Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This sub forum is a cesspool


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, GoBirds said:

They just want to hear the groupthink repeated and have it as a safe space, therefore anyone else is a “troll”. Amazing how politics make people act. 

No. 

Most of the trolls here, not all, but most, are on the conservative pro-Trump side. I know it, most people know it, and I think you know it too. I’m not talking about you or Rambling Wreck, but I have no idea why you and Rambling Wreck spend so much time defending these bozos. Don’t you guys realize that whenever they start their trolling it hurts your side? You should be as much for chasing them away as anyone else, more so in fact. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 822
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Thank god it’s separate from the FFA now 

Why on Earth do you spend so much time and energy worrying about what Squisitron and Sho Nuff do?

The back and forth of the last 12 hours in the Trump thread is fascinating to me, as is the continued, ever present, argument in our politics that somehow it is worse than it has ever been, or that so

9 minutes ago, timschochet said:

No. 

Most of the trolls here, not all, but most, are on the conservative pro-Trump side. I know it, most people know it, and I think you know it too. I’m not talking about you or Rambling Wreck, but I have no idea why you and Rambling Wreck spend so much time defending these bozos. Don’t you guys realize that whenever they start their trolling it hurts your side? You should be as much for chasing them away as anyone else, more so in fact. 

Who do I defend?  I don't recall saying the side your talking about does not contain trolls.  I'm saying there are plenty of trolls on the other side too.  Plenty.  But you guys never call them out.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

Who do I defend?  I don't recall saying the side your talking about does not contain trolls.  I'm saying there are plenty of trolls on the other side too.  Plenty.  But you guys never call them out.

Please post an example of left wing trolling 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, the rover said:

Please post an example of left wing trolling 

You ask for an example, he will post one, you will argue it isnt trolling. 

There. I just saved you both some time. No idea which one of you will be right, but neither one of you will be convinced otherwise. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, parasaurolophus said:

You ask for an example, he will post one, you will argue it isnt trolling. 

There. I just saved you both some time. No idea which one of you will be right, but neither one of you will be convinced otherwise. 

I almost never agree with anything you post, and I don’t agree with this, but it isn’t trolling.   

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, the rover said:

It’s not 5 pages, it’s 5 or so posters.  And if everyone would ignore them, that would be cool.  And it is on Joe, because the same 5 people keep getting reported, keep getting time outs, but are still allowed to post.  The moderation team knows.  They don’t care.

 

If there are 5 posters ruining the board for you, there’s an easy solution. Mute them.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, shader said:

If there are 5 posters ruining the board for you, there’s an easy solution. Mute them.  

Im suggesting that, and that everyone else does too.   Thanks for your agreement.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, the rover said:

Please post an example of left wing trolling 

I’m not going to mention any names but I liberally use the ignore function and I have several posters who people would say are left leaning that do nothing but argue and at times say things that can be taken as trolling or spam us with Twitter.  

I do think the vast majority of posters that are just plain trolls tend to be on the conservative side.  

If they would just add a feature where replies to people you’ve ignored could be hidden too then this place would be much more readable.  

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, AAABatteries said:

 

If they would just add a feature where replies to people you’ve ignored could be hidden too then this place would be much more readable.  

Apparently this exists since other boards with the same engine do it. Wjy do these guys not do it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, AAABatteries said:

I’m not going to mention any names but I liberally use the ignore function and I have several posters who people would say are left leaning that do nothing but argue and at times say things that can be taken as trolling or spam us with Twitter.  

I do think the vast majority of posters that are just plain trolls tend to be on the conservative side.  

If they would just add a feature where replies to people you’ve ignored could be hidden too then this place would be much more readable.  

Thanks. I don't know if Invision has this feature with the ignore replies but I'll ask. I can see how that would be helpful. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

There are some posts that seem to be clearly trolling where the primary goal is to get a reaction. They're often just gloating or dropping a match on a fire type things or posting just a single :lmao: emoji. Way uncool. Obviously don't do that. if you see it, please report it. But please be clear it's obviously someone really just trying to get a reaction. 

Way more of what gets labeled trolling is people just passive-aggressively labeling trolling something they don't agree with so they can take their little shot implying no sensible person could ever legitimately hold a view like that. So it must be trolling. Get over that. 

