|No such thing as a small change|
Re^2: Dealing with An(?:no|on)ytrollby tirwhan (Abbot)
|on Nov 28, 2005 at 12:17 UTC||Need Help??|
Yet you spend an entire thread on them.
Yes, I know, and that fact kept me from posting this node for a while. Ultimately I felt it would be worthwhile making the suggestion. I know this can be viewed as one big lump of troll-food, I don't think it actually turned out to be though.YMMV.
More readily than what?
More readily than they are being reaped now. Nodes are being considered and reaped for unsuitable content under the current system, which is fine. I feel that this is sometimes done a bit too hesitantly in the face of blatant troll posts. Again, YMMV.
Regarding the IP address publication, I think you misunderstand my intention. I don't believe that such a measure would prevent trolls from posting per se, but it could make it easier for people to identify the troll and deal with it in whatever way they think best (ignore/downvote/reap). As an example which is not too far from what we've seen recently, imagine there is a thread discussing the marketability of programming language skills. Amongst the replies there are three posts from AM
Now, I guess we can agree that 1 is a troll. Without knowing anything more about 2 and 3 they may appear as requests for information and lead to people trying to reply in a helpful manner. However, if the node title shows that all three posts came from the same person/IP address I personally would decide that none of them are genuine and not bother replying.
No it's not perfect, there are ways to get around it and it imposes a hoop on a certain group of users (though I still don't understand, and nobody AFAICS has tried to explain, what the big deal is about creating an unofficial "anonymous" login if one needs that). But it has been my experience that few things in life are perfect and with an issue such as this, which involves social conventions and patterns of behaviour I don't think a perfect solution exists. So I'm looking for one that's better than what we have now.
Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it. -- Brian W. Kernighan