ShalomEveryone is a full of shit enemy of humanity, and I ask for them to be banned for perpetually sealioning, shilling, lying, and dragging down discussions (only the last is ban-worthy by site rules).

submitted by JasonCarswell from (self.AskSaidIt)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Drewski 11 insightful - 3 fun11 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 3 fun -  (15 children)

Just a troll, block and move on.

[–]Chipit 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (14 children)

All that does is prevent you from seeing its posts.

The problem is that it's polluting the entire site. Which is the account's whole idea behind posting. It needs to be banned, for everyone's sake.

[–]magnora7 14 insightful - 7 fun14 insightful - 6 fun15 insightful - 7 fun -  (13 children)

The problem is that one person's "Please remove this obvious problem" is another person's "How dare you censor me, this site is corrupt and I'm going to tell everyone how bad it is!" and everyone draws that line in a different place.

So say that I might see a banning as justified, but then maybe 60% of users do not agree (often because they don't know the full story in many cases and just see the surface). So as admin it's much easier to do nothing, than to potentially jeopardize the site by appearing corrupt by seemingly banning users that don't deserve it. This is why we have the pyramid of debate, so there is an objective metric for removal.

There is no obvious solution to this type of problem. If we make a "you can't troll" rule for saidit for example, then that changes this entire forum completely after 3 years of being consistent with our rules, and many people would leave in response to that. Not to mention what is considered "trolling" is a very subjective thing, and that opinion will differ from mod to mod. This is basically how subreddit moderation on reddit works right now, and why it's such a mess. The line between "satire" and "trolling" is very thin in many cases.

New rules like "no trolling" could be done with a new website, but to make such a drastic change in policy this late in the game to saidit is basically what ruqqus did and exactly why it had a user revolt and collapsed and failed. They made an abrupt change in policy once they realized how deep this trolling/shilling problem is, and it was like a rug pull for a good portion of the community, and the upset users (many of them shills and trolls) whipped the other users in to a frenzy in response to the policy change, and it led to the admins being overwhelmed and the admin team fracturing and collapsing, causing ruqqus to shut down.

Saidit has thankfully had the pyramid of debate since day 1, and we've hardly changed our rules at all since the day we started, and this is our strong point. It does leave us vulnerable in certain ways like the OP, but it also makes us strong because it's obvious we're following the rules we've had since day 1, which shows how non-corrupt our admin and mod team is, which is our strong point compared to reddit and other sites like ruqqus. It's why we're still here, and will continue to be here.

This is why we must follow the pyramid of debate, and be very careful as admins not to just "make up rules" in the case of annoying users. This is also why we added a userban button, to put the choice in the hands of the users rather than the admins. It's not a perfect solution, but we've arrived at this set of solutions for all these very specific reasons.

[–]Chipit 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (12 children)

Well, then the trolls are going to continue their work. Saidit is never going to be a Reddit replacement, not with these people deliberately posting in order to drive people away from the site. It's their day job.

userban button, to put the choice in the hands of the users rather than the admins

All that does is block you from seeing their posts. It's nearly useless; trolls still have an effect. It's pulling the wool over your own eyes. If blocking instead removed the ability of trolls to interact with your posts and comments in any way, that would be a tremendous improvement. They'd have one of their chief weapons - the ability to stench up any thread - declawed.

[–]magnora7 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (10 children)

We do ban spam accounts, so if he's spamming a lot that would warrant banning.

I understand your frustration, believe me I do. But if we banned everyone who I thought was deliberately sabotaging this forum but not breaking any rules, we'd lose a portion of our users. Those users would very likely stir up a revolt in the saidit userbase by making new user accounts and posting to "expose the censorship and rule changes" that would cause another larger portion of users to leave. Which is exactly what caused the failure of ruqqus, and voat, and many more. So that's obviously not what we want.

And furthermore, banning these users who are not actually technically breaking any rules functionally accomplishes nothing, as they immediately create another account and start another "personality" and then they'd have to be banned again after they create enough of a mess on the new account. It's never-ending whack-a-mole with them deliberately being annoying as possible without technically breaking any rules. And it is with the intent of driving away other users, I agree.

And also please realize many of them want to be banned (without technically breaking any rules) so they can make a stink on reddit and saidit about how bad saidit is and how corrupt and broken it is, because they weren't breaking any rules. And some of these people apparently have functionally infinite IP addresses, because they apparently have military-grade VPNs or can completely spoof IPs. So that's fun. It's probably paid operators, since it's been happening for hours a day for 3 years straight, and they have all this intense IP spoofing software. Same thing affected ruqqus, voat, poal, etc

This is just how the internet is now, unfortunately. But we think our solutions for these problems are pretty good compared to most sites, generally speaking. But I could also see the use for an additional new website that has slightly more strict rules. But it also requires a level of trust in the admins from the users, to judge what is "harmful trolling" and what isn't. It's a tightrope.