I've asked our guys to look at what Invision can do for hiding the replies of people on an ignore list. That would be a helpful feature.

For the most part, the board will operate as it has been. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked Keith to check with Invision. No idea if they can do this with our board and I can't promise anything. We're on the fringe for them as our board is one of the largest they host so we sometimes have to play by a little different rules than their other clients but we'll see what they say. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Joe Bryant said:

Absolutely. But make sure it's what I said. If you see someone posting in a political thread the equal of "lulz, Tom Brady sux and is the worst qb in the league", please report it. That's something nobody says ever. But if you see the equal, report it. 

In fact, for the comment on the report, include the words, "This is equal to lulz, Tom Brady sux and is the worst qb in the league".

Most of what I see isn't remotely close to that. It's someone with an opinion that's different. 

I don’t understand why “Tom Brady sux and is the worst QB” doesn’t also constitute an opinion that’s different.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

I don’t understand why “Tom Brady sux and is the worst QB” doesn’t also constitute an opinion that’s different.

It's an opinion virtually nobody has and one that everyone clearly sees is nothing more than trying to get a reaction. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Joe Bryant said:

It's an opinion virtually nobody has and one that everyone clearly sees is nothing more than trying to get a reaction. 

But what politician would be the Tom Brady?  You could say trump, Obama, Clinton, Bush or any other number of politicians and there are many that would agree.  And it really can’t be proven like we could point to Brady’s stats and clearly show he doesn’t suck. 

But i do agree a lazy post like that serves no purpose other than to get a reaction.  But most of these threads are zingers back and forth all day every day. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

But what politician would be the Tom Brady?  You could say trump, Obama, Clinton, Bush or any other number of politicians and there are many that would agree.  And it really can’t be proven like we could point to Brady’s stats and clearly show he doesn’t suck. 

But i do agree a lazy post like that serves no purpose other than to get a reaction.  But most of these threads are zingers back and forth all day every day. 

It's less Tom Brady equating to a politician and more just any general point. 

Even on the most zealous fantatical message board, you'll get virtually zero support saying Tom Brady is the worst QB in Football. 

Anyone that does so, is doing nothing more than looking for a reaction.

If you see a political statement that has as much support and is equal to "Tom Brady is the worst QB in Football", please report it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dedfin said:

Apparently this exists since other boards with the same engine do it. Wjy do these guys not do it?

Hey @Dedfin -- can you point me to some Invision boards where "ignore" extends even to quoted text? I'd like to see how they do it so I'll know better how to ask for it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Joe Bryant said:

It's an opinion virtually nobody has and one that everyone clearly sees is nothing more than trying to get a reaction. 

Well it seems you're creating a perverse incentive here.  If one person goes around saying "Brady is the worst" that's trolling.  But if twenty people go around saying "Brady is the worst", then that's not trolling?

There was a thread a few years ago where we were discussing then-Mayor Bloomberg's law that said that stores couldn't sell sodas more than 16 ounces.  I think I was the only person in the thread that supported the law.  I spent a lot of time defending the law against all the criticism from the 99% of posters that disagreed with me.  That was an opinion that very few people had, many people accused me of doing it just to get a reaction.  But I assure you I was sincere.

In my judgment it's not so much about the opinion it's about how an opinion is defended.  If someone wants to argue that Tom Brady is the worst QB in the league and can formulate a coherent argument, I don't think that's a problem.  The problem is when they can't or won't engage in an honest discussion.

So now, to bring it back to the political threads, I see no difference between "Tom Brady sux" and "climate change is a hoax" or "Trump is a great President."  The fact that there is some support in the world for the argument that "climate change is a hoax" does not seem to me to be sufficient reason to treat that bogus statement as different from the Brady one.  Because I'm pretty sure I could organize twenty guys on this board to go around saying Brady was terrible and it wouldn't make it any more true.  It would just be twenty times as much trolling.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

Well it seems you're creating a perverse incentive here.  If one person goes around saying "Brady is the worst" that's trolling.  But if twenty people go around saying "Brady is the worst", then that's not trolling?

