Note to trolls

This is my blog, not a publicly owned free-for-all; you do not have the right to consume my comments threads with flame wars. If you want to do this, you should start your own blog, where you can launch interpersonal attacks to your heart's content. Here, I expect you to add to the conversation, or leave us.

I have used my deleting tools very lightly, because I want to be welcoming, and because once you start deleting people's comments, its hard to ensure that you do so evenhandedly. However, we're in a new wave of trollery, and I'm getting complaints again. So if your comments fit any of the following models:

1) Almost all of them contain personal insults directed against another commenter

2) You find yourself posting entire comments dedicated only to expressing your dislike of other people on the thread who have NOT been making personal attacks.

3) The proofs you offer consist largely of stating that your opinions are self evidently obvious and people who disagree with you are amoral morons.

4) They provoke multiple people into complaining about your hostility

Chances are good you are a troll. And chances are better than even that in the near future, I am going to start deleting your comments and leaving snarky notes in their place.

There are plenty of commenters who disagree with me vehemently, and are also valued members of the community; if you find yourself unsure as to how to leave a comment without trolling, try asking yourself WWFD (What Would Freddie Do?). Remember, Smokey the Bear says, "Only you can prevent flame wars".

Comments

Beautifully put

Posted by Pete | July 12, 2008 7:34 PM

I'd add one more thing: ideas are important; issues are important; people are important; the world is important.

But posting anonymous comments on the internet? Not so important.

Posted by lampwick | July 12, 2008 9:25 PM

If I had any talent, I'd write a book on troll skat -- diagnostic evidence of the passage (pun intended) of a troll:

"So you are saying..."

"So you believe that ..."

"Every one with half a brain knows ..."

Or three pages of "quoted" stuff preceeds one line or less with near zero content.

And so on and so forth.

And if I _really_ had talent, I'd write a filter to bin them (the trolls and their feeders) automagically.

Posted by Larry Sheldon | July 12, 2008 9:26 PM

This is my blog, not a publicly owned free-for-all; you do not have the right to consume my comments threads with flame wars.

Well, sorta not really:

Copyright © 2008 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.

I'm sure they've got your back, though

Posted by southpaw | July 12, 2008 9:46 PM

Megan:

Having read your 4 models I must state that:

You are the most beautiful woman I have ever seen. You also make cogent and salient points.

Notwithstanding that you incessantly captivate my mind, my body, and my soul the rest of my entire comment is dedicated to expressing my love and deep respect for the other people on this thread--even those that have been making generic praises of other people.

Nonetheless, given the overwhelming empirical evidence, I must also note that those that disagree with me tend to be righteous geniuses.

Thus, I hope to entice the singular people in this thread into praising ourselves about our communal love.

Your devoted reader,

Luis A. del Valle

PS God bless you.

Posted by Luis A. Del Valle | July 12, 2008 9:53 PM

Kumbaya, my Lord, kumbaya
Kumbaya, my Lord, kumbaya
Kumbaya, my Lord, kumbaya
O Lord, kumbaya

Someone’s laughing, Lord, kumbaya
Someone’s laughing, Lord, kumbaya
Someone’s laughing, Lord, kumbaya
O Lord, kumbaya

Someone’s crying, Lord, kumbaya
Someone’s crying, Lord, kumbaya
Someone’s crying, Lord, kumbaya
O Lord, kumbaya

Someone’s praying, Lord, kumbaya
Someone’s praying, Lord, kumbaya
Someone’s praying, Lord, kumbaya
O Lord, kumbaya

Someone’s singing, Lord, kumbaya
Someone’s singing, Lord, kumbaya
Someone’s singing, Lord, kumbaya
O Lord, kumbaya

Posted by Marvin V. Frey | July 12, 2008 10:24 PM

Love the sentiment - public comment areas seem to lure the baser elements of our society. Would be nice for people to decide on their own to take a higher road.

Press DEL and liberate yourself.

Posted by davemaz | July 12, 2008 10:46 PM

WWFD? Start his own blog!

Megan, quite a few years ago you told me that I might as well start my own blog. I'm usually quite grateful for what that encouragement has brought.

Really, folks - start your own. It's not hard, and if you are interesting and link responsibly, readers will come.

Posted by Michael Tinkler | July 12, 2008 11:01 PM

You are not quite an uncompensated martyr, are you, Ms. McArdle?

The Atlantic pays you, and owns your copyright. Can't stand the heat of being called out on your own insipidness? Leave the remunerated kitchen. Not that you'd fare any better with your own bought-and-paid-for blog. But of course you know that. How does it feel?

