170 Comments

1. Stephen:

As annoying as this disruptor was, it was interesting to see the variety of emotional and intellectual responses by contributors to this forum. I resisted his bait with some difficulty and then was pleased to see calm requests for restraint by others who were not so easily riled up.

It’s clear that many in this forum have seen real trouble and lots of it, and they don’t get too worked up over pretend trouble.

Nov 5, 2009 - 11:14 am 2. RagnarD:

Yup. The issue with guys like “The Bag Boy” is that they do not engage. They make a statement but when asked to back it up, they just ignore it. There is no dialog there or maybe said better, there is no there there, just hyperbole and ad hominem.

There are lots of them at the other PJM blogs and their modus is always the same. We used to call their type script kiddies.

Nov 5, 2009 - 11:20 am 3. Lifeofthemind:

The ability of a troll to consume bandwidth, emotional space, time and space on a page is a real threat. We need to consider the nature of the threat, what their goals are, how we can respond to protect ourselves and at the same time preserve the forum. This is going to get worse. Link this thread and the last one. The Enemy or enemies want to preempt our defenses by getting us to abandon the field, to self censor ourselves and assure them that we will not contest the battlefield of ideas or communicate with each other. Personally I would rather spend an hour arguing the virtues of German Cheese with Marie Claude than watching a troll perform onanism. We do need to remember that we come here to learn and if we seal ourselves off from intelligent disagreement then we become an echo chamber and the forum dies. That would please those who are malicious.

Nov 5, 2009 - 11:24 am 4. Roughcoat:

Dave K is one of those people who doesn’t know when or how to shut up. As a result, that was Belmont Club’s worst threat ever.

Nov 5, 2009 - 11:29 am 5. Talnik:

Maybe we should put him on the payroll.

Nov 5, 2009 - 11:29 am 6. TheCharlatan:

Feed a troll, start a fever!

Nov 5, 2009 - 11:32 am 7. marymcl:

This is an important topic and I’m glad to see we’re taking it up. First thing that occurs though is how effective will it be to simply *ignore* the troll who turns up on a thread devoted to his existence? A big part of the problem is that it doesn’t take much to get the viscious circle started – Speaking for myself, in the case of the thread in question, once he got entrenched it became a matter of staying in there till the end and not abandoning the field, even though at that stage even admonitions to ignore the troll are a response that can any troll worth his salt can build on.

Ignoring the troll is great in theory but it only works in practice if EVERYONE does it. (Even that is open to question in the case of a determined attack.) Anyway that’s just not going to happen IMO – too many people are too fed up, and some of us being perpetually disappointed in others and giving up on the conversation isn’t going to cut it, either. We’re all on the same side here and one way or another we need to find a way to confront this problem effectively. The other side is closing ranks and making plans and we need to do the same.

(btw some of this conversation is already underway on the Past and Future thread – specifically #’s 54, 61, 74, 77, 81, 83, 86, 88 and 90 – I may have missed something, there were some early remarks about troll-feeding generally but basically mac threw down the gauntlet @54)

Nov 5, 2009 - 11:44 am 8. maineman:

Might this have been a dry run for the coming net neutrality days? Or maybe Dave is just a liberal with Bipolar Disorder.

To me, the more interesting phenomenon was the inability of the rest of us to keep from engaging him, despite numerous entreaties to avoid it.

I suppose the idea that it might have been a group effort is too conspiratorial (?).

Nov 5, 2009 - 11:53 am 9. Konyok:

As the thread fully metastasized into promiscuous disclosure, I couldn’t shake the thought that perhaps Mr. Kistenmacher was the victim of a very public identity theft.

Although the disruptor’s apparent posting of “his own” e-mail address containing “his own” name could be construed as an act of heroic transparency in this realm of avatars and pseudonyms, the obsessiveness of the postings is troubling. “Normal people” just don’t behave that way when their name is revealed.

I wonder if this might be a case of the ultimate pseudonym: assuming somebody else’s identity.

Nov 5, 2009 - 11:55 am 10. Salt Lick:

The issue with guys like “The Bag Boy” is that they do not engage. They make a statement but when asked to back it up, they just ignore it.

Right Ragnar, that’s always a red flag. It’s up to us to stay detached enough to notice it and respond (or not) accordingly.

On the other hand, desperate times require desperate measures. I’ve quit certain hobby chat lists because of censorship, and yet I’ve been dismayed when determined troll attacks wrecked other lists, too.

I’d totally approve if wretchard decided to moderate and delete whatever he thought appropriate to keep this place focused.

Nov 5, 2009 - 11:56 am 11. JMH:

I noticed over on TheNextRight.com, Jim Henke had a post about NY-23 (he was part of the Hoffman campaign). The first few responses were basically abject Leftists either gloating or namecalling or otherwise pissing in the soup. Henke’s post dealt with the rather important question of what strategy is best for defeating socialists in elections. Within our own camp, there are serious, controversial and non-trivial questions that need to be answered in our quest to preserve the City on the Hill. The answers will need thought, civil debate, and at least enough mutual respect to hear, understand and evaluate the positions of each camp within the Right (or if you’d rather, within the “God Bless, not damn, America” crowd, which is open to furriners since I think America is an idea as well as a place, but I digress). Disruptive trolls calling people “TeaBaggers” and otherwise making a sideshow clown of themselves make a negative contribution to such a debate. The noise, passsion and emotion provoked by them impairs us, significantly impairs us, from having the serious debate we need to have.

I doubt it’s accidental. At least not always accidental.

Wretchard called it an open thread, so here are my thoughts (though it is Wretchard’s site and of course his decision on the subject):

Trolls need to be banned, quaranteened, ousted and otherwise kept out. When we want to hear the Left ranting about things, we all know how to type democraticundergrouns.com or dailykos.com into our browsers. If a respectful, polite liberal wants to comment here in a way that contributes to the discussion (including taking the time to understand and respond to positions, not just parrot Axelrod’s latest talking points), I’d welcome them. But the Dave K’s can go pound sand as far as I’m concerned.

PS: Don’t feed the trolls!

I partially remember a limerick on signs plastered around the outdoor seating for Casa de Pico in Old Town San Diego warning patrons not to feed the birds

There once was a man named Paco
who fed a bird his taco

I could bring a whole flock-o

Maybe Walt can fill in the missing lines (if he’s up for slumming in the limerick genre)

Nov 5, 2009 - 11:57 am 12. Leo Linbeck III:

Part of the issue, I believe, is that it has been quite some time since we had a serious troll here at the BC. Having grown accustomed to thoughtful, albeit occasionally provocative, dialogue, we had perhaps forgotten just how disruptive and obnoxious a troll can be.

This is a tribute to the normal civility of the Belmont Club, although clearly it is also a vulnerability. But then again night clubs do a better job of keeping out certain kinds of riff-raff than public libraries…

I don’t believe we should establish some kind of enforced norm. Each of us should make our own decision as to how to respond to such an incursion. But there is a “tragedy of the commons” at work here: if each of us responds individually to a troll, we end up with everyone being worse off.

Ultimately, what is needed is a technological solution: a way for good comments to rise to the top, and trolls to fall to the bottom where they belong. I personally don’t mind trolls speaking their mind, as long as I don’t have to listen to them.

I guess that makes me a NIMBY.

L3

Nov 5, 2009 - 12:03 pm 13. JMH:

we all know how to type democraticundergrouns.com

(apparently I don’t know how to type democraticunderground.com, but perhaps I’ll survive anyway)

Nov 5, 2009 - 12:04 pm 14. Lifeofthemind:

Not sure that deleting the thread is needed. My suggestion is that wretchard the cat selects three trusted deputy dawgs. If there is a threat of troll attack and wretchard is not around to respond, then two of them if they concur will place the thread in moderation mode. They will agree only to sequester for more than 30 minutes if a comment is clearly a violation of PJM standards and intended to disrupt. My candidates are L3, Dr JamieIrons and Buddy.

This could be like the election for Mess Treasurer in the wardroom. The rule was to select the guy on watch because he couldn’t fight back and then congratulate him.

Nov 5, 2009 - 12:05 pm 15. Storm-Rider:

Trolls are often rhetoricians of the culture war, which in my analysis is a form of Marxist class struggle. Since presumably many ordinary people read Belmont Club without commenting, it would appear to me that the Marxist/Socialist trolls present to us a teaching opportunity – not for the trolls – but for the silent readers.

Nov 5, 2009 - 12:05 pm 16. Cannoneer No. 4:

We’re all on the same side here and one way or another we need to find a way to confront this problem effectively.

We are not all on the same side here.

Most of the regular commenters are on the same side of the big issues like The Culture War, Counter-Jihad, capitalism vs. socialism, American Exceptionalism vs. transnational progressivism, Liberty vs. The State, but we discuss all kinds of issues here, and someone whose comments you admired a couple days ago on one thread may prove themselves a clueless ignoramus today on another thread.

Nov 5, 2009 - 12:18 pm 17. marymcl:

@9 Konyok

The same idea occurred to me and I tacked it on as an afterthought to my last post on that thread. The edit feature ran out and then the comments shut down so there was no chance to elaborate. But you’re right, his obsessively self-proclaimed moral courage on the issue was odd – also daring everyone to report him to his boss. And Subotai’s observations about sociopathic red flags made me wonder. True identity or not, there was a lot of malice at work there. It’s hardly farfetched to assume that this guy was a liar on top of everything else.

Cannoneer – Well I meant the same side of the big issues as you listed them. That’s the conversation the trolls are interested in disrupting. The other stuff doesn’t really matter in terms of this discussion, at least IMO it doesn’t.

Nov 5, 2009 - 12:23 pm 18. Brock:

The difference between opponents and trolls is engagement. Lincoln and Douglas were opponents because they engaged each other’s ideas. Dave K. was not in this category. He wants you to engage him without ever returning the favor, just to waste your time and get you riled up.

There should be some mechanism for marking trolls as such, and deleting their posts. Meanwhile we should add to the rules at the top a reminder about replying to trolls.

The problem with making someone (other than big W) a moderator is that you then need a verified account. Despite my given name above, I could be anyone. I could put L3 in the name field if I chose to. Maybe I’m Dave K!! I would suggest an Open ID account if we went that way.

Nov 5, 2009 - 12:25 pm 19. Sylvia:

I just skip the troll’s remarks. I’ve been reading BC for long enough that I recognize all the regulars’ names and I give a new name one read and if there’s no substance, poof. I do not want RF to have to waste his time moderating or culling. How do other PJM blogs handle troll invasions?

O/T. Have I missed it or has BC not yet covered the British Labour Party’s immigration policy scandal?

Nov 5, 2009 - 12:27 pm 20. buddy larsen:

Judging an intent is an ancient unsolvable problem. Judging an effect is subjective (an act of violence is not subject to subjectivity –except by those ubermenschen who can see some sort of distant “greater good”). Free speech is an absolute. Yelling ‘fire’ in a theater isn’t free speech, as it violates civil (really, human) rights. so a ban would have to be for free speech BY being against (a form of) yelling ‘fire’ in a theater.

But then there’s the question of taste, which in turn raises the question of public vs private spaces. Is this a public space? If so, then banning on taste grounds is sorta effete-ish like, imho. If it is not a public space, then go get ‘em wretchard, at your whim or convenience, by yourself or your agents, and accept no criticism for it.

(hey thanks for that thought, LotM!)

Nov 5, 2009 - 12:35 pm 21. John Lynch:

No kidding. That’s why I left one comment and went to greener pastures.

My eyes glaze over when a comment uses a lot of ideological labels. Once I see a couple of those, I know exactly what’s coming so I move on. There are plenty of people who are off in la-la land and not worth reading. I don’t reply more than once, maybe twice, to anyone. Either they engage the idea or they snark on you. At that point you’ve said all that you are going to say on the topic and other people can make up their own minds.

This is an easy comments section to troll. There are a lot of partisan people here. That’s the nature of being on PJM. If you wanted to, anyone here could go troll Kos just as badly.

If you don’t want to be trolled, don’t be trolled. Just ignore it. Did anyone really think anyone’s mind would be changed? Really?

Is it more important to be right, or to be listened to?

Nov 5, 2009 - 12:39 pm 22. programmer:

Some of the other web sites that I read (and occasionally comment on) require registration for posting (you know the drill, I’m sure, login using userid and password, etc.). As a practical matter, this is the direction, IMHO, that the web is heading anyway. It solves a whole bunch of problems with relatively small impact. It can be set up to be somewhat self administering, but coupled with the previous suggestion of a group of “hall monitors”, it would be a pretty tight system,… for a non-nuclear site.

Nov 5, 2009 - 12:41 pm 23. robin4est:

On a photo forum I read, there is a “hide me” button on every comment. By simply clicking on that button I never have to read comments by that commenter again. I don’t know if that is beyond the capability of pajamas media, but it would be wonderful to practice a bit of self censorship with a couple commenters.
It is not because I am afraid of the power of their arguments, but simply because I become tired of the drivel and quit before I can see the comments from the more thoughtful here.

Nov 5, 2009 - 12:43 pm 24. Weary G:

Ultimately, debating Trolls is pretty much a pointless exercise in terms of winning a debate, but doing so sometimes sharpens one’s debate skills. (I also have a perverse joy in exposing their lack of argument, which is why I don’t bother to post much on blogs anymore out of respect for others.)

I have found that debating trolls has made me more disciplined in following the thread of the topic because they so excel at doing the opposite in order to stay in the game. You learn to see how people try to bait you and change the issues, hell, how they change their own stances when they need to do so. You also learn how to pick apart someone’s argument even when they are deliberately trying to be obtuse or deceptive.

It forces you to stay on point, and it helps hone your skills in forcing THEM to stick to them as well.

I also subsequently find myself better able to spot BS in the words of others on the news.

Now, the most dedicated of trolls cannot be defeated (embarassed, humiliated enough to slink off) because they are beyond shame, true.

What I found works in that case is wrestle them down to ONE key point they proffer which is easily refutable and from which you REFUSE to budge from that one point until they concede.

Trolls deliberately throw out multiple comments as a form of chaff, but if no one takes the bait, it is does not work because you continue to hone in on the target.

Some will get frustrated and leave because no one is playing their game as they need to play it. No one likes being made a fool.

For others, when you make it apparent that no other points will be addressed or even mentioned, when you keep repeating your question making it clear nothing else will be read from them until they own up, they too move on, seeking easier game.

For the really hard core, you do all of the above, then ban them when they keep it up, after making it clear they were given a chance to put up or shut up.

What I eventually found works the best, though, is the immediate deleting of comments from someone, with post explaining why, and telling them to clean up the snark, attitude, whatever, and try restating their point in an adult manner. When you make it clear that no one will read their words until they are civil, they definitely either moderate or wander off.

Just my two cents…

WG

Nov 5, 2009 - 12:45 pm 25. Jeff Medcalf:

There was a feature of USENET that is sadly lacking on blogs and threaded discussion forums: you could ignore people using a killfile. Basically, when you were reading a message from someone, and you decided that they were not worthwhile, you could hit a command, and they were added to your killfile. (Cleverly, you could also block anything quoting them, or kill subject lines, or whatever you wanted.) Future posts from the same poster, or whatever pattern you blocked, simply never got to your screen. Kills trolls dead, very quickly.

Nov 5, 2009 - 12:47 pm 26. John Lynch:

Why debate trolls? You worried they are going to convince other people? Are you going to change your mind? Are they? Who cares?

What’s the upside here?

Nov 5, 2009 - 12:48 pm 27. buddy larsen:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=internet+attacks+on+georgia+and+lithuania&form=IE8SRC&src=IE-SearchBox

Nov 5, 2009 - 12:48 pm 28. Boyd:

It is interesting to me that the attack the rest of this site is suffering from trolls has taken this long to arrive here. I have followed The Belmont Club for years now and was actually kind of saddened to see it go to PJ Media because I suspected this might happen. For years I have used The Belmont Club as an example of top notch commentary but the high level of discussion here has become decidedly less so over the last months.