If blocking instead removed the ability of trolls to interact with your posts and comments in any way, that would be a tremendous improvement.

So in addition to you not seeing their activity, they would also not see your activity? I think this makes sense, I would support this upgrade. I can't really see any downsides.

[–]AXXA 9 insightful - 4 fun9 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 4 fun -  (8 children)

So in addition to you not seeing their activity, they would also not see your activity? I think this makes sense, I would support this upgrade. I can't really see any downsides.

This is how Reddit does it now and it will end up killing them. It's a horrible idea that enables intellectual cowards. Saidit is about challenging your thinking with different perspectives. It would be an absolute goldmine for shills and trolls. All they would need to do is block everybody that ever dared disagree with their narrative. Then they could spew whatever lies they wished without ever being challenged or corrected. The strength of Saidit is that we CAN disagree. That freedom to be able to disagree exists hardly anyplace else right now. Saidit is already perfect exactly as it is. Please don't give in to the intellectual cowards. Any idea that can't stand up to scrutiny is a worthless intellectual dead-end.

[–]magnora7 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (6 children)

Hm interesting points. But, I don't think people getting blocked are going to intellectually engage in an honest way anyway, that's rather the point of point of the block function isn't it? To remove from sight people you think are not acting in good faith.

If a troll blocked all people who disagreed with them, and then those people couldn't see it, then they're basically quarantining themselves off from the rest of the website, right? So then the trolling isn't as effective because it doesn't have as broad of reach.

I'm more undecided on it now because of your good points, but I think it's still a good idea despite the potential downsides.

[–]AXXA 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

For the sake of argument we could assume a ratio of one active participant to ten inactive non-participant readers. The troll only has to block the one active participant in order to reach the ten readers unchallenged and uncorrected.

[–]magnora7 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah, fair point. I'll have to think about it some more I guess.

But IRL a restraining order blocks both parties from seeing each other, or even being within distance of each other, so it does seem weird to allow the bully to watch the person being bullied even after blocking, which is how ours is currently configured.

But I see your point about people abusing it to shut down any dissent in their threads. If only there was a way to differentiate between the two situations...

[–]AXXA 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

The account that made the suggestion has an extensive history of posting numerous topics of relevant discussion and then making completely baseless ad hominem attacks against anybody that tries to discuss it. That account is the only account that I've had to warn at the ad hominem level of the Pyramid simply because of the constant non-stop use of the tactic. I don't trust that account's motivations one bit.

I agree with you that it would be nice to be able to separate warring parties. A lot of times people just aren't willing to let the other side have the last word and the drama just keeps spiraling out of control. And then when an admin is finally forced to warn one side or the other they often assume that the admin is taking sides and adds them into the drama. They just don't understand that the admin is a referee and not a player. I haven't thought of a perfect solution yet but I'll keep thinking about it and let you know my ideas.

[–]AXXA 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

It's also intellectually, philosophically, and morally wrong. It would be the equivalent of handing censorship machine guns out at a toddler daycare. Please note that the account that made the suggestion has been identified as a troll by many people including the OP and myself. Please note his use of concern trolling.

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I don't think people getting blocked are going to intellectual engage in an honest way anyway

It goes both ways. People block for stupid reasons too.

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Saidit is already perfect exactly as it is.

IFIFY:
Saidit would be perfect exactly as it is if you removed the block user altogether - and - released the problems into the wilderness of FreedIt.com.

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

then they'd have to be banned again

Subjective as it is, dragging down is against the rules. You could (and have) defined much as dragging down.

They get away with it if you do nothing and they win 100%.

Whack the moles and some, or even many, may not return, thus not losing 100%.

so they can make a stink on reddit

Why do you even care about Reddit or their lies?

But I could also see the use for an additional new website that has slightly more strict rules.

I have 2 ideas for new topical forums, preferably on decentralized Lemmy, if you're interested in branching out, assuming there aren't any like these. One is ScienceUncensored.com (or whatever name you prefer) and the other I forget (somewhere in my notes). You may have some obvious trolling, and political tainting but I would expect the science discussion to generally be more elevated.

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, block user has always been VERY problematic.

If blocking instead removed the ability of trolls to interact with your posts and comments in any way,

Great idea! Read the immunization explanation below.