Posted by Glenn Kenny | July 12, 2008 11:53 PM

Okay, fair enough, and I admit that I should not have poked CG, with Joseph Conrad or anything else. It seemed like a good idea at the time.

Posted by aMouseforallSeasons | July 13, 2008 12:41 AM

"If you want to do this, you should start your own blog..."

It was a long while back, but I recall that the individual (or perhaps one of the individuals) at whom I suspect this is directed has claimed that this, in fact, was his(her?) blog. Or at least he(she?) told me in attempting to banish me from ever commenting here (and no I wasn't hurling personal attacks back). Sorry - no link since it was, as I said, a long while back and I don't recall the topic.

Posted by Mark | July 13, 2008 12:54 AM

What follows is a well-received oldie-but-goodie that, thanks to some Byzantine rules, found its way into a post of mine during my own forum-slogging days... the high-strung may find it useful in avoiding antisocial behavior, or in identifying those who are in fact practicing the same.

If someone questions your statements, you are being criticized; if someone questions your right to make those statements, you are being flamed.

If you defend your statements, you are carrying on a discussion; if you attack your critics, you are flaming.

If you make a strong statement on the basis of experience, that means something. But if other people have had different experiences, that means at least as much.

Posted by ben | July 13, 2008 1:31 AM

Oh Glenn, bitter because nobody wants to pay you for your trite film criticism? Perhaps you are drunk and feeling bad about your own unemployment but I think you'll find that Megan allows quite a bit of criticism on this blog.

Posted by R. Totale | July 13, 2008 1:50 AM

To Glenn,

If you held a party, telling your friends to invite their friends, and then you held forth on something, and one of your friends' friends called repeatedly called you (say) the n-word (let's assume for the sake of this hypothetical that you're black), then why are you the bad guy for throwing him out? I don't get it.

Posted by Questioner | July 13, 2008 2:13 AM

Glenn Fanny writes:

'You are not quite an uncompensated martyr, are you, Ms. McArdle?

The Atlantic pays you, and owns your copyright. Can't stand the heat of being called out on your own insipidness? Leave the remunerated kitchen. Not that you'd fare any better with your own bought-and-paid-for blog. But of course you know that. How does it feel?

Ah yes, ad hominem argumentation: the first and only intellectual arsenal available to the imbecilic trolls that inhabit blogs. Whether Ms. McArdle is paid for making an argument is irrelevant. If you are offended that you fall under Ms. McArdle' definition of a tasteless troll, refute her definition, provide a raison d'etre for trolls, but do not engage in stupid sophistry by attacking a characteristic of Ms. McArdle. It is not her fault that her internet access is provided by a Corporation while your acess is provided by your parents.

And could you please give an example of her insipidnes? I know providing facts to substantiate your sophistry is as unnatural to you as your birth, but give it a try expand your intellectual horizon, Socrates.

Posted by Luis A. del Valle | July 13, 2008 2:30 AM

This is my blog, not a publicly owned free-for-all; you do not have the right t--

Oh, blow it out your ass, Howard...

Posted by dave™© | July 13, 2008 3:47 AM

And just for the record, this isn't "your" blog, dearie - it's the property of the Atlantic, who were stupid enough to hire you and are, hopefully, suffering for it.

Posted by dave™© | July 13, 2008 3:49 AM

rawk. on.
Look.. I'm an unrepentant liberal.. and I disagree with your points from time to time...

vehemently.. in fact..

but this is your blog. You have control... if people don't like it.. they can go someplace else...

free will and all..

and now.. back to your regularly scheduled programs...

Posted by tricstmr | July 13, 2008 3:50 AM

And could you please give an example of her insipidnes?

"I imagine this is what it feels like to be a refugee..."

Posted by dave™© | July 13, 2008 3:52 AM

"And just for the record, this isn't "your" blog, dearie - it's the property of the Atlantic, who were stupid enough to hire you and are, hopefully, suffering for it."

I don't know... would you object to someone who rents an apartment and is hosting a party saying to some drunken lout, "This is my apartment and I'm kicking you out?"

From back in my family law days, when you valued a professional enterprise you would have to discount a certain part of it for estate division purposes for "personal goodwill." Thus, a family physician's practice would have very little value other than the equipment, while an air conditioning business would have comparatively greater value.