However, if you think it is bad here you should follow many of the other postings on this site. Some have degenerated to almost 100% troll wars. This is a serious problem because I see these comments sections as having a potential of being a sort of a networked think tank of Conservative and Libertarian thought. It is no wonder then that a determined enemy and, unfortunately, their troll enablers on the Right (not all trolls here are on the Left) has descended with tactics designed to bring this all to an end.

I believe this is a very important post by Wretchard. I have complained in the comments and to the management for a while now about my belief that something needs to be done to bring some control over those here to disrupt and destroy. I hope this thread uses these think tank abilities available here to bring forth some proposals on how to balance diverse commentary views with a need for the security of this site.

My practical suggestion: Require registration based in an ISP based mail address (no web addresses) in order to be able to have some accountability and ability to ban people when necessary. Ebay did this to great effect and it did not limit their business model.

Nov 5, 2009 - 12:54 pm 29. Konyok:

What makes a troll a troll?

Is it trespassing on the other team’s turf? Is it violating the local mores? (I remember riding the trolley in Ukraine, my legs crossed broadly with the sole of my shoe up and out. My fellow passengers knew I was American straightaway – nobody else would be so casually rude in public. I was oblivious … )

What so distinguished the person calling himself Dave K was the obsession to taunt other posters on a personal level.

I think that enforcement of a general rule against personal abuse is the appropriate response. (Of course, that would mean more unpaid work by our kind host … ) The three post rule would also do the job, but that would stifle some pretty interesting exchanges here.

Nov 5, 2009 - 12:56 pm 30. Cannoneer No. 4:

What this blog needs is a MIJI Program.

We weren’t meaconed.

b. Intrusion. The intentional
insertion of electromagnetic energy into
transmission paths in any manner, with the
objective of deceiving operations or of
causing confusion. Example: An
unauthorized radio transmission pretending
to be part of an air traffic control
service and giving false instructions to a
pilot.
c. Jamming. The deliberate
radiation, reradiation, or reflection of
electromagnetic energy to disrupt enemy use
of electronic devices, equipment, or
systems. Example: Transmitting a tone or
noise burst that blocks the reception of
information on a frequency.
NOTE: Meaconing, intrusion, and jamming
are further defined as deliberate actions
by unfriendly countries with the intent of
disrupting DOD data transfer. Events
attributed to friendly countries, another
US activity, or nonfriendly countries when
the intent can be determined as not
targeted against DOD data transfer will be
evaluated as interference (for example,
exercise jamming by a nonfriendly country
of its own forces for training purposes
that interfere with DOD capabilities).
d. Interference. Any electromagnetic
disturbance that interrupts, obstructs, or
otherwise degrades or limits the effective performance of electronics or electrical
equipment. It can be induced
intentionally, as in some forms of
electronic warfare, or unintentionally, as
a result of spurious emissions and
responses, intermodulation products, and
the like. Example: The interruption of
military transmissions by a civilian radio
broadcast.

I’d go with intrusion.

Nov 5, 2009 - 1:01 pm 31. buddy larsen:

JL/26 asks ‘why debate trolls?’ –part of the answer is @ SR/15. Sometimes you imagine a silent reader who is trying to find his/her political self, and for that person you just don’t want to leave some troll accusation hanging there unanswered, as if a point had been made. Also, wretchard’s 102 count includes a number made in defense of a friend, mainly in order to avoid indicating a breach in unit cohesion.

Nov 5, 2009 - 1:02 pm 32. Harry:

Just a couple of observations.

I’ll bet there is a troll technique that generally works to disrupt and derail a thread. That guy has used his skills elsewhere.

I noticed that he often made personal attacks on writers that had to do with style or uniqueness. If he can engage you personally from a position of hurt or shame, your anger takes you off the point. If you can see what is happening then you can chose your response. Go kick your dog, but don’t respond to troll. I think if you have a continual provocatuer (like more than one thread) Wretch should block him – who wants to wade through a pile of crap to get to the meat of the matter.

I love this place and the writers who contribute!
Harry

Nov 5, 2009 - 1:09 pm 33. John Lynch:

Boyd- same here. The old Belmont Club comments section wasn’t nearly as partisan as this has become. There are some really bizarre ideas that float around here that make me feel like a left winger by comparison. A lot of it is conspiracy theory. Wretchard is a really sensible guy, but a lot of commenters are wacko. And they get a lot of screen time.

The real problem isn’t that there aren’t enough restrictions on posting, but that there are enough commenters that the bad drives out the good. Any site that gets enough people eventually becomes dominated by people who post a lot, badly. The most motivated people tend to be the most extreme in their views.

Really, most people will have one, maybe two, good things to say on a topic. After that it’s just junk. Many commenters just post the same things over and over.

In the end, the problem isn’t that there is the odd troll. It’s that the environment has become dominated by people who are easy to troll. When your comments section becomes dominated by partisans, you drive out the people who want to stay on topic but don’t want to deal with the more extreme people on their own side. Disagreement on a topic is just that, nothing more. It isn’t war, it isn’t being on “the other side.”

It’s not quite that bad yet, but it’s coming. Unfortunately, Wretchard is a victim of his own success because of the number of readers he’s attracted. However, a lot of them will take one look at the comments section and go to the next post instead.

Nov 5, 2009 - 1:09 pm 34. anton:

After reading Richard’s post I went back and read the whole thread. Then I thought about it a while.

I take full blame for my first reply to the troll. After I realised that he was beyond redemption I simply scrolled past any post by him or in reply to him. Saved a lot of time.

The worst part was that, unlike vivo or biblo44, he wasn’t even addressing the thread. He simply spewed hate on everyone. I do admire his typing speed however; his turnaround time was amazing.

On the technical side a question; could a battery of people all signing in as the same poster have been behind this? His posts were so close together that they were stepping on each others shadows.

I am with the guys in the last thread about setting up a back-up system, perhaps a little better insulated from the fringes.

I promise to never feed a troll again.

Nov 5, 2009 - 1:12 pm 35. stumbley:

Really, truly, the only way to deal with trolls is to ignore them. If we ban those with whom we “disagree” (and of course, “disagreement” is in the eye of the beholder and subject to infinite variability), we lose much of what makes the Belmont Club the thoughtful, vital and engaging blog it is. This comments section is worth multiple subscriptions to any number of “insightful” publications. If we only listen to those whose opinions are like our own, we become an echo chamber full of sound and fury signifying nothing.

Just don’t let the adolescents like DaveK get under your skin. Assess the substance of the remarks; if there’s “no there there”, just give them a pass.

“I say take off and nuke the place from orbit. It’s the only way.”

Nov 5, 2009 - 1:13 pm 36. steeple:

I feel blessed to be in a forum with the intelligent and articulate posters who visit BC. My fear is that we would lose several voices if BC endured a withering multi-day attack by trolls. Who would want to come and wade through a thread like that every day? So the guilty should pay the price in order to protect the innocent. Commenting here at BC is a priviledge and not a right, imho.

While this is meant to be an open forum, ultimately even these forums have to be protected from someone backing a sound truck up to the podium and blasting out high decibel energy. The analog appears to be computer viruses, etc… and it appears that we need the equivalent of a network firewall. But perhaps we have the luxury of letting the virus identify itself first before we drop the wall down against further infection.

Nov 5, 2009 - 1:14 pm 37. feeblemind:

The troll must be pleased. Now there is an entire thread devoted to him.

Nov 5, 2009 - 1:14 pm 38. Urban B:

Oh, I don’t know… There’s something fun about a little online slut fest. I call it a slut fest because those like Dave K who like to stir things up are prostitutes to their own egos. (I have no idea what that means, but I like it, and will use it again.)

Wretchard described his little escapade as ‘effective disruption’. I’m not so sure. If you subtract the posts by or responding to him, that’s still 232 comments! Isn’t that a lot higher than average? And none of us are going to stop reading either Wretchard or each other.

So while I agree in not feeding the trolls, Dave K failed miserably in either 1) stopping this marvelous blog or 2) changing anyone’s mind! So…

Eh.

Nov 5, 2009 - 1:16 pm 39. Boyd:

33. John Lynch: “Many commenters just post the same things over and over.”

One persistant commenter on numerous other posts was just pasting the exact same bunch of links and commentary )ironicly about the dangers of trolls)into nearly every post on this site. And he was ostensibly on “our” side. Again, not all trolls are of the Leftist variety here so claims or actions that limit trolling don’t and shouldn’t be be limited to one perspective over another. It’s the activity not the point of view that matters.

Nov 5, 2009 - 1:24 pm 40. buddy larsen:

UB/38 is right –strive for circumspection and balanced comity and…zzzzzzzzzz. An internet thread has already surrendered 100% of the physicality of initiative. All the varieties of fire and ice have to come thru the artful arrangement of itty bitty glyphs.

And another thing –if you find yourself getting angry over over something coming thru the glyphs –congratulations, my friend, you are ”in the world” and to be reckoned with.

Nov 5, 2009 - 1:27 pm 41. Boyd:

35. stumbley: “If we ban those with whom we “disagree” (and of course, “disagreement” is in the eye of the beholder and subject to infinite variability), we lose much of what makes the Belmont Club the thoughtful, vital and engaging blog it is.”

As trite as the whole Alinsky thing is becoming it’s tough not to see that this is rule whatever about using their own rules against them. This does seem to be a classic Liberty versus security conundrum and there won’t be any easy answers but I don’t believe doing nothing is any longer feasible.

OK, after being a lurker for all these years and using up my welcome in 3 consecutive comments I’ll go back to my hole for a while. I hope there are some answers.

Nov 5, 2009 - 1:32 pm 42. bogie wheel:

JL/26 asks ‘why debate trolls?’ –part of the answer is @ SR/15. Sometimes you imagine a silent reader who is trying to find his/her political self, and for that person you just don’t want to leave some troll accusation hanging there unanswered, as if a point had been made.

Except that, if the commenters are otherwise engaged in cogent discussion, it will collectively drown out the troll comment. If the troll persists in trolling, then it should become evident to the silent reader that they are not dealing with an “honest” accuser but a troll, in which case, why take any of the accusations seriously?

I find I’m pretty much aligned with John Lynch’s POV on this one. Maybe it’s because I’ve been on net discussion boards for 12 years now (I know, not nearly as long as others, but I’m a luddite by certain yardsticks), or maybe it’s because working 75 hours a week at two jobs means my hassle meter is pretty punked by the end of the day & I don’t come to read BC for more of the same … or maybe it’s just that I’m becoming a lazy bugger in my middle age. At any rate, spending hours & hours of my time on the futile pursuit of responding to a troll isn’t what I want to do with my eves & weekends at this point in my life … so I ignore & keep scrolling. YMMV.

LOTM has raised what seem to me to be some not unimportant concerns about organized & underwritten attacks (as opposed to John Allan Muhammed nutjob freelancing), and Subotai has made a good case for protecting the long-term viability of the BC communications network(s). I will chip in (to my modest ability) if technical upgrades & decentralization require equipment & labor. I value what we have here at BC, and Richard really does an Atlas-sized share of work in making this a haven for us. I don’t want to get to the point where Wretchard shrugs.

Nov 5, 2009 - 1:33 pm 43. Storm-Rider:

John Lynch, 33: “the problem isn’t that there is the odd troll. It’s that the environment has become dominated by people who are easy to troll… When your comments section becomes dominated by partisans, you drive out the people who want to stay on topic but don’t want to deal with the more extreme people on their own side.”

I for one enjoy reading the other “partisan” commenters on this site; I’m one of them. I consider most conservative commenters at Belmont Club as partisans to sacred human liberty (conservation of liberty – great paradox); partisans to the American Revolution. Some in England identified Thomas Jefferson and Patrick Henry as “partisans” who, had the internet existed, would have been easy for them to troll. If you are going to label some commenters here as extremists (I assume you are not speaking of the Marxist trolls), then you should identify some specific examples of extreme comments.

Nov 5, 2009 - 1:34 pm 44. Salt Lick:

The problem with the free-speech and “ignore the troll” philosophy is that it takes time and energy to scan through trollsh*t to find the good stuff.

Someone mentioned TheNextRight — I was excited when that place made its appearance; now I rarely visit, its clogged with so much trollsh*t. For me, it’s simply a matter of time-management.

Nov 5, 2009 - 1:42 pm 45. bits:

“By knowing things that exist, you can know that which does not exist.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5_rings

i conclude that in this blogpost context, one knows its words are not-exist – and are a harmless shadow, that one needn’t respond too —

one may, of course, respond for fun, entertainment and practice.

Nov 5, 2009 - 1:43 pm 46. presbypoet:

I wonder if that was a probing attack. Checking for vulnerabilities. Trolls have been with us for a long time. Someone was working very hard for a long time, not just here on BC, but also on other PJM sites. Yet he only attacked one thread here on BC. There is some information here. His determined attack seems more calculated than most trolls. It is important to remember the enemy is also able to shift his plans.

It would be interesting to know if The Troll was coming from Iowa, or Washington D.C. Although that will prove nothing, it is a data point.

A final point, the troll treats others as objects, not as people to have a conversation with. It is a counterfeit conversation. A good reminder to be on our manners.

Nov 5, 2009 - 1:43 pm 47. Dave:

Konyok #9 and 29:

marymcl #17:

others:

To me, the most disturbing aspect was the “intelligence failure” apparent when that
name was publicized and then (sort of) tracked.
The individual portrayed had won a grocery-bagging CONTEST. It was then ass u me’d by
entirely too many BCers that said persons primary source of earned income was bagging groceries! The odds would favor the contest winner having other responsibilities and means of renumeration and simply doing the bagging bit for fun. Additionally, the article noted that he had taken thrid place in a previous contest and then had practiced his techniques so as to win the next one. That type of self-improvement is certainly not commensurate with the trollish personality revealed to us. This is on top of the fact that those who bag groceries and catch greased pigs at the County Fair are seldom those who enjoy maniacally harassing others without letup.

I mention this because it illustrates how to inadvertently misread both friendly and enemy capabilities. Long ago and far away, the 100 millimeter guns that were not there and did not threaten DaNang nonetheless managed to monkey wrench allied efforts for a few days. What sparked the disruption was gosh-awfully similar to the photo and headline that distracted many of us.

Nothing to do about this aspect of our disrupted thread but to (a) chalk it up to experience and keep an eye out for such diversions in the future.

Nov 5, 2009 - 1:45 pm 48. buddy larsen:

Some ”extreme comments” are exceptionally lucid and well-styled. the writers are clearly less nutjobs fulminating but are, rather, aiming at something like Patton’s polished helmet: “this is how we are going to have to present ourselves if we want to tell the other side to be careful what they think they might want to try to get away with.”

In that way, as in the way of our primate cousins who seem to be warmongering in beating their chests but are actually preventing the wars that come from misunderstanding, these extremists perversely may offer us a better chance for peace than those who by excess accommodation accidentally lure invasion.

Just think if Neville Chamberlain had been in a position and of a mind to talk like the North Korean negotiators at Panmunjon (”Die, Running Dogs of Capitalism!!!”), we might’ve avoided WWII. Or not –but then we didn’t anyway.

Nov 5, 2009 - 2:03 pm 49. Dave:

KONYOK: Did you read any of the earlier (1-50)
comments before the troll attack started?

I mentioned a Texas Aggie who, along with another National Guardsman, had been killed by an IED. He seemingly was there because of his advanced degree in “renewable resources”
which translates as agriculture and animal husbandry of the type you, I and Buddy were discussing a while back. You might want to go back and read over that and kindly note some input from Xixi in VA.

And Robert Kaplan recently noted Chinese interest in Afghanistan because there are industrial minerals in them thar hills. Well, I say we explore this with the Middle Kingdom. They will need to go in Big Time
and that entails paying Very Generous royalties. Said royalties to go to directly to our strategic platoons/trading posts who generously share the wealth with cooperative
locals. Note the word “cooperative”. It will entail certain performances on their part and will not be a dole. This ought to chase the Taliban out permanently and our potential rival’s raw materials are under our watchful eye. Not Bad.

And as the Japanese are always on the lookout for rqw materials, they might well be persuaded to help with the finangling—–financing that is.