There was a thread a few years ago where we were discussing then-Mayor Bloomberg's law that said that stores couldn't sell sodas more than 16 ounces.  I think I was the only person in the thread that supported the law.  I spent a lot of time defending the law against all the criticism from the 99% of posters that disagreed with me.  That was an opinion that very few people had, many people accused me of doing it just to get a reaction.  But I assure you I was sincere.

In my judgment it's not so much about the opinion it's about how an opinion is defended.  If someone wants to argue that Tom Brady is the worst QB in the league and can formulate a coherent argument, I don't think that's a problem.  The problem is when they can't or won't engage in an honest discussion.

So now, to bring it back to the political threads, I see no difference between "Tom Brady sux" and "climate change is a hoax" or "Trump is a great President."  The fact that there is some support in the world for the argument that "climate change is a hoax" does not seem to me to be sufficient reason to treat that bogus statement as different from the Brady one.  Because I'm pretty sure I could organize twenty guys on this board to go around saying Brady was terrible and it wouldn't make it any more true.  It would just be twenty times as much trolling.

It'd be lame but I suppose one could manufacture and orchestrate enough people to try and break the system.

I don't believe that's been a real issue or problem in the past and I don't see it being one in the future. 

And agreed for sure, how a position is defended is crucial. 

That's where a discussion happens.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

Just to clarify, I'm not trying to influence people to make ridiculous and inflammatory arguments.  I'm just saying that it doesn't become less ridiculous or inflammatory just because the view is held more widely.

Understood. Thanks. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

Well it seems you're creating a perverse incentive here.  If one person goes around saying "Brady is the worst" that's trolling.  But if twenty people go around saying "Brady is the worst", then that's not trolling?

There was a thread a few years ago where we were discussing then-Mayor Bloomberg's law that said that stores couldn't sell sodas more than 16 ounces.  I think I was the only person in the thread that supported the law.  I spent a lot of time defending the law against all the criticism from the 99% of posters that disagreed with me.  That was an opinion that very few people had, many people accused me of doing it just to get a reaction.  But I assure you I was sincere.

In my judgment it's not so much about the opinion it's about how an opinion is defended.  If someone wants to argue that Tom Brady is the worst QB in the league and can formulate a coherent argument, I don't think that's a problem.  The problem is when they can't or won't engage in an honest discussion.

So now, to bring it back to the political threads, I see no difference between "Tom Brady sux" and "climate change is a hoax" or "Trump is a great President."  The fact that there is some support in the world for the argument that "climate change is a hoax" does not seem to me to be sufficient reason to treat that bogus statement as different from the Brady one.  Because I'm pretty sure I could organize twenty guys on this board to go around saying Brady was terrible and it wouldn't make it any more true.  It would just be twenty times as much trolling.

I don't remember the soda discussion but I would have backed you up on that.

In your examples I think there are people that believe climate change is a hoax.  There are meteorologists that I follow because I like there coverage of major storms that believe it's a hoax.   I don't think anyone is trolling when they post that.  Most of those discussions are lazy and dramatic anyway and turn into accusations about believing in science or not.  We even had a thread last week that insinuated the world would end in a decade if we don't fix the problem immediately.  I don't remember the last time I've seen someone actually discuss policies related to climate change and defend their position of that actual policy but I admit I don't keep up with every thread here so I could have missed it.

I also think people believe Trump is a great President and they aren't trolling by posting it.  Sure, it triggers a large subset of posters here but it's still not trolling and they do back it up with reasons why.  I've seen unemployment, stock market, his SCOTUS picks as reasons why.  But the reasons they point to and drowned out immediately because any Trump is great post is going to be quickly followed by 25 Trump sucks posts and 50 you're a troll posts.

Controversial political opinions aren't trolling.  Any opinion is going to have people picking sides instantly and there are posters that will believe both sides of the opinion.  The trolling here is lumping posters with large groups (Anyone that supports Kavanaugh hates women and supports rapists, for example).  Or when posters are relentless until they "win" an argument and have to have the last zinger (there are literally 50+ pages of the same 5 people discussing guns with the same comments page after page after page).

I don't think anyone could put together a coherent argument that Brady sucks (though I'm open if anyone wants to try).  His stats, W/L record, rings, etc... proves he doesn't suck so that's definitely trolling.  The political stuff is mostly opinion.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Joe Bryant said:

Absolutely. But make sure it's what I said. If you see someone posting in a political thread the equal of "lulz, Tom Brady sux and is the worst qb in the league", please report it. That's something nobody says ever. But if you see the equal, report it. 