This blog is almost entirely built on Megan's personal goodwill. If she hung her shingle somewhere else, likely a substantial part of her readership would follow her there (I followed her here from Assymettrical Information).

So, all things considered, I think it's entirely appropriate for her to say "it's my blog, play nice."

Posted by benmor | July 13, 2008 5:10 AM

On my own cafe press site where I sell stuff, one items says "Hatred and bigotry are not moral values".

That item sells well with all my stuff that mocks the president and vice president and calls a portion of America morons.

I may be a hypocrite.

Posted by dave™© | July 13, 2008 7:07 AM

This blog is almost entirely built on Megan's personal goodwill. If she hung her shingle somewhere else, likely a substantial part of her readership would follow her there (I followed her here from Assymettrical Information).

So, all things considered, I think it's entirely appropriate for her to say "it's my blog, play nice."

Posted by benmor | July 13, 2008 5:10 AM

This cat's post proves, all too readily, that some people really are on the left-hand side of the Bell Curve.

To be clear, I'm referencing those who think this: "You are not quite an uncompensated martyr, are you, Ms. McArdle?

The Atlantic pays you, and owns your copyright. Can't stand the heat of being called out on your own insipidness? Leave the remunerated kitchen. Not that you'd fare any better with your own bought-and-paid-for blog. But of course you know that. How does it feel?

Posted by Glenn Kenny | July 12, 2008 11:53 PM

is additive, to any debate. It's too F'in comical that 'Glenn Kenny' writes a weblog on Film/Cinema, for he fits, too well, into the old joke about Projectionists and Movie Theatres..

Posted by Mark E Hoffer | July 13, 2008 7:45 AM

"This cat's post proves, all too readily, that some people really are on the left-hand side of the Bell Curve."

Why is that?

Posted by benmor | July 13, 2008 7:56 AM

sorry to be oblique.

I meant to convey: 1) that you, by example, certainly are not, and 2) ..follows from there.

Posted by Mark E Hoffer | July 13, 2008 8:08 AM

Hic de minimus obstat

Posted by Michael | July 13, 2008 8:50 AM

Anonymouse--that was not flaming, that was gentle humor directed at the content of his post, not the man himself. Sadly, it probably falls under the rubric of "don't feed the trolls", but it was amusing and entirely appropriate. You are not a member of our troll community.

Posted by Megan McArdle | July 13, 2008 8:54 AM

It should probably be noted that I occasionally hang out under bridges and demand children answer obscure trivia questions before I let them pass.

Posted by Freddie | July 13, 2008 10:29 AM

Freddie:
But do you like to eat billy goats? I've had goat (don't know whether it was billy or nanny) twice at Jamaican restaurants and found it quite tasty -- very like lamb. On the other hand, it was so heavily spiced that I wondered if it wouldn't have been so tasty if it was just the goat and a bit of salt and pepper.

Here is a cheerful little story about a troll and three billy goats. We can all think of our favorite trolls while reading the happy ending.

Posted by Dr. Weevil | July 13, 2008 11:17 AM

I like to make intrapersonal attacks. I start out a comment making the case for a viewpoint I don't like, then argue my way to the opposite viewpoint, and top it off by calling myself a moron for ever considering that the original viewpoint was correct.

Posted by Jeff | July 13, 2008 2:09 PM

Bush lied and people died!
Bill Clinton killed Vincet Foster!
Obama is Muslim!
McCain is a lousy pilot!
Religion is the opiate of the masses!
Blog censorship is a sign of the incipient creeping hand of fascism in our society!

Hmm. That actually is Kinda fun...

Of course, Clinton really Did have Vince Foster killed but I don't want to argue about it. Some sheeple are just too dense to grasp the truth and it's futile to attempt enlightenment.

Posted by Quoth | July 13, 2008 2:50 PM

Er, who the devil is Freddie?

Posted by Quoth | July 13, 2008 2:52 PM

Could someone please provide a definition of a troll? It seems like a descriptor that serves falsely to provide an "objective" label for what is in fact a purely subjective valuation.

If you want to say no personal attacks (which is a fine rule in my opinion), that is objective. But if you say this person is a troll and that person isn't, what in the world are you really talking about?

Posted by Mike | July 13, 2008 5:10 PM

Proof by repeated assertion is a common tactic of those who lack any substantive ammo.

Posted by PA | July 13, 2008 6:06 PM

Hmmmmmm....

"2) You find yourself posting entire comments dedicated only to expressing your dislike of other people on the thread who have NOT been making personal attacks."