Nov 5, 2009 - 2:05 pm 50. Agoraphobic Plumber:

In a previous life, I am disgraced to admit that I participated in the fine art of trolling (usually on usenet), though I was really more into flaming most of the time. Also flonking, but that’s another story. We had our own whole subculture going for awhile in the mid-to-late 90s. If you’ve ever heard of the “meow wars”, then you’ve indirectly heard of some work that I participated in.

I have to say that the poster above had it exactly right, Dave is a prostitute to his own ego. It’s all about ego. The more people, and the more important people, you can stir up, the bigger the success is considered. I remember once a troll that wasn’t affiliated with us (forget his nom offhand, but he was named after some children’s show character in the south pacific or something) got into a forum frequented by government officials in Singapore or somewhere down there and they actually officially censured him in session without knowing who he was. We were awestruck.

I have to say that Dave’s style was pretty average, while his motivation was clearly there. He was prepared to play, too, and he’s quick with the search engine.

I know he bugged you guys quite a bit, but I enjoyed his performance. Oh, and I’m sorry for any time in the past I may have trolled a group you were part of. I used to do a lot of that, though I haven’t for maybe 9 or 10 years or so. I still have trouble keeping from engaging trolls. Would a great actor be offered a fun cameo as himself and easily turn it down?

If it makes you feel any better, I doubt the guy is even political at all. He just latched on to the fact that we ARE. That’s enough for a good trollfest.

Nov 5, 2009 - 2:06 pm 51. elby:

Quite a number of years ago I participated in a bulletin board site that I found quite informative and enjoyable. Until it was destroyed by a persistent troll who disagreed with the general position of the posters. He would come in and drop his bait, which would immediately be taken up by poster after poster trying to argue with him. It went on for weeks, in nearly every thread, eventually destroying the board. So there is a real danger with persistent trolls and we need to protect BC from them. I like LoTM’s idea of some deputized bouncers to squash a troll early on, given that Wretchard has a life and can’t spend his days moderating comments.

That being said, it is indeed a rare thing to see an entire thread at BC get trashed by trolls as some other threads are on PJM. Even so, coming up proactively with a solution is a good idea. It could happen here again.

Nov 5, 2009 - 2:12 pm 52. Al_Batross:

“Have I missed it or has BC not yet covered the British Labour Party’s immigration policy scandal?” Sylvia@19.

see October 26th, 2009 10:23 am Alone
http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/page/2/

Nov 5, 2009 - 2:15 pm 53. Subotai Bahadur:

Yeah, I engaged the enemy, albeit mostly indirectly. But we have a problem here that requires some sort of solution. I am not sure that it is within the purview of this one blog.

From what I have seen in passing, the rest of PJM just endures the attacks and attendent disruption. This particular troll critter was all over PJM that day.

We are dealing with the eternal problem of which has the upper hand, attack or defense? Since our goal includes the intention of remaining an open forum, and theirs [I assume that this is part of a directed attack as a prelude to other measures to restrict free speech and political opposition. I admit that it may be a mass ad hoc movement; but given the emphasis of the enemy during the election on similar disruptions, I will go with deliberate until proven otherwise. YMMV.] is purely disruption, there is no way for purely defensive measures to adequately protect the open forum.

There is going to be an increasing level of disruption from the enemy until they succeed in stifling all uncontrolled political speech. We can ameliorate the situation, but we have to understand that given their goal, final victory [viewed as survival of free speech] is not something that we can achieve defensively.

It is important to note that those targeting us, are surely watching this thread. Thus any detailed countermeasures discussed here are in the enemy’s hands. That implies the need for a secure back channel forum for such detailed discussions and implementation. There has been some consideration of this on other threads, and I hope it will bear fruit.

It will be up to Wretchard to decide what, if any, defensive measures he will erect in his house. And any offensive measures are beyond what he could or should be responsible for. It will take an alliance of free people.

One of the things that our opponents depend upon, and take as being as natural as breathing, is the fact that the Nomenklatura of both parties are singularly immune from the consequences of their actions, legal or otherwise. This extends to those doing their will. Our political and business class are functionally immune from both civil and criminal process, unless they have been politically selected as a scapegoat. There is no political downside to violating the law, the Constitution, or any moral codes as we can see now. We have edged around that in discussions here.

We have a Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee [writes tax law] who has admitted concealing millions of dollars of income, and who pays no penalty. The former Congressman and current mayor of Oakland has admitted not bothering to pay taxes for years, and there will be no penalty. The Secretary of the Treasury, and indeed most of the appointees of this administration have been found to have evaded taxes, and violated other laws, without penalty. The government hires and fires executives in private businesses in the absence of legal or constitutional powers allowing them to do so. They revoke private employment agreements that have statutory backing. They claim the right to determine the wages of ANYONE in the private sector. And there is no legal recourse. Their employees and volunteers physically attack citizens exercising their First Amendment rights [what we are trying to defend in this thread] with absolute impunity. Their supporters can threaten voters with weapons outside of polling places, and be granted immunity by the Department of Justice. They use the government to fund both vote fraud and apparently from their documented intimate familiarity with the processes involved; both child prostitution and tax fraud. One can only wonder what other criminal activities we do not know about.

They and theirs are functionally immune from civil, criminal, political, economic, or physical sanctions for illegal actions. And that is the problem. We fear them, rightfully so. They fear nothing but internal political purges. To restore a balance of power, a balance of fear of consequences must be restored.

This seems to be a constant throughout Western Culture. We are not going to solve all those problems here. We have our own little piece of it, trying to defend ourselves and our rights of free speech, that is occupying our attention.

While the Armies of the Right thread was active, I wrote a piece about dealing with troll infestations. The thread closed before I could post it. I did do so on the Past and Future thread, and if I may I will do so again.

Just theoretical ponderings here.

It is undoubted that just as the government controlled newsmedia-entertainment complex is one front in this, the COLD civil war; our use of the internet and talk radio is another. We cannot, and should not, assume that our side will be allowed to continue to operate unhindered by the other. Just as our speaking out in any public forum contains with it the implications that names are being taken by the other side [hasn't stopped anyone yet, just one should be aware of it] for their next strike; it would be rational for our side to be gathering intelligence based on their activities.

We know from experience that the Democrats have an active troll operation. We saw during the campaign that at some sites we knew the trolls by names, shift schedules, and days off. If we can see active measures, we can assume passive measures exist, but that is another matter. If I may postulate; assuming that someone assumes the de facto position of G-2/G-6 in any one of the nodes of “distributed resistance”, their active measures can be used for the benefit of our side.

Each assumption below is subject to ‘confirm or deny’ validation, and conclusions will need to be modified to match the real situation.

Assumption #1: There is a central control for the messages, desired memes, and operations for their active troll measures.

Assumption #2: There is a finite number of enemy operatives [trolls] available for their use. While we cannot directly detect any unrevealed operatives, the number we are dealing with should be managable. If total coverage is not possible, a picture can be built up using what data can be gathered and expanded as coverage becomes available.

Assumption #3: While there may be a central control offering direction to the trolls, they are not centrally located, and are in fact distributed around the country, probably in urban areas and college towns. If there are central location(s), it opens another entire set of options.

Assumption #4: Legal and open source means do exist to track IP addresses down to a specific location. I have seen such in operation, and in that case there was a certain amount of IP hopping agility involved in an attempt at deception. In that particular case, the troll had made direct, physical threats to the children of the blogger. When the troll received physical evidence that his location and identity was known and that he would be subject to retaliation if anything happened to the kids, he ceased operations. Physical location is not necessarily important for Sigint/TA purposes, but may yield other information. Use of public WiFi can slow the tracking process, but enhances other information gathering options once localization is obtained.

Assumption #5: If Assumption #1 holds, this data will allow TA efforts to track higher nodes in the chain of command, perhaps all the way to the top, with concurrent intelligence benefits. If Assumption # 1 does not hold, standard public information sources and investigative techniques will allow a picture to be built up of the individual for other, perfectly legal, purposes and uses.

Mind you, this comes from my knowledge of the state of the art, and not from personal experience. There are a number of personages here who are quite probably more experienced in the field who can confirm or deny the feasibility. I, for one, make the assumption that TWANLOC are already doing similar things to us.

As I said, just getting theoretical here.

Subotai Bahadur

————————–

The gathering of information is but one step. Active measures to counter are another, and once again I note that just as the forces ranged against us are larger than this site, any countermeasures are beyond what this site alone can do. It will require an alliance, a coalition, a confederation of both sites supporting liberty, and of boffins. Such is not in existence as of yet.

I note Assumptions 4 & 5 above. The means exist to track back to where the enemy operates. Further, once that is established, further information can be developed about the specific actors in each case using standard investigative techniques.

Once information is developed, a choice of course of action can be made by whatever governing body controls the coalition. It can be as simple as publicly revealing the identity involved. It can involve revealing some of the more outrageous of his public [albeit supposedly anonymous] postings to schools, employers, or families. If evidence of criminal activity is uncovered, seeing that they are arrested and charged could be another means. Eventually, a realization that trolling has consequences can come into being.

Said coalition can be used to assist in purely defensive efforts. If someone is a troll, they can be traced over a period of time and any IP’s they use can be noted and passed on to all members for an IP ban. If they get too far out of hand, the coalition can report them to their ISP’s if appropriate.

Further, I suspect that we are also in the early stages of a cyber-war. Since the beginning of this regime, conservative sites have been subject to what appears to be malware attacks. PJM and especially BC seem to have had technical problems with the commenting systems, and sometimes with access itself, that makes me suspicious. I am not privy to the technical side of PJM, and so I have absolutely no certain knowledge of the causes of the problems. But if they are the result of deliberate attacks with malware, it would be beneficial for a coalition of sites to work together to block and counter such attacks.

Huddling behind castle walls while the other side brings up cannons is not the path to victory or survival. At most, it is a temporary expedient. We need to look for a more active response. I offer this for consideration in detail on more secure channels by those with greater technical expertise than I.

Subotai Bahadur

Nov 5, 2009 - 2:15 pm 54. Dave:

One more comment on the troll attack and then I will try to shut up for a while.

I noticed two commenters to whom there was no trollish reply. I was one, but I do not count. I made a single brief and oblique reference which I anticipated would go unnoticed by our unwanted visitor by not by some of the Good Guys.

The other person to whom there was no reply could not have gone unnoticed. Yet there was not a trollish peep to be heard when our own mongolian horde was in town. He must have thunk that Bayan of the Hundred Eyes was watching.

V-e-r-y I-n-t-e-r-e-s-t-i-n-g.

Nov 5, 2009 - 2:16 pm 55. Marty:

I hope the person who did the tabulation just used “Find” and didn’t actually read the whole thread while making tally marks.

I think we can self-police; just, don’t feed the trolls. If you’re not sure a commenter is a troll, answer and see what comes back. It never takes more than 3 or 4 of those to tell whether someone is here to make a contribution or just throw sand in the gears. If the latter, just identify the person as a troll and ask everyone to stop. The first such comment may not do it, but if several people do, the rest will pick up on it.

Nov 5, 2009 - 2:16 pm 56. buddy larsen:

Dave –something bad has just happened at Fort Hood –tune in your equipment –hope it ain’t jihadis –7 or 8 dead, 20 wounded, shooters at large –

Nov 5, 2009 - 2:17 pm 57. marymcl:

@31 buddy larsen

That’s true and thanks again. Our boy got a bit obsessed with me personally after I unintentionally provoked him with a remark I made in an exchange with JMH – one I wouldn’t have made, btw if I’d been reading his posts instead of skipping over them, since I would have noticed certain obscene remarks made earlier (also directed at me personally) Anyway buddy and several others spoke up about it and coincidentally (or not) some high powered ridicule of the intruder appeared as well. Point is, I don’t blame people for walking out on the thread early on and nobody who remained is claiming to be a saint but numbers aren’t the whole story. You had to be there. Certainly what the others did meant a lot to me at the time, and still does.

@55 Marty

That’s not a bad idea, but it sure didn’t work that time.

Nov 5, 2009 - 2:26 pm 58. buddy larsen:

http://www.financialsense.com/stormwatch/geo/pastanalysis/2004/0513.html
(last couple paras)

Nov 5, 2009 - 2:29 pm 59. Knight1:

I concur with #19 Sylvia. I’m more a reader than a commenter as either I haven’t the knowledge for the thread or someone did a better post. During the Dave K (and Dave the K) episode, I caught what he was doing and just scrolled past; I skimmed the content from commentors engaging. I understand the concern, but I appreciate hearing all sides with the caveat of the courtesy present here by BC commentators.

Nov 5, 2009 - 2:38 pm 60. Dave D.:

..Elby (51), I’ve seen that method used successfully on the Gunboards site. Site moderators can and have worked, but it’s a timeconsuming job and troll attacks don’t take a holiday. The Belmont Club is definitely worth the cost of vigilance. Bad commentors do drive out good ones. Someone commented favorably on Dave K.’s rapid responses. Thoughtfullness requires time and diligence, something trolls don’t need since their comments aren’t intended to be thoughful, but to provoke. While the advice to not feed the trolls is popular, I’ve never seen it work successfully. As a method to stop trolling, I think it’s useless.
..The internet is a smorgy and nobody takes the dish with the fly on it. If you can’t control trolls, they will destroy the Belmont Club. Wretchards lifeview and intellect have attracted the best commentors of any site I view. That has in turn attracted me. Find a way to deny control to the Dave K’s and you save the site.

Nov 5, 2009 - 2:40 pm 61. Ben:

I generally lurk around here. I lurk because most of y’all say what I have to say in a much more eloquent and informed manner. This time however I have a thought to add:

If there is to be some sort of technological screen or a robust anti-troll policy enforced I feel care should be taken so that it doesn’t end up screening out people who are unpleasant but responsive.

For example: I’m a Jew who found it constructive and heartening to watch the BC commenariat call Cedarford on his anti-semitism. Others have simply found him annoying but for those who are less informed or impressionable it serves a purpose. I’d hate it if people like him got purged.

Since this is an open thread I’d like to thank Wretchard for the heads up about QuickNote. I’m unemployed and it has come in handy.

Keep up the good work y’all. I’m going back to lurking.

Nov 5, 2009 - 2:41 pm 62. always right:

If Subotai said ‘that particular troll’ was all over PJM that day, then I doubt it is generated from a single person. Seems to me it is a coordinated team effort using the one sign-in name. And behold, someone else mentioned the disruption when Georgia was under attack last year.

The identity theft of the unfortunate ‘grocery bagger’ was carefully chosen and well-thought out. As soon as anyone able to dig the information up, the perpetrators get a kick out of the ‘normal repsonse’ of stereotyping leftist trolls. In fact, they want BC-ers to go ahead destroy this poor sap, even taunting repeatedly. And this feeds back to their stereotyping of rightwingers.

As to what to do, I don’t have additional suggestions as others have better thought out plans. In the end, self-restrain is the only thing that will work. Other well worthy sites had been undergone the same process, it would be nice if PJM can have a ’self-help’ section with their blog hosts on this issue. It is beyond just The BC.

Nov 5, 2009 - 2:53 pm 63. mariner:

I’ve been reading Belmont Club since Wretchard was a cat (the first Blogspot site), and I believe this site is one of the most intelligent on the Net.

The Leftists use major media to broadcast their agenda, control discourse, and coordinate supporters; we must use the Internet. Sites like this one present a threat to be neutralized. Trolling will accomplish that if it results in measures to severely control access, or in self-censoring either by our host or by commenters.

I believe the troll problem can be mitigated with self-restraint. I didn’t feed the troll, and if I can manage that so can other and more esteemed commenters.

Subotai@53

I agree with you; that is why I posted a few threads ago that Americans who truly wish to live free would need to take extreme measures to get their country back.

Because I don’t often comment (though I read most threads), more established commenters probably thought I was a wacko. I hope I’m not, but I believe I see pretty clearly what the end game may be if we wish to see the corrupt and the socialists removed from power. (See The Battle of Athens. Ironically I believe I first heard about the Battle of Athens on BC.)

Nov 5, 2009 - 2:54 pm 64. steveaz:

marymcl @#7,
“Ignoring the troll is great in theory but it only works in practice if EVERYONE does it.”

JMH @#11,
“Don’t feed the trolls!”