In fact, for the comment on the report, include the words, "This is equal to lulz, Tom Brady sux and is the worst qb in the league".

Most of what I see isn't remotely close to that. It's someone with an opinion that's different. 

I don't know Joe, one guy said something like "you (as in liberals/democrats/progressives) are still the Detroit Lions". I guess it's not perfectly equal, so

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

 

There was a thread a few years ago where we were discussing then-Mayor Bloomberg's law that said that stores couldn't sell sodas more than 16 ounces.  I think I was the only person in the thread that supported the law.  I spent a lot of time defending the law against all the criticism from the 99% of posters that disagreed with me.  That was an opinion that very few people had, many people accused me of doing it just to get a reaction.  But I assure you I was sincere.

 

 

Tangent. This is fascinating. I only vaguely remember the discussion and I'm sure you're right. But that's a pretty wild illustration of how the board has changed. I can't imagine a proposal today thought of as being equally liberal having a similar response here today. When people say the board has shifted, I think that's more what they're talking about. Interesting. 

Edited by Joe Bryant
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

I don't think anyone could put together a coherent argument that Brady sucks (though I'm open if anyone wants to try).  His stats, W/L record, rings, etc... proves he doesn't suck so that's definitely trolling.  The political stuff is mostly opinion.

 

I guess I'm just not convinced that we can judge the sincerity of a poster's position based upon whether other people also hold that position.  A single person expressing an unpopular view can be sincere.  And a group of people all expressing the same view might all be trolls.  To me it's just a bad shortcut for figuring out how to encourage good discussion.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

 

I guess I'm just not convinced that we can judge the sincerity of a poster's position based upon whether other people also hold that position.  A single person expressing an unpopular view can be sincere.  And a group of people all expressing the same view might all be trolls.  To me it's just a bad shortcut for figuring out how to encourage good discussion.

I'd agree. I think the defensible part has to factor in too. 

The groupthink or echo chamber element is a big part of this to and why it's not solely the number of people. We don't want to drown out voices. So it's a balance for sure.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dedfin said:

Apparently this exists since other boards with the same engine do it. Wjy do these guys not do it?

Please let us know where you're seeing this with the invision board engine. Thanks. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Matthias said:

This is somewhat less flagrant, but there's a few guys who would routinely come in and say that there was zero evidence of Trump-Russia collusion. And other people would take their time and explain, and link and show, that there's a massive amount of evidence. There's a huge number of facts that suggest that there was, and is, a connection between Russia & Trump. Which is exactly what evidence is and means. So people explain, "this is the definition of evidence and here is 50 separate facts that shows this connection and thus are 50 pieces of evidence" which the person would never respond to or say, "Oh, ok." Just come back the next day with, "LULZ. There's no evidence of collusion." 

The, "echo chamber" aspect is an illusion and a delusion. There's plenty of conservatives in here. MT is a libertarian which means mostly traditional conservative policies. Nobody at all is trying to run MT off of the board. 

There are plenty of posts from the other side that equal the LULZ and stuff you mentioned.  Here's a few from two threads in the last couple of days so don't act like it's one side doing that on this forum.  

He's the classic WYSIWYG buffoon

What a bs puff piece. Lap dogs for this doosh.

Stupid ####### Trump.

The nerve of these deplorables

"Donald Trump is an awful human being, a terrible incarnation of a President, a gross excuse of a man, a rabidly aggressive anti-intellectual dullard and an open bigot and misogynist who offers little in the way of thoughtful policy and even less in the context of civil discourse.  To support him entails being blind to the myopic vision and puerile inanity he offers up on any given day which leads me to reasonably conclude that your judgement skills are severely lacking and therefore any notion of fruitful discussion is nonexistent.  Aint worth the time effort anymore."
 

I see very few people saying there's zero evidence of collusion with Russia.  I see people saying until Trump is charged with a crime then he's innocent.  It's the same standard that was applied to Clinton and the email server during the election.  And we've had years of "but emails" trolling posts too.

