Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Eng if planesandships is a troll he isnt a very good one. There were here before that were much better at it. Beside that i like to read the fact filled replies of the members.Which problem though? Trolling or difference of opinion? Trolling is easy to spot and should be moderated. The well structured discussion of facts and answering questions are good things, completely different to trolling.
Eng
I don't agree. I propose that Trolling is bad for the Forum and should be, at the very least, recognised and controlled where needed, you don't seem to support that. As for now implying twice that I advocate a "triggerhappy" censorship of postings.. where did that come from?Differentiating between a person who is really trolling vs. a person who comes here with already developed opinions that are not super-aligned with what other forum members say is in many cases a subjective matter. It is not beyond the established members of this forum to make snarky comments, either.
Being trigger-happy might be the modus operandi at Greg's channel, and hopefully not here.
Come on Mods! This is at least the third Troll that has spoiled this forum in the last year. You need a better perception of how these muckspreading posters operate. I suggest that trolling is obvious in the style and Moderators should act more decisively. IMO, Moderating is an active task, or it should otherwise be called Observing.
Eng
Yeah, see my post #45. I won't give that creep any views for his YT crap.This is what I and Bill and others are trying to get at with Greg.
Not going to ban him or delete his post just because his opinion is different to others.
Yes, but it's not a matter of different opinions. Your comment here seems to fly in the face of all the reasoned and factual contributions from other knowledgeable members when trolling behaviour occurs. The problem with trolls is that they may present Pseudo-arguments, often with passive-aggressive responses to discussion, lack of factual information and sometimes whacky statements, all designed to undermine the site. Another troll tactic is to totally ignore a reasoned reply that someone has presented correctly and then flit-off onto other aspects with opinions but few facts or constructive discussion.
I am disappointed that this Forum seems unable to control trolling behaviour, unchecked trolling is a very negative force. Yet again, this site seems unable to control it.
Eng
You do suck at it...Would you like to do better? I'll stand down and hand my job over to you, since we are doing such a terrible job here…
I don't agree. I propose that Trolling is bad for the Forum and should be, at the very least, recognised and controlled where needed, you don't seem to support that. As for now implying twice that I advocate a "triggerhappy" censorship of postings.. where did that come from?
In case of confusion, I am suggesting that moderation of trolling should be the job of "Moderators".
Eng
i'd add, that if we just ban anybody who doesn't agree with our narrative, then wont be just like this Greg bloke ?
if he is a troll as you suggest, then why would we not ban him ?So, some sort of bandwagon rolling here about "Banning". Who mentioned that? Who mentioned not allowing differences of opinion?
Eng
So, some sort of bandwagon rolling here about "Banning". Who mentioned that? Who mentioned not allowing differences of opinion?
Eng
So, some sort of bandwagon rolling here about "Banning". Who mentioned that? Who mentioned not allowing differences of opinion?
Eng
Moderation of trolling type posts does not have to mean banning anyone straight-off, that would be the unusual extreme action for outright abuse of anyone or the Forum rules.You did. You are telling us to moderate him. How do you propose we go about moderating someone's different opinion/views that are contrary to yours, when they have not broken any of the forum rules as of yet?
I'm sorry that we disappoint you so much.
Moderation of trolling type posts does not have to mean banning anyone straight-off, that would be the unusual extreme action for outright abuse of anyone or the Forum rules.
Trolling usually starts with far less extreme and even gentle posts that develop. It is possible to recognise the development and give on-thread comment and/or PM as appropriate.
Depending on the posts, it may well be appropriate to edit parts of posts and notify the poster as required whilst leaving the majority of the post. This work is obviously labour intensive but, it is only required where bad intention is recognised, and it can stop unpleasant or low standard posting. Certainly, on another forum, this method of moderation produces a high standard of postings and unpleasant confrontations are rapidly resolved, often with continuation of a satisfactory exchange on the thread.
So, my point is that moderation should start as soon as the unpleasant aspects of possible trolling are seen, with notice to the appropriate poster. In my experience, early correction has positive results.
Eng