Leo Linbeck III @#12
“if each of us responds individually to a troll, we end up with everyone being worse off.”

I see a consensus forming at the front end of this thread: we need to enlarge the definition of “troll” to include people who respond to trolls. The trolls’ interlocutors, themselves, are trolls, and there should be consequences. There’ll need to be a carve-out to allow one or two earnest attempts made at entertaining the troll, but this blandishment, like those that any graceful host would extend to any new acquaintance, should have its limits.

Not sure how to put any teeth behind the parlor rules, though. Usually, when folks want to tune someone out they’ll pull down their shades and give a “tell-it-to-the-hand” wave. If you’ve got the trolls’ IP addresses, it shouldn’t be too hard to redirect habitual offenders off to a “Whatev’” page, BC’s equivalent of solitary confinement in a pink, padded cell.
-Steve

Nov 5, 2009 - 2:56 pm 65. buddy larsen:

o/t but fyi –12 dead, 31 wounded, the shooter was killed. Two possible accomplices apprehended, all three were (are) soldiers. two weapons used, both handguns. No info on shooter nor other two possibles is being given out by base commander (other than, FBI is on that and he is waiting for the report). Commander is speaking to the press live as i type –

now Fox has cut to Obama, live, who is about to ’speak on the tragedy’ –that happened at 1:30 PM –

Obama apologizes for interrupting what the speech had been scheduled as –an address to the problems of Native Americans –due to the Fort Hood incident –he continues –editor shuts me off in a few secs –

Nov 5, 2009 - 2:57 pm 66. Foul Harold:

I do not suffer fools easily and consider The Belmont Club essential daily reading. Ignoring the troll problem accomplishes nothing. They need to be stomped on, thoroughly belittled, and thrown out.

You can rest assured that left-leaning discussion boards have no compunction whatsoever about doing the same with far less provocation.

Nov 5, 2009 - 3:00 pm 67. toad:

In the past trolls have shown up on technical and hobby sites that I frequented.
I gave up on those sites. Quite a few are gone because people got tired of wading through the troll feces to find answers to questions and problems. Either get control of the trolls or watch readership die off.

Nov 5, 2009 - 3:00 pm 68. wws:

First, I think this thread isn’t “all about” or dedicated to the poster in that other thread. This is about net trolling in general, and as such I think it’s perfectly appropriate and probably overdue to have this discussion.

I’m not bothered by trolls too much, sometimes they’re a lot of fun to play with. I always thought it a great game to Troll the Trolls. (although I recognize this distresses some people) I suppose when the volume gets to the point that it drowns out all reasonable discussion and causes good posters to quit an otherwise meaningfull discussion, then something should be done to limit it. Personal insults that distress longtime contributors probably cross the line too, although that’s a judgment call that’s hard to apply except on a case by case basis.

hehe, Agoraphobic Plumber – yes, I remember the “meow” wars. I used to read and occasionally contribute to the Kibologists, if you remember them. I was more of a sci-fi geek then, and I still recall how one of my associates started one of the greatest Star Trek flamewars ever with a simple one line question: “Best Captain Ever: Kirk, Picard, Sisko, or That Bitch???”
If you were a trekkie those were the baddest fightin’ words ever penned. Ah, those were the days!

Another groaner always good for a really stupid flamewar – Who would win the battle, the Enterprise or an Imperial Star Destroyer? Fanboys were willing to die over that one. Memories, memories.

Nov 5, 2009 - 3:01 pm 69. jkrank:

As a longtime lurker, I’m of the mind that there is simply no solution to trolling.

The concept of a comments section, one that grants the ability to bounce comments off of each other in real time and subsequently learn and maybe even grow also comes with a price. There will be those who use an open society in bad faith in order to corrupt the society.

It’s ‘truth to power’ or ‘courage’ on the cheap. It is truly sublime deceit. But we do see quite a lot of that nowadays.

The anguish that so many have over trolling is that it attacks virtue, tarnishes something that one finds special, even unique. That’s why it’s so hard to ‘ignore’ a troll; the very point is to desecrate something dear.

The fact that many here are appalled reveals something noble in them, no matter their political persuasion or thoughts on this or that.

I say: continue to speak genuinely and openly. And be careful and delicate about the application of controls on site comments, or you’ll end up snuffing out a part of what makes BC special.

Nov 5, 2009 - 3:05 pm 70. Ari Tai:

I’d prefer a technical option. And until the pendulum returns to favoring smart clients which we and others can program to provide these features independently of the content authors, it’ll have to be done by the web site. PJM management, if you don’t know how to do this (provide a “kill-file” equivalent feature in both the UI and client cookie store) some of us would be happy to provide gratis (but we’ll need to know what you’re running).. or if you have a contracted programming staff, we’ll pay the bill.

And given the recent “best of comments” activity, the service could include ability not just to flag “don’t show me any more by Ari” but five degrees of “Agree to Disagree,” and perhaps a flag to nominate a comment for consideration of a “Wretchard (Oscar) Award” flag.

Nov 5, 2009 - 3:08 pm 71. Storm-Rider:

Stevaz, 64: “we need to enlarge the definition of “troll” to include people who respond to trolls.”

Isn’t moral equivalence a core philosophy of the Marxist Left? Sorry, but anti-trolls are not trolls; just as anti-Marxists are not Marxists and anti-jihadists are not jihadists.

Part of the global conflict between liberty and tyranny (Marxist, Fascist or Islamist) is rhetorical; this battle should not be abandoned because the human mind (silent readers) is a terrible thing to waste. There are many hearts and minds out there waiting for philosophical direction. They’ve already a brainwashing in their schools and from our mass media and entertainment; what they read here may be their only opportunity to understand the moral and philosophical basis for the American Revolution. That is why BC is targeted; there are many enemies of the American Declaration of Independence.

Nov 5, 2009 - 3:20 pm 72. Storm-Rider:

Correction:

They’ve already had a thorough brainwashing in their schools…

Nov 5, 2009 - 3:25 pm 73. blogstrop:

I have avoided commenting on lefty sites – no need to even read them since the MSM gives us their talking points continuously. Trolls are uninvited guests and should be ejected, but I realise this takes a lot of resources. A daily comment limit would be an automatic circuit breaker. Cluttered threads are ruined threads.

Nov 5, 2009 - 3:25 pm 74. Highlander:

O/T: Disgusted by the sheer fecklessness of our C-in-C. He spent three minutes blowing sunshine up the a**es of the attendees of the conference before saying a word about the soldiers and staff killed and wounded at Ft. Hood. I am praying for them, and hope that no buddies were in the building when this took place. Forgive the raw emotions…this hits close to home.

Working back to the topic at hand: I have gone to great effort to be civil and restrained in my comments, particularly toward my adversaries on the Left. No longer. F*** Obama, and his little troll minions. I have to agree with both Subotai and Foul Harold…active measures are called for and public humiliation of such such idiots justified.

Nov 5, 2009 - 3:28 pm 75. buddy larsen:

Dave/54; hmmm –i thought it was a coincidence that i’d used ‘Des Moines’ upthread and then the guy turned out to be from Des Moines. if the actual troll just picked the Des Moines grocery guy off the web, that’s a head scratcher. but i’m no detective –i had no info on him –i used Des Moines by way of trying to think of a recent national emergency (that’d avoid Katrina –which would’ve mixed my message) which was to wax sarc about a large army of americorp kids supplanting the already extant organizations –such as those native Iowans who had their own bulldozers and front loaders and local volunteers ready to hand when the Mississippi flooded that year. The last thing they needed would’ve been to feed and house a horde of hungry teenagers who’d never held a shovel.

***

Kay baily Hutchinson is on the tv re fort Hood –she’s saying shooter ”was an officer” who was ”upset at having been posted to Afghanistan” –she said she has a name and that ”the name tells us something” –but she is not ready to release thename — –saying he was a Major ==and ”primary gunman” –

Nov 5, 2009 - 3:31 pm 76. Harry:

I don’t mind seeing many Doug or Buddy posts. It’s not a quantity issue it is a tone issue. You can tell who’s engaged in legimate give and take (sometimes even off thread) and who isn’t. A flame thrower once identified could be blocked. Legitimate discourse even argument can flourish. Even Cedarford made a contribution because he wasn’t bent on disruption.

Harry

Nov 5, 2009 - 3:32 pm 77. buddy larsen:

shooter “…from Virgina, and a convert to Islam ….” –reporter from local tv station –

***H/76; thanks harry –i realize i overdo it at times –but i do swear off for long stretches whenever i get too embarrassed at my lack of manners –:-(

Nov 5, 2009 - 3:39 pm 78. Dave:

Buddy;

Multiple shooters, multiple locations. Definitely some form of “enemy activity”.
Exact nature of which needs to be determined.

Ed Driscoll seems to be “live-blogging” it.
Switch to his column as Wretch is not in locale to follow developments.

Turn TV OFF and keep it that way until somebody has time to do accurate summary. Television is incapable of giving you a comprehensive picture of what is happening. All you will get is repeat visual footage time and again. Radio is useful but not the idiot box.

Once again: If current information accurate, shooting(s) definitely enemy activity but nature of enemy remains unknown.

Nov 5, 2009 - 3:39 pm 79. Langley:

OT – Sorry

The suspected gunman was identified by ABC News as Major Malik Nadal Hasan.

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/soldiers-killed-fort-hood-shooting/story?id=9007938

Nov 5, 2009 - 3:41 pm 80. Cannoneer No. 4:

Battle of Wanat, July 13, 2008, 9 KIA, 27 WIA.

Fort Hood Massacre, November 5, 2009, 12 KIA, 31 WIA.

A US Army MAJOR, pay grade O-4, active shooter with two handguns, CONVERT to the Religion of Peace.

We are infiltrated.

Nov 5, 2009 - 3:42 pm 81. dan:

One identified convert to Islam, 2 other suspects about whom nothing has been released. Simply a rage-fest? You’d think 3 men armed with… basically anything would believe that, of all places, they would be mostly likely to be killed on a military base. The motivation stated seems insufficient: that he was upset for being posted to Afghanistan. Afghanistan? Where there have been about 800 deaths in 8 years? And a Muslim would not find some consolation in being sent into the Dar-al-Islam?

He can’t be simply nuts, because he had two co-nuts. Insanity does not work that way. And all three must have presumed they would die on base.

Therefore, sleepers? Or recently planned? I wonder who the other two are, or whether these details are true. Perhaps this is advanced active measures: one side howls about Islamic infiltration and suicide-terrorism, the other howls about military degredation because of “Bush’s wars” and “neo-cons!” The ideological clash, the chasm widens/the enemy flashes lightning to test how wide the chasm, the crisis approaches.

Hm.

Nov 5, 2009 - 3:44 pm 82. buddy larsen:

dave/78 –link please –thnx

Nov 5, 2009 - 3:54 pm 83. Skookumchuk:

I’m no techie, but here goes – commenter registration and use of ISP based email addresses would seemingly make things much more manageable. I also like the 24 / 7 team of moderators idea. Labor intensive, but it could be done by sharing the load. I agree that this kind of activity is bound to increase over time and is or will be under some sort of centralized direction. We have to deal with it sooner rather than later. BC is too rich of a resource to lose.

Nov 5, 2009 - 3:59 pm 84. Josh:

There are no converts to Islam, just reverts, y’know.

Apparently this guy reverted bigtime.

Nov 5, 2009 - 4:00 pm 85. Martin McPhillips:

That type of disruption was what destroyed the most active political groups on Usenet in the ’90s. I wondered in a recent email to someone who was there if all that wasn’t some sort of “penny-a-post” ACORNista effort.

Or something from that Alinskyite universe. A lot of it was subhuman depersonalization in its steady trope, like the one you just experienced here.

Nov 5, 2009 - 4:11 pm 86. Knight1:

#71 Highlander – re Pres. Obama – agreed, couldn’t believe the first 3 minutes – had no idea what he was talking about until “first Americans”- and the cheering in the press room was disconcerting.

Nov 5, 2009 - 4:12 pm 87. JMH:

Last I’ve heard is only two shooters (third was the result of two different eyewitnesses seeing the same guy).

Two nuts? A little more plausible than three, but Dan’s point is still valid. The shooter is apparently a psychatrist. Don’t know when he reverted, er, converted,

Nov 5, 2009 - 4:13 pm 88. Habu:

Eighty four comments showing as I write. Some long, some short.

People, many of you are overanalyzing the troll issue. If one shows up, FORGET taking them on. As W has pointed out they waste much valuable time and they love the attention.

It’s not that hard to just simply not buy into feeding trolls. If you feed them you’re part of the problem, not any part of a solution no matter how erudite and intellectual you might think you are. They’re just rhetorical chloroform

Nov 5, 2009 - 4:14 pm 89. 49erDweet:

Like 63. mariner:, I was reading W when he was still merely a cat. He’s always had trolls. Even now I can remember some of them by name. Ugh. But when the rest of us learned to stop feeding them they went away. It does take some self-discipline. But trolls live and die by the number and vitriol of their responders. Starve them and they die.

None of you regular posters will lose “face” in my book by not responding back once a troll has attacked you or your ideas. Most of us are smart enough to recognize the troll as being an inferior object, something far beneath our notice. We will still love you if you shut up and starve the silly thing out.

W’s instincts on this have been spot-on all these years, in my book.

Now back to Ft. Hood news coverage

Cheers

Nov 5, 2009 - 4:15 pm 90. herb:

When this passed it occurred to me that 3 US Soldiers were an unlikely source for this act absent any Other Motivation. It also occurred to me that the most likely source of that motivation was dear old islam. QED.

I hate the idea of classifying people by their religion. It just aint right. It leads to so many ugly UnAmerican and UnChristian things. But there have been a very limited number of soldier on soldier incidents in the past several years, all involving Persons With Arab Names. Im just a dirt engineer with a limited grasp of nuance but it seems to me that there is a logical conclusion to be drawn here. Can someone help me out here? I hate to see unarmed soldiers gunned down.

Nov 5, 2009 - 4:16 pm 91. Charles:

58. buddy larsen:

Buddy the Russian in south america was referring to a russian author who thinks that the USA is going to fall apart in the next couple years like the soviet union did in 1991 after withdrawing from afghanistan.

MOSCOW — For a decade, Russian academic Igor Panarin has been predicting the U.S. will fall apart in 2010. For most of that time, he admits, few took his argument — that an economic and moral collapse will trigger a civil war and the eventual breakup of the U.S. — very seriously. Now he’s found an eager audience: Russian state media.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123051100709638419.html

Nov 5, 2009 - 4:19 pm 92. Habu:

SR 15 and BL 31.

I disagree with the premise and BL’s defense of it.

No less an authority on marxism than Thomas Sowell, and he is one of the acknowledged experts on Marxism says Marxism isn’t close to a coherent philosophy and is not understood as such by 99% of those who discuss it. Ergo there is zero educational value in discussing something that none of us could make coherent in our lifetimes.

Marx even admitted he didn’t understand it or believe he was a Marxist.

Just don’t feed the trolls.

Nov 5, 2009 - 4:27 pm 93. bob from Idaho:

The Army identified the suspected gunman as Maj. Malik Nadal Hasan.

Hasan, 39, is a licensed psychiatrist from Silver Spring, Md., according to CBS News investigative producer Len Tepper.

Retired Maj. Gen. Robert Scales told Fox News the massacre did not appear to be the act of a mentally ill or extremely stressed person.

“This was a deliberate act of execution,” he said.

A sharia shrink, what a hell of a combination.

If you’re not nuts when you go in for a consultation, you will be when you come out.

Nov 5, 2009 - 4:29 pm 94. John Lynch:

Charles- yeah, that Russian guy is great. His map of the post-breakup USA looks suspiciously like the occupied USA in the 80s miniseries “Amerika.” I always get a good laugh out of Utah and California in the same country. If they end up together, what’s the point of a civil war?

Anyway, his argument boils down to “we ran out of oil, and America ran out of oil, so both collapse.” Ok, bud.

Nov 5, 2009 - 4:30 pm 95. Lifeofthemind:

The simply Ignore the troll argument is necessary but insufficient because the troll does occupy physical space on the screen and bandwidth that can block access. We need a technical solution to identify and sequester and then refer for blocking.

