to distinguish a troll from an honest user who happens to be annoying. In particular, we've never suspended a user using a real name.

I think the best thing to do is send the message, "the only response inflammatory content will get is to be flagged offensive and deleted". It's hard to imagine that anybody objecting to that.

If you want, you can also downvote troll posts, but I wouldn't bother. My personal policy on downvoting (which I hope is adopted by most of the MO community) is that if I downvote a post, I always leave a comment explaining why I did so and (if applicable) how the post can be improved, or if there is already such a comment which captures everything I'd like to say, I upvote it. That way, the user can do a better job next time. The author of a troll post obviously has no interest in doing a better job, so I don't bother trying to help.

Jon Awbrey comments on "Trolls and how to deal with them" (463)

Jon Awbrey — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 08:23:10 -0800

@Anton : Okay, I haven't seen any posts like that, but maybe I'm reading different topics. The point remains that I've never seen anything good come from that kind of language. I was under the impression that we are supposed to use our real names here, or at least identify ourselves on our profile pages, and that usually makes the normal sorts of peer guidance effective enough, always with discussion, not ostracism.

Anton Geraschenko comments on "Trolls and how to deal with them" (462)

Anton Geraschenko — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 07:50:58 -0800

@Jon: We're not talking about users who are merely irritating. Users who are unwittingly irritate others and contribute nothing valuable are "a nuisance", but users who post material whose primary intention is to be inflammatory are "trolls". The former should be dealt with gently and the later should be dealt with harshly.

Anton Geraschenko comments on "Trolls and how to deal with them" (461)

Anton Geraschenko — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 07:06:34 -0800

I've edited Scott's post because I wanted the proper procedure to appear right under the question, but I'll repeat it here because I'm not sure if people re-read posts, and I don't know if edited posts appear in the feed.

In addition to flagging a troll's post for moderator attention, please flag the post offensive and leave a comment encouraging other users to flag the post offensive. If a post accumulates five offensive flags, it is automatically deleted.

Jon Awbrey comments on "Trolls and how to deal with them" (460)

Jon Awbrey — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 05:19:23 -0800

In my experience, people who use the word "troll" to describe other people have probably been mis-enculturated somewhere along the line, so it's probably best for all people in the long run to leave that mis-culture behind.

Ilya Nikokoshev comments on "Trolls and how to deal with them" (459)

Ilya Nikokoshev — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 00:52:46 -0800

You should know about the following effect: downvotes take -2 rep, while upvotes give +10 rep. Therefore in people make 4 downvotes and somebody gives one upvote, the result is positive for the troll.

I tend to think cases of obvious trolling are outside the usual voting/comment/explanation process.

Scott Morrison comments on "Trolls and how to deal with them" (457)

Scott Morrison — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 23:39:52 -0800

(This is Anton editing Scott's post because I want the following to appear immediately under the question)

If you come across blatant troll posts, please do the following things:

Flag the post as offensive. If a post accumulates some number of offensive flags (I think 5), it is automatically deleted by the community user.
If somebody else has not already done so, leave a comment encouraging others to flag the post offensive, explaining that this will automatically delete the post.
Flag the post for moderator attention. If a moderator can get to the post quickly, he can take care of it. Also, if you flag the post, we can take appropriate action against the perpetrator.

As you said, you should not try to engage with the troll in any way.

(original post follows)

Please flag as "requires moderator attention". We'll get to them more quickly if they've been flagged -- I'm certainly not reading every post anymore, although I do read every title within about 12 hours of posting.

I'd encourage voting down trolls -- it's important that they don't accumulate enough reputation to comment, as this makes them harder to control.

Harrison Brown comments on "Trolls and how to deal with them" (456)

Harrison Brown — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 21:15:58 -0800

So we seem to have one or two trolls floating around. On the one hand, this means that someone's decided the MO community is worth trolling, which is a twisted kind of compliment; on the other hand, it means that there are people who spend time trying to annoy, disturb and/or upset us.

Chances are you already know this, if you're here, but just in case: the most basic rule on how to deal with someone who is trolling is *Do not feed the trolls.* This means, in a nutshell, don't reply to a trollish post or comment. Don't acknowledge a troll's existence, even, other than to flag their post and/or maybe mark it down.

I do have a couple questions, though.

1. What's the proper way to flag an inflammatory, "trollish" post? Or does it matter? (E.g., is there some type of priority system?)
2. Is there any advantage or disadvantage to marking down a post/reply/comment that seems to be there for the purpose of trolling? Or is doing so just wasting daily votes and possibly FTT?