Funny how you bring up one poster (Maurile).  Others could easily say there are plenty of liberals and no one is trying to run Henry Ford off the forum.  Because Henry isn't the problem just like Maurile isn't the problem.  If you're going to whine about the posts that don't bring enough facts for you then you should be whining about the 500 responses to those that drag every thread down too.  Including the many you've responded to over the years (I'm guilty as well).

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Matthias said:

Also as an aside the board needs something in place to prevent Person X getting their account suspended then showing up the next day as Person Y. It's not the alias name that's the problem.

Maybe I'm too aggressive using ignore but the aliases that seem like obvious trolls go directly on ignore.  Honestly, I get a little irritated by some of our longtime posters who are great posters and knowledgeable who spend time arguing with someone that I feel isn't worth the time.  That's where this hide replies to users on ignore feature would be so awesome.  I'll never have to read the nonsense.  If that means I start missing some posts by Henry or Tim or fatguy I'm willing to take that trade off.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

 

"Donald Trump is an awful human being, a terrible incarnation of a President, a gross excuse of a man, a rabidly aggressive anti-intellectual dullard and an open bigot and misogynist who offers little in the way of thoughtful policy and even less in the context of civil discourse.  To support him entails being blind to the myopic vision and puerile inanity he offers up on any given day which leads me to reasonably conclude that your judgement skills are severely lacking and therefore any notion of fruitful discussion is nonexistent.  Aint worth the time effort anymore."
 

 

This is a considered post and is in the thread designed specifically to elicit back and forth about why we are where we are in today's political climate.  Counter my thoughts of you disagree.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Joe Bryant said:

There are some posts that seem to be clearly trolling where the primary goal is to get a reaction. They're often just gloating or dropping a match on a fire type things or posting just a single :lmao: emoji. Way uncool. Obviously don't do that. if you see it, please report it. But please be clear it's obviously someone really just trying to get a reaction. 

Way more of what gets labeled trolling is people just passive-aggressively labeling trolling something they don't agree with so they can take their little shot implying no sensible person could ever legitimately hold a view like that. So it must be trolling. Get over that. 

I've asked our guys to look at what Invision can do for hiding the replies of people on an ignore list. That would be a helpful feature.

For the most part, the board will operate as it has been. 

I think a lot of people are angry over the brightness of the forum too.  The color scheme is simply too bright, and it subconsciously makes them angry at each other like a bull seeing red.  I think a dark theme would help out a lot to calm people’s nerves.  Just sayin Joe

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

I think a lot of people are angry over the brightness of the forum too.  The color scheme is simply too bright, and it subconsciously makes them angry at each other like a bull seeing red.  I think a dark theme would help out a lot to calm people’s nerves.  Just sayin Joe

Interesting theory here.  Dark themes are much better either way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Matthias said:

Also as an aside the board needs something in place to prevent Person X getting their account suspended then showing up the next day as Person Y. It's not the alias name that's the problem.

I don't think invision has this feature, but the absolute best way I've seen this be handled on other boards is that when someone gets banned, they can still post like nothing ever happened, but only they can see their own posts.  Nobody else can see them.  So they just keep posting away never knowing that only they can see their own posts. 

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Memphis Foundry said:

Hey @Dedfin -- can you point me to some Invision boards where "ignore" extends even to quoted text? I'd like to see how they do it so I'll know better how to ask for it.

As stated in my pm, I was mistaken it was not Invision. I guess it looked like it to me, who is dumb.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Scoresman said:

I don't think invision has this feature, but the absolute best way I've seen this be handled on other boards is that when someone gets banned, they can still post like nothing ever happened, but only they can see their own posts.  Nobody else can see them.  So they just keep posting away never knowing that only they can see their own posts. 

:lmao:

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

It's the same standard that was applied to Clinton and the email server during the election.  And we've had years of "but emails" trolling posts too.

To be fair, the chants of "Lock her up" were not imaginary....

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Matthias said:

Also as an aside the board needs something in place to prevent Person X getting their account suspended then showing up the next day as Person Y. It's not the alias name that's the problem.

That's kind of a internet-wide problem

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Matthias said:

Psh. Back in 1994 when I messed around with an online board I could IP-ban someone. I can't imagine we've regressed in technology in the last 24 years.