It is going to get worse. The Internet, the crown jewel of technology and the foundation of the economy of the 21st century, was just given away by Obama to international regulators. Think of Unesco and the UN Human Rights Commission being given the keys to the First Amendment and whatever business is still around for you and yours to work in in 10 years. Giving away, correction stealing, GM was a straight Chicago style payoff to supporters and given that it was an old and declining industry that was reprehensible but survivable. The loss of the Internet, the turning it over to the tender administrations of people with the moral stature of Mohamed ElBaradei of the IAEA, is a far more serious blow. Consider who actually built this technical marvel and who will get to control it. The Internet is largely the work of Americans and Israelis with significant help from free Chinese, English, Italians, Dutch and some Hungarian exiles. Almost the same groups created the atomic age that sustained American power and an unprecedented expansion of global wealth, health and creativity. Now the enemies of all that are being given the power to shut it all down.

Horrible news from Ft Hood. Never doubt the efficacy of prayer.

Nov 5, 2009 - 4:42 pm 96. buddy larsen:

Psychiatry is one of the vital platforms according to Lavrentiy Beria –and remember the basic marxist critique –the psychiatric concept of the authoritarian personality that results from the competitive pressure in judaochristian free markets that is responsible for war, racism, oppression of women, etcetera –a bedrock foundational meme factory, that psychiatry is –once co-opted, every critique of it becomes an evidence of its validity. Like that acid blood in the Alien –if you spill its blood it eats through the ship and you die.

At least some of the murdered at Fort Hood were just back –just BACK –from Iraq. To die in the heart of Texas, at a deployment readiness medical facility in the heart of the largest deployment facility in the USA, at the hands of a field grade officer who had major warning label all over him but nothing a bureaucracy in the PC era could officially notice –has got to be a game changer. Morale alone is going to turn harder or softer but not stay the same.

Nov 5, 2009 - 4:43 pm 97. pel:

Re: Panarin’s Post-Apoc USA

I get a laugh out of that one. A Texas Republic that is a part of Mexico or under Mexican influence? what a riot.

Re: The Trolls

Yes, the trouble with trolls is feeding them. Dave K was quite acerbic at first, but there was a chance to simply offer short, principled counters to his bombs. There were a few decent attempts, but they came too late. Some had simply engaged, to which he responded with ad-hominems, and then it was off to the races.

He had a couple of points, which while worded in an incendiary fashion, need to be readily addressed when they are made. Namely: How do you avoid the charge of hypocrisy when accepting our very large military and all its budgets but criticizing the other oversized parts of government as unnecessary bloat? And, what of the charge that the military accepts enlisted men (and women) who are just too inept to go to college or otherwise find a “proper” job?

The “Constitution covers defense, absolutely, but medicare and social security… eh, not so much, and I happen to enjoy expensive Pax Americana over the Nazi/Soviet world arrangement” and “enlisted military are actually smarter than you think they are, and I’m not going to be terribly picky about who volunteers to become a target so that -you- don’t have to be drafted against your will” approaches are the right places to start, but they need to be fully formed, intelligently arranged, and dropped like a ton a bricks onto somebody who tries to start the “Army is full of welfare queens” meme flamefest here.

Nov 5, 2009 - 5:03 pm 98. Salt Lick:

Ace of Spades has a link saying the two other suspected Fort Hood shooters have been released.

Nov 5, 2009 - 5:03 pm 99. Storm-Rider:

herb, 90: “I hate the idea of classifying people by their religion.”

It’s not the religion; it’s the legal system. The Islamic legal system (Sharia) is totalitarian, i.e.: it is the arbitrary law of a few individuals within a religious oligarchy. Marxism, also totalitarian, is the arbitrary law of a few individuals within an atheist oligarchy.

“The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite.” Thomas Jefferson

Nov 5, 2009 - 5:11 pm 100. Raoul Ortega:

One thing I’ve noticed is that in many cases, there are a small group of people who must respond to everything the troll says. Eventually a thread consists of the troll and those willing to play its game. Who seem too dense to realize they are never going to get a straight answer. If you are going to start banning people, don’t ban the troll, but ban the people who lack any self control or discipline and end up encouraging it.

Nov 5, 2009 - 5:11 pm 101. Gaffe Prices:

Not much in the way of details on how far this goes beyond this ‘medical’ officer. We will have to wait and see. Of what has been confirmed so far I am not surprised at what has happened. I anticipated something on our own soil. This major, Nadal Malik Hasan knew that this was probably the facility that offered the least resistance, and chose and planned it for that reason.

That makes it a cowardly attack. As are all acts of terror. Specifically so. I keep hearing the words “tragic” and “tragedy” being repeated over and over at the conclusion of the updates.

There is nothing tragic about this. By definition, tragedy involves one being the victim of ones’ own designs.

Here’s tragedy: I go swimming in the creek when its storming and flooding, throwing caution to the wind to ride the white water. I drown. My tragic death: My designs, my decisions. Not here.

I heard at one point that a police officer was present at the processing facility; he killed Nadal Malik Hasan, and was killed himself. Killed in the line of duty, to protect others from this insane killers mad bloodlust. Nothing tragic about it. He gave his life to save others and stop the killer(s). He represents our finest.

Grief? yeah. Lots of it.

Rest in peace. May your families be comforted through this horror. May we know the depth of your courage, and pick up the torch again.

Let us gather our prayers for the families of the wounded and fallen soldiers in this time of grief, and grieve with them.

“Greater love hath no one than he/she who would give his/her life for his/her friends.”

Amen.

Nov 5, 2009 - 5:29 pm 102. Korval:

Howdy…

I’ve been mostly a reader/lurker on BC for a few years now, and greatly enjoyed the posts if its more (and sometimes less) erudite members. In this (my second post, and under a different name), I’d like to say “Thanks!” to W for providing such a thought provoking and informative arena for discussion.

Regarding recent trollery, I am of the opinion that it was deliberate and very politically motivated. That, and the faux identity provided was very likely a fake. (Probably the poor grocery boy stole the troll’s girlfriend or some such). I do not find it a stretch of the imagination to think that there are loyal legions of … activists … who will eagerly sign up to troll forum X, or website Y on Election Day.

Consider it the internet equivalent of thugs with sticks outside the polling place.

Their purpose? Of course, to disrupt enemy communications during the battle.

Congrats, W! You’ve made the official “enemies list”!

Unfortunately, this means you’re the target for pernicious internet warfare.

I’d suggest that people think carefully on this. Our enemies, foreign and domestic wish to deny our rights to freely assemble and express ourselves in an online forum. This attack was nothing more than a quasi-legal attempt at an informational DNS attack.

People also need to be aware that trolls like nothing more than to provoke a poorly thought out emotional reaction. The better to quote in other locations and smear the reputation of an online community. This is why it is generally best to ignore and not feed them.

Short of requiring actual signups for membership in the BC, another technical solution I’ve seen on other sites is simply to limit the frequency with which one can post. Given the troll’s posting rate, a mandatory minimum of 5 minutes between posts (for example) would have likely cramped his style.

Just a thought, and keep up the great community!
K (who is actually C)

P.S. God bless our troops and their families.

Nov 5, 2009 - 5:32 pm 103. Geeze Louise:

@15: Since presumably many ordinary people read Belmont Club without commenting, it would appear to me that the Marxist/Socialist trolls present to us a teaching opportunity – not for the trolls – but for the silent readers.

Folks here got conned. The only teaching that occurred during the thread in question was how not to deal with a bully/troll. The only tool I need for bully control is my brain. I move along to a more interesting space.**

Second (as per Buddy), no new themes emerged requiring a Socratic dialogue. If socialism is to endure in some ‘new and improved’ form, then let’s see it. Otherwise, same old bag of groceries.

Parenthetically, this nasty ideological divide is not just tiresome, but borderline pointless. Not long ago, (Q3 2009 sometime) I listened to a news interview with several CEO’s of mid-sized businesses. None of them were particularly inflamed over the “public plan” health care option. What rattled their cages was the failure to control escalating costs – regardless of public versus private delivery.

Issues in the political arena gridlock over failure to resolve the technicals, which are owned by lobbyists, and yet every night – whether FOX, or one of the ‘BC’s – we are presented with a repeat episode of The Same Old Dem-Repub fist fight. Not unlike the focus on this site.

The foundation of the Beltway power architecture is self-interest. Lobbyists don’t care which side of the aisle members of Congress park themselves. Ideology is a word they picked up in a marketing course in college.

**Occupying bandwidth is a next generation issue. Dave the Bagger, as a demonic precursor to a digital blackout attack, is a stretch. Some perspective is in order. I was amused. This country has enough real enemies without shadow boxing every kook getting high on his keyboard.

Nov 5, 2009 - 5:34 pm 104. twobyfour:

Raoul/100

A bit too over the top.
Consider that thread a “flu”. People got antibodies and will most likely take measures, personally, to avoid getting infected again.
It would be nicer if there was an anti-troll mechanism like Rantburg has, for instance, after suffering troll raids for some time, but we have to do for now with what we have and also policing takes quite a few people involved and a chunk of their time.
I am pretty sure that there won’t be a major repeat, just some mild infections if this happens again.

It is, though, quite likely that troll attack would increase in the near future and have more disruptive effect simply by their volume. Thus, some measures should be implemented if that happens to be the case. The email-based registration/id would prolly be the desired minimum requirement.

Speaking of which… that would be the default mode of access to fallback solutions, with some other types of security thrown in. Just making that clear up front. No need to trumpet loudly what these measures will be, eh?

(PLS all, make note of this, you will initially need it: twobyfourum at gmail dot com)

Nov 5, 2009 - 5:39 pm 105. Konyok:

Dave,

Yes, I did read your post, and was gratified at your mention. It’s just that I was trying to stick to the “Armies of the Right” theme.

No doubt, if China is going to successfully develop the copper mine at Anyak they’re going to have to build some roads, probably a railroad given the scale of the thing, and provide security for themselves. That, and oil and gas development in Sheberghan, will provide some revenue and economic activity in the country, but agricultural development is the most dire need. (Minister of Mines Adel is a pretty good guy, I’ve met him. A Soviet trained Hazara, he appears to be a serious and honest technocrat. Agriculture Minister Rahimi is American trained, but is at a great disadvantage because his only revenue is handouts from the “international community.”)

**

It did strike me odd that the person calling himself Dave K never responded to any of my oblique references to him. He was quick to comment on anything remotely about him. It also seemed telling to me that he never responded to Buddy’s post quoting Beria on disruption, taking the rhyming bait instead.

**

I’m not sure why, but my first thought about the Fort Hood shootings was the treachery of Afghan policemen – turning on both American and British troops in the last week. I still can’t shake that connection …

Nov 5, 2009 - 5:40 pm 106. Storm-Rider:

Habu, 92: “Marxism isn’t close to a coherent philosophy and is not understood as such by 99% of those who discuss it. Ergo there is zero educational value in discussing something that none of us could make coherent in our lifetimes. Marx even admitted he didn’t understand it or believe he was a Marxist.”

Marxism can be understood fairly easily; it is the opposite of the American Declaration of Independence. All individuals evolve with a natural right to equal outcomes – such as property ownership – regardless of labor – except of course for the ruling Marxist elite – they are “more equal” (Animal Farm). The State is endowed by the State (Marxist Oligarchy) with unalienable rights to the individual’s property, liberty, and (if necessary for the security of the State), to his/her life.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/guides/Z-Social%20Justice-Code%20for%20Communism.htm

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/2125/print

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8630135369495797236&hl=en#

The reason so many people don’t understand Marxism, or believe it can’t be understood, is because they haven’t read and studied the Communist Manifesto; they have not become students of this totalitarian political ideology. You can’t defeat your enemy unless you understand your enemy.

“Marx even admitted he didn’t understand it or believe he was a Marxist.”

I believe Karl Marx was a liar; also a genius.

Nov 5, 2009 - 5:40 pm 107. Marcus Aurelius:

I missed the flamefest back on that thread. However, from time to time we get drive bys coming in here working to stir things up.

I remember calling one out and asking for people not to feed the trolls and that troll started trolling me about how they were not a troll but was debating in good faith — however I just quite paying attention.

I went back and viewed Dave K #58 and the name calling (w/o any sort of provocation) is a dead give away this person is not interested in discussion but disruption and I generally refuse to feed the trolls.

In that thread even if you are a lefty/Democrat there is no need to hurl gratuitous insults.

Once I remember here one guy attacked myself and others for our “Victor Davis Hanson” wannabee handles. In that case, I did respond and I thought it was worth it because I don’t remember his points being too crazy but he seemed rather hostile to us & Wretchard in general.

There really is no way short of moderation to head off such events. You can require registration but when a registration is revoked and the offender re-applies with a different handle or comes up with some scheme to mask their IP (or is behind a proxy server).

Plus moderation is not a task I would want to hassle with. I moderate comments at Blogger Beer and will probably turn it off as the troll who instigated has not appeared in a year or two now. A friend runs a local blog and does good with comments but usually no more than 10/post and she gavef up moderation a long time ago. Commentary is definitely rough and tumble but it is within bounds.

LOL, I just started writing rants on Craig’s List “Rants and Raves” for my locale. I read for a long time and had an enjoyable time writing a rant in the RnR style!

Nov 5, 2009 - 5:43 pm 108. RW:

In Amateur Radio the usual response to an intruder on a frequency is to pretend that you do not hear him. You might say “Hey, do y’all hear something in the background now and then?” even if the guy is coming in loud and clear.

So I would suggest we not only do not engage the trolls but also say “Hey, Dave K, you are just posting a what looks like a bunch of gibberish letters on my computer screen. You better go check and see what is wrong.” And perhaps even post some gibberish letters ourselves.

And then go listen to the Brad Paisley song “Online” – it is appropriate for those creeps. Maybe even ask the guy how things are down at the Pizza Pit.

Nov 5, 2009 - 5:48 pm 109. buddy larsen:

Psychiatry is the field of helping victims, and victimology is marxism’s basic raison d’etre.

The counter is that the capitalist system (and ‘capitalist” is a marxist term –it used to just be called ”freedom”) has nothing to do with the inside of a person’s head or heart –it’s about the living conditions –which presumably are either better or worse than they can or can’t be.

The hearts and minds stuff is another matter completely (addressed by the self, or the loved one, or the psychiatrist, or the bottle or bong, or even addressed in church or temple for those who i’m seeing increasingly as ”on to something” old fashioned that may better get new or au courant again), and if one wants to posit that being poorer and more oppressed than necessary is better for the heart and mind than being less poor and less oppressed than necessary, well go ahead and make that argument.

But the marxist critique of capitalism creating victims is confronted by the obvious fact that capitalism is what in the world can defeat poverty, and thus the ‘critique’ has to stretch way out to the notion of relative poverty (that is, social-contexted poverty that measures gap between top and bottom) being the morality underneath creating chaos and misery and violence in the subversion of non-marxist nations.

So, the concept of ‘relative poverty’ is their hole card and thing to beat –and it’s easy to understand –if stated clearly and often –that freedom despite the rich is better than bondage without them, esp since you won’t BE without them (Castro is one of the richest men in the world, but he says he owns nothing, it all belongs to Cuba).

Especially if you too, or at least your descendants, can get rich too, should you or they issue forth thoughts and deeds of sufficient value in the market. this is ‘upward mobility’ –and it is an early victim of societal chaos. marxism hopes to be outed as a rule or ruin system, so that we will see that Fort Hood to 9/11 WTC incidents can never be stopped by their defenders –only by their perps. Thus the doctrine of exhausting your opponents by any means necessary, until they come to you for help (see USA, “BDS”, 2004-08).

A continental geopolitical trans-epoch protection racket, making a move right now in your time and mine.

Nov 5, 2009 - 5:53 pm 110. geoffb:

On a photo forum I read, there is a “hide me” button on every comment. By simply clicking on that button I never have to read comments by that commenter again.

Over at Protein Wisdom one of the long time commenters wrote a program that works with Firefox and Greasemonkey that does that, for the site, for anyone who runs it as part of Firefox. He recently made it work for another Wordpress site POWIP. Handy. It can be turned off when you wish to see those hidden comments.