So far I don't think I've ever posted a comment dedicated only to expressing my dislike of any other people on any thread.

But now that I know it's OK as long as they have been making personal attacks - I'M ON THE LOOKOUT!

Posted by Jens Fiederer | July 13, 2008 7:49 PM

Oh...and please don't treat this as a hijack, but the billy goat item reminded me of a recent bit of learning....

Back when I was growing up in the Virgin Islands, there was a local (well, local to the Caribbean) hit song, "Ram Goat Liver".

The lyrics included....

"Ram goat liver good to make mannish water...."

Until only recently, I had assumed this was just a way of saying that liver enhanced potency/fertility for the man, but recent discussion while arranging a class reunion revealed there actually is such a dish:

http://www.gapyear.com/features/mannish_water_are_you_man_enough.html

Posted by Jens Fiederer | July 13, 2008 7:58 PM

Sadly, it probably falls under the rubric of "don't feed the trolls", but it was amusing and entirely appropriate. You are not a member of our troll community.

Oh, good. It would be rather awkward, what with the whole height discrepancy and corresponding lack of "commanding presence". In general, we mice types are much more effective at ankle biting and ruining the dry-good stores. Children and goats, I leave to others who possess the appropriately-sized molars.

Posted by aMouseforallSeasons | July 13, 2008 8:10 PM

This post brings up a number of good questions concerning the economics of blogging:

1) How is value added by building a blog? Who adds what value?

2) Do trolls add value to a blog? Does that value add vary by the blog audience? How about the maturity of the blog?

3) What value do you get in return for revealing your real name when commenting?

Posted by Sweet Lou | July 13, 2008 8:59 PM

Dave(tm), since you've been brave enough to represent those attacking with, let us say, a little more vigor, let me ask you an honest question.

Why do you bother?

To persuade people to your point of view requires that you hold at least some common values and world-views with those to whom you are speaking. However, it seems pretty clear that you don't.

For example, MM's refugee comment is a complete non-issue for anyone here who isn't determined to be offended by MM. It's exactly the sort of light-hearted comment that people make, and trying to interpret it as more than that makes you out as someone desperate to find offense.

If your base values and assumptions are *so* different from pretty much any reader here, you must realize that your efforts that could be used to persuade borderline believers to your cause could be more effectively used elsewhere.

So, once again, why do you bother?

For the record, I bother because while I came to AI a few years ago for the pleasure of being outraged by "libertarian clap-trap", I found MM was far too nuanced to cause me simple outrage (which is why she's constantly being shot at by the true libertarians). Instead, I spend some effort making comments where I might possibly shift a readers or two a few degrees towards my viewpoint, thus doing my part for the international leftist conspiracy to dominate the world.

Posted by Tom West | July 13, 2008 9:55 PM

Tom West,

I know that all the good, smart people agree with me, because the liberal blogs that I read tell me this is the case. Therefore, the people here who disagree with me are stupid and/or evil.

When the stupid and/or evil people argue with me, that will simply prove that I must have hit a mark - otherwise, why would they be paying attention to me.

I don't want to persuade, I just don't want to be ignored. Recognize me! Legitimize me!

PAY ATTENTION TO ME!!!!!!!!

Posted by dave™© | July 13, 2008 11:56 PM

Dave, you would get further if you called these right-wing hacks out for COWARDLY choosing to not post their name, email address, photograph, credit card number, and medical history.

Those cowardly cowering cowards.

(See, now they HAVE to respond. I called them cowards!)

Posted by Charles Giacommetti | July 14, 2008 12:07 AM

Very good. Personally I figure if either 1,2 0r 3 occurs I have won the field of ideas, because insults and personal attacks are the only ammunition left to the opposition. ;-)

Posted by Dan Kauffman | July 14, 2008 1:28 AM

I do wonder if an editorialist made the statement
"This is my column" would they get a raft of letters pointing out the periodical it was in was the one that really owned the column???

Posted by Dan Kauffman | July 14, 2008 3:44 AM

I do wonder if an editorialist made the statement
"This is my column" would they get a raft of letters pointing out the periodical it was in was the one that really owned the column???

Posted by Dan Kauffman | July 14, 2008 3:45 AM

Whoops. Is there a second Dave(tm) making fun of the first, one Dave(tm) all along who was making fun of MM's critics, or one Dave(tm) who's making fun of himself?

Posted by Tom West | July 14, 2008 5:50 AM

Oh, sweet irony.

Posted by Eric James | July 14, 2008 8:08 AM