Much easier to spoof your IP or if your IP is dynamically assigned then you risk blocking others.   Note, this is my layman's understanding - I could be totally wrong on this but I don't think it's as easy as "There's @Sinn Fein's IP - he gone".  Even if we all wished that were true.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Scoresman said:

I don't think invision has this feature, but the absolute best way I've seen this be handled on other boards is that when someone gets banned, they can still post like nothing ever happened, but only they can see their own posts.  Nobody else can see them.  So they just keep posting away never knowing that only they can see their own posts. 

This is too funny, probably the best solution 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

60 minutes was on last night.  In the Trump thread, there were 4-5 posts calling Trump an idiot, a buffoon and a few other derogatory things.  On this board, those things are ok and "normal".  If you went into a board that leaned heavily "right", those posts would be considered as trollish.  

Honestly, it's absurd that grown adults care about people posting on internet threads and complain to thread moderators about it.  It's extremely juvenile.  Block people that annoy you and move on.  If you think it's extremely egregious and offends you to your core, report them to Joe. 

This board is about as left as it gets on the net.  I've been accused of being on the far-right hundreds of times despite me never supporting a Republican candidate on this board, never casting a vote in my life for a Republican and never advocated for anyone to vote in any direction.  But I've called into question things taken as fact from time to time and have earned those labels and been accused of trolling countless times.  All because I don't think like the majority of people on this board.  But honestly, I don't lie, I'm not trying to "get a reaction", I'm just expressing my thoughts.  I'd guess that most people are doing the same, aside from the few obvious trolls that pop up on occasion.

But even the "Q" guy that was on here...was he really trolling?  There are real, legitimate people that believe that way.  Sometimes it's best to let them have their space and express their thoughts, as long as they aren't breaking board rules.

Personally, I think Joe handles this board pretty well.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Matthias said:

Psh. Back in 1994 when I messed around with an online board I could IP-ban someone. I can't imagine we've regressed in technology in the last 24 years.

Actually it's much easier to get around IP address banning now than it used to be.  If your router gets banned, shut off wifi, connect on cell service and you've circumvented the IP ban.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, AAABatteries said:

Much easier to spoof your IP or if your IP is dynamically assigned then you risk blocking others.   Note, this is my layman's understanding - I could be totally wrong on this but I don't think it's as easy as "There's @Sinn Fein's IP - he gone".  Even if we all wished that were true.

What isn't difficult is to hire moderators (already done) to make judgement calls on this stuff. No one needs to go "well his IP doesn't match anyone that has caused trouble before so let's just watch him post some troll posts and see where it goes from here".

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Scoresman said:

I don't think invision has this feature, but the absolute best way I've seen this be handled on other boards is that when someone gets banned, they can still post like nothing ever happened, but only they can see their own posts.  Nobody else can see them.  So they just keep posting away never knowing that only they can see their own posts. 

I can totally see this happening to me and me flailing and wailing around, "WTF IS GOING ON HERE? EVEN FLOPPO WON'T TALK TO ME ANY MORE!"

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Matthias said:

:shrug:

People have said, "put the trolls on ignore" when it's been said multiple times by multiple people, "We have." There's still other problems caused by people who bring negative value to discussions.

Trump's own closest advisors have called him a moron and an idiot. When he talks, he meanders. Apparently in meetings he'll tell the same anecdote 2 or 3 times, 10 minutes apart. It's not about political leanings. It's about being able to defend a stated position. That's it.

Why are they problems?  Because they express opinions you don't believe?

I could very easily defend the opinion that Trump is NOT an idiot.  You may not believe me, but I could mount a defense.  But at the end of that discussion, I'd guarantee you'd feel I didn't defend the stated position.  Would that mean that I should leave the board or that I'm bringing negative value to the discussion because I can't defend that position?

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Matthias said:

Trump is racist. He's sexist. He's committed sexual assaults. He tells objectively provable lies every single day. He's egoistic. He's thin-skinned. He's an autocrat. He cozies up to dictators and alienates the leaders of democracies who are our closest allies. He profits directly off of his administration. He has numerous links to a foreign power whose judgment he believes and follows over every branch of the US intelligence agencies.

There's a legion of reasons for people to think poorly of him. That have nothing to do with how one has voted in the past 30 years.

I'm fine with your description of Trump.  But on a heavy leaning conservative board, the above would be considered an extremely trollish post.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...