Nov 5, 2009 - 5:54 pm 111. geoffb:

Trolls from the Left are useful in one way. They will by their presence and persistence highlight exactly what they believe should not be discussed.

Nov 5, 2009 - 6:05 pm 112. Eggplant:

Leo Linbeck III said:

“Part of the issue, I believe, is that it has been quite some time since we had a serious troll here at the BC. Having grown accustomed to thoughtful, albeit occasionally provocative, dialogue, we had perhaps forgotten just how disruptive and obnoxious a troll can be.”

Sums it up nicely. We’ve gotten soft from too much civil discourse.

If an obvious troll makes repeated stupid comments, allow Wretchard or one of the more eloquent regular Belmont Club members to properly flame the troll (don’t do it yourself unless you’re good at it). After that, ignore the troll and don’t feed him.

Nov 5, 2009 - 6:06 pm 113. twobyfour:

RW/108

The noise stuff… good.
The other, minimal engagement, akin to pour just a few drops of oil instead of the whole cup… it is still an engagement and a feed to the troll.

The result is smelly droppings. They do not have any shame, whatsoever, to befoul the place.

Flaming the troll is an engagement, too. Despite being tempting.

Nov 5, 2009 - 6:09 pm 114. Gaffe Prices:

#6, “TheCharlatan: Feed a troll, start a fever!

The key strategy of rat troll packs is to 1) change the subject and 2) put others on the defensive of trying to disprove baseless negative fallacies of logic. I saw it months back, and haven’t seen it again until lately. The strategy started with the WH vs. Fox news thing, where the troll patrols change the subject from- rival news org’s not defending one of their own (despite ideological differences)- to the trolls switch to their invention of the “Fox is biased” “debate”. Media bias is a subject of debate; just not the topic of discussion lead by the blog host.

The white house started fabricating this assault on fox news, to run interference for this health scare/death dare vote coming tomorrow.

And now this. I think there will be some pretty skittish House member votes tomorrow, now that some muslim killer/mass muderer has realigned our priorities to back where they should be

The key is to recognize the names of the various trolls and avoid reading their fake-out distractions. But sometimes…

Whew. Guilty as charged. I usually do pretty well, avoiding the trolls, and skipping over their inanities. But when I smell a rat pack of those trolls, and they have tag teamed their way to off-topic-ing the thread to total distraction, I call out their tag team paid seminar behavior, as I did on a thread recently.

I managed to get them pretty mad, and one of their replies showed how mad one of them was. I wonder if its still there. (not deleted)

Trolls are not here to engage in dialogue: the only way to avoid them is to skip over them. Read and think about the comments of those you know, recognize and trust; do not apply the same cognitive principles to those whom you cannot trust.

It’s tough to skip over their subtle altering of the subject line. The tag team approach makes it appear that there is a conversation on their terms. When there isn’t. That’s the fake.

Nov 5, 2009 - 6:25 pm 115. Lifeofthemind:

Will post this on my blog under the title “Evidence of Insanity.”

Konyak,
I’m not sure why, but my first thought about the Fort Hood shootings was the treachery of Afghan policemen – turning on both American and British troops in the last week.

Karadzic wasn’t the only psychiatrist to turn murderous. There is something in the training process that promotes the objectification of people to a greater extent even than shown by surgeons, and most of surgeons I met during a student job at the hospitals struck me as egomaniacal jerks.

IIRC the Intifada began with Palestinian policemen turning the guns the Israelis had given them on the Israelis who they were on joint patrol with. The British and some Americans responded by insisting that what was needed was more training for the Fatah security services and more “cooperation” from Israel. Since that has worked so well I am sure the same people have plans to train and equip the “moderates of Hamas.”

Nov 5, 2009 - 6:28 pm 116. dan:

buddy was it you who posted the dubious sourced speech by beria discussing the importance of supporting and advancing freudian theory and psycholanalysis generally because the basic experience of the patient/devotee is humiliation? i thought that was a pretty great idea, evilwise, and jives with what is known about Richard Sorge’s presence (just after the failure of the first attempt at Bolshevik revolution in Germany) at the founding meeting of what became known as the Frankfurt School – whose project, after all, was to fuse Marxism and Freudian theory.

Nov 5, 2009 - 6:54 pm 117. twobyfour:

Lifeofthemind/115

A shrink, not a psychiatrist. A bit different category. 95% of psychologists I knew went to study psychology to resolve their internal problems. I knew only one psychiatrist and he was f***d up as well, but I don’t have enough data to extrapolate what is it like in the field.

But that is very likely secondary in this case. The primary component, no doubt, is the SJS (sudden jihad syndrome).

Correction, he was a psychiatrist.

Nov 5, 2009 - 6:55 pm 118. Mark_B:

I used the “slow news day”/”this thread is dead anyway” excuse to pile on.

Is it reasonable to restrict comments to those who were registered two weeks ago? This would prevent an avalanche. Maybe fallback to the old site?

Nov 5, 2009 - 6:57 pm 119. twobyfour:

Officer profile of Hasan.

Notice the religion field: no prefs.
His cousin says he was a muslim all his life. The recent “conversion” as reported by some media must have been more like “activation”.

Nov 5, 2009 - 7:10 pm 120. Tamquam:

One of the unpleasant side effects of free speech is a lot of speech that is boring, annoying and generally not worth my time and attention. Witness television as a fine example of just exactly that. Every day I hear people say inane things, expound positions I do not share and and share enthusiasms I’d rather know nothing about.

I suppose that I could take issue with these people and try and argue them out of their silly ideas, but it would be a total waste of my time. I suppose, if I had the means and inclination, I could implement a technical means of silencing them, such as a portable cone of silence. I could even withdraw myself from society and commune with the esoteric in magnificent solitude.

None of those solutions are realistic or sane. People will babble on and I don’t want to hear it I ignore them and move on. The idea that BC must somehow insulate itself from the free speech of idiots is just plain silly. The idiots you will always have with you, to paraphrase the Lord, so get over it. It is a discipline to refrain from engaging those who attempt disruptive arguments. People need to be reminded of this.

What you feed grows. Trolls are inviting us into a no-win power struggle. The feel empowered by our engagement with them. The more we engage the more empowered they feel. If we don’t engage they don’t get what they want and go seek it elsewhere. If you are committed to more trolls, then engage them, by all means. I just skipped his posts and any post that referenced him. If you don’t want more trolls, ignore them. Presumably we are all adults here who both know what needs (not) doing and how to (not) do it.

BTW – Where’s DK tonight? You’d think he’d be here stirring the pot and lapping it up.

Nov 5, 2009 - 7:11 pm 121. gadfly:

For the hoards of people, including me, who have been banned by Chuckles over at LGF for simply disagreeing or questioning the host (about such things as why another poster was banned), I am much more comfortable with Wretchard’s open policy. Having said that, I believe that the Armies of the Right was an important topic that was never explored diligently by the learned regulars on this blog because one bad apple in the barrel.

I have seen many approaches to control blog posts, including the blogger’s own yea or nay on every post (which would keep Wretchard up nights), to actual post ratings by readers including the right to request a ban of any poster who takes the time to respond. That method adds even more power to the unwashed.

In the case of Dave K, however, he was by his own admission hijacking the thread. When that happens, a method needs to be put in place . . . perhaps an email to Pajamas Media, that will permit someone to temporarily block the offender’s IP address. Better yet would be to turn a switch on which would accept the offenders post but keep it from the public forum “awaiting approval” forever.

Nov 5, 2009 - 7:17 pm 122. Storm-Rider:

The trolls are not the main issue; the silent reader is the issue. Responding to irrational troll posts with reasonable and knowledgeable arguments (or with humorous sarcastic rhetoric) not only helps hone our own minds and increase our knowledge; it presents the argument to the silent reader in a way which is self-defeating for the troll. We should respond to the trolls with the silent audience in mind – we have a teaching opportunity, but it requires some knowledge and effort. I’m not saying ignoring the trolls is wrong – that may sometimes be the right thing; I’m just believe there are some arguments that are worth making, and honestly sometimes it’s fun.

Nov 5, 2009 - 7:28 pm 123. Lifeofthemind:

Storm-Rider,
You are I am afraid simply wrong about this. While you may enjoy sharpening your skills on the troll that is not I dare to say why wretchard went to the trouble of formulating the post nor is it why most of us come here and support the Club. The troll is not harmless because he is physically preventing other activity. When he produces dozens of comments and column inches of space are occupied it blocks out other activity. Your response simply adds to that problem. Once you can determine that it is not a legitimate disagreement, heck I am considered ideologically challenging by many here, then the dialogue should stop. In meat space you would pull such an obnoxious intruder aside to either converse with privately or to pulp but in here as long as they can arrive and post and even more so if anyone engages them then it becomes impossible to follow any other conversation. If someone entered a movie theater and turned on a portable boombox and set up a strobe light you would not expect others to admire your witty repartee with them.

Nov 5, 2009 - 8:05 pm 124. Eggplant:

I agree with Lifeofthemind. Again, the best response is to allow one club member to properly flame the troll and then the troll should be ignored. Definitely do not allow the troll to tie up bandwidth. When that happens, the troll has won.

Nov 5, 2009 - 8:17 pm 125. buddy larsen:

SR/122 pretty much sums up my own attitude –ignoring them completely requires fire control over many guns and it ain’t gonna happen too often. Someone will lock horns and then katy bahdeedoe. but one can always on-off a reply, including laying out the coming likely response(s) from the oaf, then conclude with “i’m all done, got no more to say to ye”. That’d possibly help solve for silent reader without tossing the thread in the loo.

Dan/116; yep –the ‘dubious’ tag is ambiguous –it means there’s no one that can find the statement written close in to the saying. But even if he didn’t say it in so many words in one fell swoop, he dropped the same content all over the place for years and years, attribb’d. i think of it as one of those squib quotes –ahh, ”new journalism” i think it is called. But the truth of it is in the pudding –what LB prescribes is what we’ve seen done –and doing. Frankfurt school –you gotta admit –that is pure genius to meld and weld Freud and marx. Propaganda can go anywhere with that.
Everybody hurts, after all. Gore figgered it out –everybody has bad weather after all.
listen, forthose without the tube blaring at them, that shooter is alive, in the hospital, out of danger. Also this–this could be big –the cop who took him down ALSO survived and is out of danger –anmd it’s a woman –a female first responder, who took him on in a old west shootout in which they both went down. Ladies and germs, we have a new national heroine. all this is breaking –haven’t caught her name yet. That’s Texas A&M country –female Aggies are known as “Maggies” –or, as we used to call ‘em in the days of ribaldry and a certain and well-known brand of canned cat food, “Puss in Boots”.

Nov 5, 2009 - 8:18 pm 126. Storm-Rider:

Lifeofthemind,
I’m 57 years old, but I can still remember like it was yesterday when my son at the age of two (he’s 19 now) kept telling me and others “you’re wrong.” I told my son that it was bad manners to tell people to their face that they are wrong; better I said to tell them “I disagree” or “we disagree.” To my amazement, without skipping a beat, my son said: “I’m right, and you disagree.”

Nov 5, 2009 - 8:30 pm 127. Konyok:

Ah, Buddy. There went a whole snortfull of good Georgian wine, right out my nose and all over the QWERTY!

If this gal turns out to be conservative, boy oh boy.

Nov 5, 2009 - 8:30 pm 128. marymcl:

Heads ups folks – wretchard has a Ft. Hood thread set up

Nov 5, 2009 - 8:31 pm 129. buddy larsen:

Konyok –she is SURE to be happy with the current healthcare system, as it is!

Nov 5, 2009 - 8:35 pm 130. herb:

Buddy:

“the cop who took him down ALSO survived and is out of danger ”

Thanks be to God.

Nov 5, 2009 - 9:21 pm 131. buddy larsen:

H/130; truly –Amen

Nov 5, 2009 - 9:48 pm 132. buddy larsen:

Charles/91; re Igor Panarin:

Nov 5, 2009 - 10:18 pm 133. buddy larsen:

(snip from the link in #132)

If Panarin is right about the breakup of the United States, then he is also right about the coming of a new global order under Moscow and Beijing. But is he right about the breakup of the United States? It was an anonymous Russian diplomat quoted in Pravda last July, who first intimated that the United States was about to suffer a profound crisis – a crisis of existence. How did the Russian diplomat know that the United States was headed for a financial crash? He knew because Russia has the best information service in the world, formerly known as the KGB. Russian spies have penetrated everywhere, and provide high quality information to people like Panarin – who is a “former” KGB analyst.

The Russian intelligence services have long tracked economic, financial and demographic changes in the United States. Russian analysts know that certain trends lead to political crisis. Such trends include ethnic balkanization, an ideological split in the ruling class, rising indebtedness, economic collapse, and declining moral standards. A country like the United States is ripe for civil war. If this should happen, foreign powers would intervene and the country would be split along geographical lines: California and the West would fall under Chinese control, Texas and the south would go to Mexico, and Russia would lay claim to Alaska. “It would be reasonable for Russia to lay claim to Alaska,” says Panarin. “It was part of the Russian empire for a long time.”

Panarin is saying, basically, that the present economic crisis signals a political crisis. The divisions within American society, and the narcissistic pathologies of consumer society, will cause an implosion. The people of America will turn against one another. The protective nuclear umbrella provided by the United States will cease to function. Europe and Asia will fall to Russia and China. From that point forward, the outcome of every political conflict on the planet will be determined in Moscow or Beijing. This would include, of course, the conflict within America itself.

(end quote; read more @ link)

Nov 5, 2009 - 10:30 pm 134. Ned:

After laying awake for sometime last night, it occurred to me that the unwelcome “guest” could be a trolling phisherman. I hope no one responded to his email address.

Ned

Nov 5, 2009 - 10:49 pm 135. Wadeusaf:

Cannoneer No, 4/16

“we discuss all kinds of issues here, and someone whose comments you admired a couple days ago on one thread may prove themselves a clueless ignoramus today on another thread.
I know I’m guilty of being clueless and seeming an ignoramus.

The “guest” no doubt is admired by that Grocery Store clerk in ways we can only begin to imagine given our short exposure. I figure the real mouth behind the keyboard was some hacker/troll who enjoys pissing off folks. The choice of words and this place as a target were probably done via an internet search. I the use of the grocery clerk was to my mind due to the ability of the hacker to hijack his profile and IP, and taunt.
The guy knows enough to be dangerous.

Buddy, didn’t mean to step on your experiment. I think, Freud and Free markets mixed well with varied results that critical thought should be able to remedy. Mixing Freud with Marxism, wow I hadn’t thought along those lines. Would that be considered a fantasy fetish, or just a figment of blowing out ones imagination. (guilty of witless pundantry, as charged)

Nov 5, 2009 - 11:23 pm 136. Gaffe Prices:

Re: me self #114

I got this troll, DaveKKK by name so mad, distracted and apoplectic, that he had this charming thing to say:

(here:
http://pajamasmedia.com/ronradosh/2009/10/29/why-liberal-journalists-are-joining-the-obama-administrations-attack-on-fox-news/#comments-175
)

Dave K.:
Gaffe Prices@173:

It’s a shock to me and it’s a shock to you
Your mother’s got a beard, sandals, and a penis too
It don’t look right see, when she’s walking down the street
To see her ball bag jiggin’ to the beat of her feet

I said
Your mother’s got a penis
Your mother’s got a penis
Your mother’s got a penis
That’s right
Your mother’s got a penis

I cite this as evidence in support of above comments to the effect of “Don’t feed the trolls”

I didn’t, and this is to demonstrate that this is as good as it can possibly get. My bad. apologies to all.

People like this work in tag teams, and/or post under multiple alias’s, but either way they are doing it for someone’s else’s bidding. and they work for cheap.

As marymcl pointed out, it only works when everyone pays them no mind. Grats that this thread can focus on this phemon thoroughly, and we then can proceed better informed and prepared.

If I don’t recognize their name I’l try and skip over, and keep OT better.

That’s my pledge. That and my pledge to free a million people from slavery, like Demi Moore pledged.

From the sublime to the ridiculous. And then back again.

Nov 5, 2009 - 11:26 pm 137. Gary Rosen:

“Maybe we should put him on the payroll.”

He’s already on a payroll – Axelrod’s. These morons are all over right wing blogs, they get paid to disrupt them. You might do the same if you were too stupid to hold a real job.

Nov 5, 2009 - 11:41 pm 138. buddy larsen:

no no, wade –u didn’t step on anything –this be a freedom zone –need attention, grow a beard and craze your eye and go speechify in the street –hey –(slaps forehead) that sounds kinda fun!

Gaffe –mercy –those people make you wanna call Roy –

Nov 5, 2009 - 11:56 pm 139. Charles:

132. buddy larsen:

The whole of democratic efforts for the next four years of O’s presidency are to lock down by legal means democratic majorities. It won’t take much really.

New York California and Illinois are pretty solidly blue. All the dems need is texas and florida. with those two states in their pockets they can blow off the rest of the country. counting illegals in the census is helpful
but not critical. the real deal is legalizing the illegals. once that’s done both texas and florida flip blue.

I don’t think the illegals will be legalized but not without a fight. amnesty legislation has been introduced into congress. it hasn’t been taken up however as health care has sucked the oxygen out of most democratic initiatives.

That said, I’m not so sure that demographic trends won’t make texas and florida go blue on blue for the dems by 2025 or so.

Nov 6, 2009 - 12:16 am 140. Sylvia:

52/Al. Thank you. Figured RF couldn’t miss something that significant.

I was on a closed Yahoo Group for years and then Yahoo changed their policy, opened all groups, and exposed the supposedly closed archives. It was simply a handspinning list, but we all stopped using our children’s and husbands’ names, became vague when referring to where we lived, etc. The attraction of the closed group had been the ability to have meaningful discussions, usually at an expert level. The influx of people who didn’t share our passion killed the group. We reverted to the old privately held mail lists, which were the textile community’s step up from bulletin boards, and most of those are still active, but not at same high level. Quite a few of us set up blogs since the then-newfound ability to post photos was an excellent tool in teaching new ways to turn a sock heel, for instance. Most tried blogging and became weary of trolls and spam, so now they’re members of Ravelry, an excellent social network site (easy to join, but pretty closely monitored by section heads) for knitters, handspinners, and other textile geeks. The bulletin boards are very, very active, but controversy is of limited scope, things like whether a particular sweater pattern works well for women with big front porches. Ravelers show up at textile fairs wearing their buttons and handknits and enjoy each others’ company. Again, it’s a labor-intensive thing to set up and obviously not how W would like to spend his life.

Captcha works pretty well, actually. Having to ride herd on all the posts and cull trolls gets old quickly. A back-up network is a like-to-have. Mail drop becomes a huge bother when the rest of the tangible world goes to heck in a hand basket. That said, I would happily knit socks to throw in the box for RF.

Nov 6, 2009 - 12:25 am 141. Gaffe Prices:

take note of how they call each of us out by name, when no one seems to be taking the bait.

“hey so and so @246….”

buddy- I’ve been reading a book called “The Next 100 Years” by Gerge Friedman,

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_2_19?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=the+next+100+years+by+george+friedman&sprefix=The+Next+100+years+

If the above link from #132 is correct and George Friedman’s macro-predictions aren’t true, those proximitys are a worry.

Friedman’s premise is that U.S. is the superpower it is because we patrol and secure not any land geography, but two oceans, the Atlantic and the Pacific.

(I’ve often premised arguments from the premise that that link article does; namely that if one eliminates U.S. from the global dynamic, what powers would or will try to lurch into the void.)

I like the Atlantis analogy Nyquist provides.

Friedman posits that U.S. Hegemony in this way will survive peons such as 0bama, and that 0bama, Axelrod, and that cheap belly dancer Rahm Emanuael et al know all this well by now. soviet union’s previous efforts to sink the economy were pretty paltry, and of course Poody putin is counting on Sore-a$$ and 0bama to deliver on what he or they cannot.

It will be interesting to watch as this has gone beyond 0bama & co. watching themselves sink beneath the shifting sands to digging their own graves in order to provide some *new* plausible cover for them to hide out in. The cold light of day, or the shadow cast by Saturn in the night sky is becoming unbearable for them.

So these cowards will foist 0bama out to front, as he is the one with all the name recognition, to buy time against the inevitable.

But nothing can possibly help him now.

This vote (on health scare/dare dare) today will go down in defeat, or Nancy will postpone it by cynically and skittishly citing the muslim slaughter of unarmed American soldiers as her pathetic pretext for postponement.

Either way, The Bill is Doomed; she will only be making things worse for herself than they already are, and the rot will set in for good.

Soros’s, putin’s hopes dashed, we can watch as the death nell sounds on their far kvetched fetched schemes. Good Riddence. Good bye blythe spirits, the Harvest Moon approaches.

Nov 6, 2009 - 12:42 am 142. RagnarD:

gadfly @ 121 said (in part):

When that happens, a method needs to be put in place . . . perhaps an email to Pajamas Media, …

From what I have seen on other threads @ PJM on other blogs is that the moderators are pretty asleep at the switch. I have seen their “rules” seriously violated and nothing done, even when a request to take action is posted. It is so bad, I have seen the requests for action moderated out of existence. So, you tell me …. what is the real policy? Who are the trolls, in actuality? Are the rules so capricious they do not matter?

The posts in questions had to do with one of them saying on a Glenn Beck thread – “Well, Beck cannot even make a kid right.” (I paraphrase)- in reference to Beck’s oldest daughter being born with cerebral palsy. Now that was just wrong. When the offender was called out, the person just started a-h attacks the like I have never seen. Then some 10 days later when called out for the horrid transgressions the troll denied making the comments. Even in the face of links to the comment.

This leads me to believe one of two things:

1. Some of the trolls inhabiting the space under the bridges at PJM are possibly paid to post and disrupt. They are provided the identity to use, the scripts to follow and maybe even the posts to attack.
2. The trollish behavior is due to kids just being obnoxious or adults with malformed moral filters doing the same.

Either one makes them particularly …… distasteful beings. These guys are piling up bad karma at an amazing rate.

Oh, and I am one of those who Chucklehead @ LGF banned 2-3 years ago, at the start of the purges. My sin? Disagreeing with the party line as proclaimed by Charles. How long did it take after registration being successful? 30 minutes! Shortest membership I have ever had!

buddy @ 125:

…a certain and well-known brand of canned cat food, “Puss in Boots”.

You have to warn before saying stuff like that! My cousins boy is an Aggie. The Navy put him through school and he is serving his owed time now, with distinction. Last sea tour was minesweepers in the Gulf! His wife is an Aggie and probably would replace your vital parts for that crack. Mean little woman. Her Dad is at the hosp in San Antonio as a researcher. I got good Texas roots in that part of the world.

Hmm, just occurred to me, this, Amazon Mechanical Turk, could be being used to do some political trolling by the denizens of the building in DC. What do ya’ll think? (Inspired by the hints of Gaffe Prices @ 136 – H/T)

Nov 6, 2009 - 1:10 am 143. Wadeusaf:

Buddy Larson
–need attention, grow a beard and craze your eye and go speechify in the street –hey –(slaps forehead) that sounds kinda fun!

Naw round these parts that would mean rubbing elbows with anarchists, code pink and members of the elfin brigades. Quite the crew they are, flag burners and fomentors of real nonsense. Crazy as it sounds they can be for the Iranian protesters and support Hezbollah in the same breath. they can be anti business and pro government corporation and best of all they are pro free speech and against anyone else handling the bull horn.

Ashes ashes we’d all fall down.

Nov 6, 2009 - 1:23 am 144. JG27 AD:

Seems to me that many of the posters were having fun playing with the troll.

Reading through this thread and the subject thread too, I got the impression that many BC posters perhaps felt that they had taken a walk down to the local bar, had a few drinks, danced on tables, sang off-key and well, had a rip-roaring good time.

Now, today they awakened with a headache and are drinking coffee and getting back to serious BC business.

Letting off some steam from the normal high caliber discussions here at BC is a good thing.

AD

Nov 6, 2009 - 3:04 am 145. dtmack:

Let me see – most of the comments on that particular thread were related in some way to the troll. And many on the next thread. Now there’s one devoted exclusively to that particular troll. Looks like pretty effective trolling to me.

His original nasty comments regarding the Military were obviously intended to provoke, and I’m surprised that so many rose to the bait.

I don’t agree that his assertions had to be challenged for the sake of newcomers to the site. I think most would be absolutely appalled by his post, and subsequent ones, without anyone challenging the posts themselves. The best thing lefties do is speak – the more they do, the more they reveal exactly who they are.

Ignore them, and let their words stand on their own. Children quickly tire when the game doesn’t go their way.

Nov 6, 2009 - 3:08 am 146. Lifeofthemind:

Sarah Palin’s email was hacked by the son of a State Senator. They exist.
There are two sides to the solution.
1. Protect the forum through social and technical robustness.
2. Pursue the trolls into their lair under the bridge, lift the rocks.

The First Amendment is a restraint on government, not on private actors. You do not have a Right to Privacy to speak about me or to damage my interests. The government has a monopoly on the use of violence to settle disputes, except in very narrow circumstances. There are laws against secondary boycotts, usually violated by the Left, and civil court systems for recovering damages but no expectation that the identity, employment or place in society of an offender will be protected. The only exception to that that I am aware of would be to protect a minor. In the case of harm done by a minor those responsible as parents should face exposure and retribution.

Nov 6, 2009 - 5:01 am 147. wws:

Regarding Panarin’s comments: He ain’t ever visited Texas. If worst comes to worst, I think the Reconstituted 2nd Republic could easily and quickly establish dominance over most north american energy supplies. Louisiana and Mississippi are comparatively low population areas, and I’m sure they would quickly see the wisdom of affiliating with the 2nd Republic for their own protection. Once control of the lower Mississippi was established, the lower midwest up to St. Louis would almost certainly be compelled to join; the 2nd Republic would be glad to negotiate generous terms combined with local autonomy. With the economic bases of food and energy production established, survival is assured and expansion would become the next order of business.

I mean think about it; you know we already got more guns than all y’all put together.

Panarin’s worried about the large hispanic population, but he doesn’t understand that this would work in reverse: This would be the base for an expeditionary force, all with personal guarantees of property and land holdings in the new areas, which would venture down along the gulf coast and establish the 2nd Republic’s control over the area defined by the triangle of Matamoros, Monterrey and Tampico. Going to Veracruz would probably be an overreach, but that would depend on the resistance encountered. No reason to bother with Chihuahua and Sonora – nothing there worth taking or holding. If Aztlan wants to control them from its L.A. Capitol, they can have them.

The real prize, of course, will come about 10 years after these holdings are consolidated, and will probably require an alliance with New Florida. Allied, the armies of the 2 great southern republics should be able to easily invade Cuba and establish a new provisional governing authority. With this accomplished, the Gulf and all of it’s resources would become a 2nd Republic lake, turning it into one of the most vibrant areas of the new world economy.
But yes, competition with New Florida is one of the greatest potential flashpoints of this future. Managing that relationship will require diplomatic skill on both sides.

But it will be fun to watch BosWash squirm when we demand that they pay for their oil and grain with gold bullion only.

Panarin, when it comes to this projection business, you’re a punk.

Nov 6, 2009 - 7:57 am 148. Appalachian:

I’ve been a regular reader here for many years. I’m sure that many of the regular commentators here have more going on than I do. Nonetheless, adding to a substantive discussion is time-consuming (at least for me it is), and I usually feel under time-pressure.

I would like to say, though, what a wonderful site this is, and how much I have enjoyed it. Richard Fernandez is a treasure.

The commentary is also very good. This is the only site I visit in which I take the time to read the comments. In most sites, this is a waste of time.

The BC is like a gathering at Richard’s house. He’s invited us in, started each discussion with a thoughtful and interesting essay, and often contributed to the ensuing discussion. He asks only that guests follow reasonable rules of decent manners, which are stated up front.

All that is needed is to enforce those rules. I don’t think anyone wants to exclude reasoned argument, but anyone making personal attacks should be shown the door.

Nov 6, 2009 - 8:43 am 149. Marie Claude:

Marymcl,

I take the opportunity of “this post about a former post” to reply you on Albert Camus, I’m still not at home, but in Portugal (where, BTW, I ate a fabulous fresh dorade on BBQ, and my hubby, a gargantuesque dish of “sardines”), so my connection on the net is counted, as long as we stay on the harbour with our “auto-caravanna” !

I suggest “the stranger” (L’étranger”) too, very typical of A. Camus’s moral of the absurdity, for those who appreciate weird atmospheres.

Bush was photographied in summer 2007 with this book in his hands, dunno on which paper anymore, probably NYT.

“The Stranger” was/is really dealing with what your soldiers may have experienced in Irak, culpability, racism, no apparent reason for (gratuitement) murdering an “Arab”…

about translations into english, I have no referrences

Life, German cheeze, is an inspide form of “Camembert” in northern Germany, some insipide slices with oignons and beer in Düsseldorf Kneipen… hmm, the thing is, there’s nothing to narre about them, but, of course, still of the French’s

Nov 6, 2009 - 9:40 am 150. Whitehall:

I appreciate especially the thoughtful remarks of Mr. Lynch and Mr. Bahadur. An open system is subject to attack and disruption and the with the temptation will come the action. Just like “free love” devolves into a venereal disease epidemic.

Most of us will resist trolling back at leftist sites in tit for tat. That is a marker that we conservatives are not yet ready for a cold civil war, much less a hot one. WE are the ones saying “give (civil) peace a chance.” The other side is slipping into uncivil behavior in civic, financial, and legal spheres. The recent election returns offer hope that the larger part of the voters recognize this and push back at the ballot box. Hopefully, this will give us votes “beyond the margin of fraud.”

I will congratulation myself for not taking the guy’s bait. It was clear to me that he had nothing to add and wouldn’t be dissuaded. However, I was disappointed in that so many of the other comments were at a fantasy level about gun calibers and the life and too few on the realistic actions we can take to save the Republic and our liberties.

Nov 6, 2009 - 9:41 am 151. buddy larsen:

W/150; “we arm to parley”
–Winston Churchill

wws/147; hotDAMN, boy!

R/142; message rec/ -stop- re ‘cat food’ -stop- appreciate warning -stop – will make amends pronto -stop – pls inform Maggie -stop -before she git holt a me -stop-

Nov 6, 2009 - 10:37 am 152. buddy larsen:

R/142; To make amends to that ‘mean little woman’ from Texas A&M (play it loud)!

Nov 6, 2009 - 11:09 am 153. steveaz:

JG27 AD @144
“Letting off some steam from the normal high caliber discussions here at BC is a good thing.”

Right on!

And, while we’re talking about trolling, I’ll take this chance to say that there’s something that bothers me about threads like this one. It is “we,” a public, free, commenters group, commenting about “us.” All, please forgive me the literary license, but this reminds me other dodgy, self-centered vocations, like navel-gazing, beard-pulling and masturbation, all of which are discouraged in public for a host of very good reasons. The recent “best-commentor” competition weighed similarly.

Sorry. Some things need saying, and they may provoke:

(1) We all need to learn to love our inner troll. Think about it: commentators at blogs like Wretchard’s self-select – thinking ourselves vortices invited to twirl off of an angel’s pinyons, we feel obliged, nay, bound to lend our words, unbidden and often inchoate, to our host’s incisive posts. And how dare we? As though his equals, we coast sans permission in the eddies streaming off the shoulders of his intellect. What a band of egotists! What a plague of pigeons! What a cast of free-riders! What a rumpus of…trolls!

We’ve all got an inner troll (some have a BIG one), so…get in touch with him or her, and, instead of hiding it in a closet somewhere, doll it up and roll your troll out on Richard’s blog on occasion so it can get some fresh air, and so we can get a chance to meet it, too. Just keep the outing short.

(2) Discussing a relationship (as in, “Honey, let’s talk about our relationship.”) has always been the prelude to a jolt. When a girlfriend wants to discuss “the relationship,” something’s up! She’s pregnant, your halitosis is finally off-putting, or she’s running off with your brother’s best friend (or all three). That conversation is an identical “we-discussing-us” arrangement, bearing all the same barnacles that commentator-competitions and troll-introspectives at my favorite blog bear: spurred self-awareness, overt status contests and a sense that the commentators have been roughly shuffled thru, like a box of old “Car and Driver” magazines from the early eighties might be handled by a rough-handed janitor.

Which regular commentator got left off of Leo Linbeck’s list of instruments and didn’t wonder, “Hey, he’s missing my entire horn section,” or, “Hey, Mozart, I’ve been here since ‘07 playing my piccolo (albeit a little off-key), and the conductor doesn’t even know I’m here,” or…? My point is, when people focus on analyzing group-relations over and above their personal, selfless literary contributions to our common forum it introduces anxieties like, “How does my short comment three threads back “match up” to Luddie’s long one at #whatever?” “Why didn’t Whitehall vote for Trangbang?” “Why didn’t dan win – I can’t believe dan didn’t win?!” I think that this fractures the group and dissolves comity.

In the future, I say let’s nix the intramural beauty contests (”may I please, pretty please, play clarinet to Konyok’s trombone”). And, to get rid of the trolls, let’s devise a short list of identifiers that earn the tagged commentator a permanent ban. For example, if you exceed, say, 15 posts and use the word “dialectical” more than twice in any one thread, you are 86′d on the spot, no questions asked!

It’s back to the HuffPo fish-bowl for you – enjoy your daily flakes!

Nov 6, 2009 - 11:22 am 154. Whitehall:

Mr. Larsen,

Don’t get me wrong – I’ve nothing against gun ownership and might buy one myself someday. I’m saying that in any political scenario I can imagine, resorting to armed citizenry using violence in a HOT civil war is a sign of deperation and our success in defending our liberties and our prosperity will be a low probability event.

Far, far better to focus on how to re-invirgorate the public spirit of limited government. We can still swing elections and remove politicians through the ballot box and replace them with people who will respect our Constitution and acknowledge the primacy of the American people.

As the internet is our new tool for communication and political activation, it is being attacked. How to defend our main communications tool is of vital importance and the rightful point of this thread. Keeping a reasonable signal-to-noise ratio is a practical concern that must be addressed in the here-and-now.

Fellow conservatives, keep your eyes upon the doughnut, and not upon the hole.

Nov 6, 2009 - 11:24 am 155. HEPT:

I ain’t a smart man I have been coming here to BC for years I read what folks here say and process it all. I make a comment and it’s pretty much personal opinion or observation even a guess some times I try to get back to folks who answer but I ain’t always that prompt I raise two horses and they can be a handful sometimes.
I don’t beleive I come across as a troll and sure as hell don’t mean to.
If I do just remember I don’t mean to and ain’t that smart LOL
“I’m just a soul who’s intentions are good, Oh Lord, please don’t let me be misunderstood.”

Nov 6, 2009 - 11:29 am 156. buddy larsen:

GP/141; harkens back to Mahan, on the meaning of naval power. John Keegan has written on that too –one thing that sticks in memory is the enormous gap between the amount of resources needed to bring to bear a given set of military power at sea vs on land. He used Nelson’s fleet at Trafalger to make some stunning comparisons between the cost of the ships and crews vs the cost of horse, mules, oxen, forage and handlers, to’ve moved the same guns the same distance on land. Also, the sea being a hostile environment immune to permanent settlement, how the last ship afloat owns freedom and mastery of the whole sea. It’d be a safe bet that if a hostile power ever sought to intimidate USA into a withdrawal from some sea area, it’ll be by a surprise attack on one of our carriers –not a la Yamamoto 1941, but –taking advantage of modern weapon lethality –thru some “rogue accident” immediately followed by intense diplomacy aimed at covering our president’s rear as he pulls USN back toward home ports “in order to defuse tensions”. The sailors newly in davy jones’ locker will upset him as much as the Fort Hood soldiers did yesterday –not too much, not that big a deal in the larger scheme of “bringing fundamental change to America”.

Nov 6, 2009 - 11:37 am 157. buddy larsen:

W/154; i hear ya –& good points all. we just need to remember that defense is a layered affair, and the Minutemen are the ones who pull the bacon out when it falls into the fire –

S/153; as long as we’re on the topic, i got stuck on clarinet –which really bummed me out –no offense to Benny Goodman but jeez wot a lite weight instrument

Nov 6, 2009 - 11:50 am 158. Whitehall:

So I’ve got $500 to spend for political purposes.

Where is it better put? Buying a WWII rifle or donating to a conservative candidate who has the energy and will power to win office?

I will acknowledge that an armed citizenry defends my liberties too. Thanks.

Nov 6, 2009 - 12:12 pm 159. buddy larsen:

W/158; put half down on the rifle and give $250 to the pol but lever it with a handwritten note noting your fave issue and that the included check is equal to the amount you’re spending to buy a rifle. In the end you’re out $750 but you have a good rifle, and a pol who knows what you want, and that he has taken your money, and that you have a gun, and that you went to some effort to make sure he knew it.

Nov 6, 2009 - 12:47 pm 160. marymcl:

There’s something going on in the comment section for Ed Driscoll’s post on Ft. Hood.

There are a number of comments by what appear to be several different incarnations of the poster known as poor citizen, including one who comes across as recognizably the same individual who frequents PJM and has posted here occasionally (mushy-middle centrist – foolish in my book but not a troll) Anyway someone else with a style familiar to anyone who was on the Armies thread is definitely trolling using that poster’s NIC –

@149 MarieClaude –

I haven’t read “The Stranger” since high school but if memory serves, the main character was dead inside and brightened up at the prospect of his execution. That fits the suicide bombers well enough, also seems to resonate with things of his that I’ve read more recently (his observation somewhere in “The Myth of Sisyphus” – not that particular essay but one of the others – that nihilism was a dead-end that invariably led to suicide)

@153 steveaz

I think you’re overreacting about Leo’s orchestra. We’re all adults here and I don’t think anyone takes it *that* seriously – it was just a friendly little bit of whimsy (though as long as you’ve mentioned it, this is as good a time as any to point out he forgot to include any flutes!?!)

Nov 6, 2009 - 3:29 pm 161. Lifeofthemind:

On the closed downstream thread wretchard noted that the unemployed do have the luxury of time while the employed are often limited to contributing a cheque. The argument for aristocratic government was that wisdom comes from having the time to contemplate a situation and the leisure to study subjects like history or theology. That is why Jefferson wanted a government ruled by a Whig ascendency of gentleman farmers supported by sturdy yeomen neighbors. Unemployment may make your time constraints more flexible but it does not fit the needs of conservative political action for, wait for it, three reasons.

1) Effective activity takes money, such as for travel etc.
2) Conservatives do not trust or support the unemployed. It feels like having a prostitute offer you counsel on
    Virtue.
3) Networking to get a job and to advance a cause conflict and more so for Conservatives than the Left.

If I had the money I would love to run for office. The fact is that most Republicans around here get 20-30% of the vote. To do it as a vanity project is wasteful. Most candidates are either very young resume builders or retirees with an axe to grind. They put their names out and pray but do not commit the time energy and resources needed to seriously compete. To run for City Council would mean starting now and devoting two years to getting to know every constituent, community group, church, synagogue or temple, with at best one chance in 3 of success if the resources expended are vast. To run for Congress would be even harder and more expensive, easily in the millions, with less probability of victory. And that is despite the fact that large numbers of individuals are repelled by the cynical fraud of the left and would love to hear an appeal to the image of America that they or their parents came to NY believing in.

Nov 6, 2009 - 5:32 pm 162. wws:

There’s another consideration in running for office these days which cuts out even more people. If you’ve got anything sensitive in your past – and I’m not necessarily talking about illegal activities, but anything personally sensitive for you or for a close family member – you have to consider the impact of this information becoming public, because it will now, and in the most abusive way possible. Even if you decide you could stand the heat, can you take responsibility for the damage that could be done to people close to you? I’m sure quite a few of you will know exactly what I’m talking about.

Nov 6, 2009 - 11:14 pm 163. SunSword:

I take the position that trolls cannot be ignored. Because when the trolls are actually a disruptive group effort, it doesn’t matter whether or not we respond.

For example: suppose 4 like minded people on a university campus sit in a dorm room for 2 hours, all signed into laptops, and they hammer a set of blogs, all with the same posting name. They can collectively make every other comment be from their little borg collective.

So even if NO ONE responds, they can cause irritation just by making every other comment from them.

The only solution is moderation. Moderated blogs tell you when you post that your post is being held for moderation review. It doesn’t automatically appear. That stops this troll tactic dead in the water. They don’t hit sites with this feature.

Nov 7, 2009 - 6:11 am 164. cfbleachers:

It’s funny, in an odd sort of way…I don’t comment often here. The regulars here do a pretty spectacular job of handling what I might want to say…often better than I could say it.

I comment elsewhere on PJM and sometimes a regular here will wander and comment on my post or engage with me. When I comment here, I usually don’t get a ton of response, it’s a one-off comment and I’m gone…back to lurking and enjoying the wit and wisdom of the regulars.

I DID comment on the Armies of the Right thread (at # 60)…, saw how the thread got hijacked and parachuted out.

It is in my nature to follow one of my law professor’s bits of sage advice, “don’t try to fill empty vessels”…but, I must admit on rare occasions (once every 6 months or so), I am moved to respond to a troll…but not here. The Belmont Club is a place I reserve for higher reading…it somehow offends me more here…to watch a thread devolve into a fraternity food fight. This lovely place…is better than that. It’s why I don’t comment that much myself here. I enjoy leaving this place the way I find it most days.

Onto my larger point, then back to putting my feet up and enjoying Wretchard’s home from my lurking perch, I promise.

This thread gives me the opportunity to voice something that I have been considering for a while now. It is the very nature of trolls, trolling, trollism.

It seems to me that there ought to be a more defined catalogue of behaviors and terms for the behaviors and I will offer mine for amendment, upgrade and expansion.

1)The McTroll–This is a semi-regular contributor who wakes up each morning and goes to a site basically repeating the talking points of the “opposing worldview”. “Call Center Trollism”…it really doesn’t matter what the topic is, you are going to raise an issue and they are going to flip to Page 314 of the pre-written playbook and answer you with “the message” corresponding to the topic. Thimble deep and incapable of original thought, bland, repetitive, but no matter where a topic goes…you are going to get the same thing…every time.

2)The Trollop–VERY rare. Someone who comes on to a thread as the “loyal opposition”. Very experienced and possibly better at the particular activity of that day…you don’t want to like the engagement, but you do in spite of yourself. You might even learn a thing or two. They never insult you or point out your shortcomings. And you come away feeling satisfied, somehow.

3)Trollhole–Wakes up in the morning looking to suck the positive energy out of any passing matter within its range. Usually started off as a dying red giant and now wants to make reason and rationale disappear. Disruption of a thread’s orbit as witnessed in the original thread talked about here is the rasion d’etre of its existence. Ad hominem attacks, “you people”, insults, snark in every sentence…the visceral “resistance” is fight or flight at its core. (”Don’t feed the trolls”…”surround and kill ‘em”)

The response to each, I think, would be different…and the alerts and alarms would be as well. Perhaps there are more…or better descriptions. But I believe recognizing the differences could be important.

Nov 7, 2009 - 6:44 am 165. JFSanders031:

Boyd, John Lynch et al. This desire to live within a pristine world is a major bug in the minds of many. Once you face the reality that you cannot hope to control your world completely. Only then can you begin to enjoy the infinite varieties of life, politics…

As adults we have children. When you have incompletely developed minds around you, you will sometimes see a mess. IT HAPPENS. In an internet (incoherent) environment the possibility of physical interdiction of said IDM is not possible. So you are limited to using control of yourself and words to effect said IDM. Now if you ignore IDM what is the possible response from it?

It can continue to fling feces or it will get bored and go away. If you engage it? It will continue to fling feces or it will shift. Think of what the lady that taught Helen Keller. Also understand that as was said before those that come here to get off the fence will see reasoned argument from the adults and feces from the IDM and make their decision to join us.

A side note. My youngest son was a Troll until his father caught him at it and was in physical distance of said IDM! Any way he told me during our conversation about behavior that it was SOP for trolls to assume more than one identity inside a thread. Just so they could keep the troll going. He would argue with himself to draw others in and get them riled up. It was to him all about getting some old goat’s blood pressure up.

100. Raoul Ortega: Very good idea! But I think it would require full time Moderators and as such would bring BC into the pay to play mode of operation.

Just a personal note to Boyd. We are adults here. Why would you use “One persistant commenter”. Be adult. Call them out. USE NAMES.

Nov 7, 2009 - 7:36 am 166. Geeze Louise:

I can’t relate to the mad troll banning rush.

And I have one more comment because I think it’s important.

Prominent in the failure topology of 2008 was the absence of self-regulation – markets, financial services, mortgage lending, securitization, risk management, corporate governance, political oversight, regulatory agencies, credit card abuse. The groups who lost the most – and it’s not over – were the ones who were saving and exercising spending restraint, which was quite a few of us actually – $14T of us.

The first line of defense is always personal responsibility. Your rewards will vary depending on what your neighbor is doing.

The DJIA jumped back over 10,000 based on a +9% or so increase in productivity, which means labor is lean and mean, the same group that took it on the chin – and elsewhere – in 2008.

End today’s Populist Bulletin Teaching Moment #910.

The current crop of elites are doing a high wire act without benefit of the net of a public mandate.

@161 & @162: Sudden Poverty Syndrome and Sudden Palin Syndrome. Been there. Done that. And never even ran for office. More seriously, the general caliber of elected parties needs elevating. It’s ironic – maybe not the word, but strange – that I sort of like most of what’s left of the Republican massacre in Congress. Having said that, I loathed and despised the Republican leader(less)ship under Bush. What contempt I have left is reserved for the current crop of Democrats.

Since I am holding my own personal “beauty contest,” I adore Rudy Guiliani (fully prepared to vote for him any time any place – one of those wonderful people that you don’t have to cringe every time he opens his mouth to speak). I think a Palin run would be suicidal. Neutral on Petraeus because we could elect God, Mother Teresa, and your mother all rolled into one perfect candidate and s/he would still fail with this Congress.

Nov 7, 2009 - 8:46 am 167. marymcl:

@163 SunSword

Some of the other bloggers on PJM put comments in moderation and it doesn’t have any effect on the troll presence. To all appearances they get approved no less than any other commenters. In that case it’s hard to see what’s being gained by holding up comments. Also it removes the possibility of timely conversation within the group, which happens to be one of things I enjoy most about BC, whether or not I’m taking an active part. The hold-up time varies and that’s a problem all by itself. One time I posted something on Prof. Hanson’s blog and it didn’t get out of moderation until the following day, along with dozens of other comments that were evidently held up at the same time. And the guy who’d been trolling the thread (his schtick repeated ad nauseum was that VDH was a racist) was right up there with the rest of us.

@164 cfbleachers

That’s a good breakdown – pioneering troll taxonomy! PJM has a dedicated cadre of McTrolls, that’s for sure. Part of the concern driving this thread is the possibility of Trollholes United, if you like, and what to do about it.

LotM, Geeze Louise

I love Rudy and still think he’d be a great candidate for POTUS, with or without the Republican party. Frankly the GOP’s management of the last presidential campaign makes me wonder whose side they’re on anyway. He’s got national presence, the common touch, executive experience with a thick skin to match, he’s patriotic and articulate, and there’s no question where he stands as far as terrorism and the war are concerned. I don’t think his pro-choice views would be as big a liability as some think, especially if he took the position of leaving all such “social” issues up to the states. I like Sarah Palin but she’s more valuable as a fundraiser and stalking horse IMO. Though a Rudy/Sarah ticket might be just the thing (or Rudy with Gen. Petreaus)

BTW I have a question for the Subscription Manager – if I click the little box next to the thread name to stop the e-mails after each new comment, will that unsubscribe me from the thread? (meaning they’ll just start up again next time I comment) I don’t mind them, just curious how this thing works

Nov 7, 2009 - 9:49 am 168. Wadeusaf:

Buddy,
re Pannarin,

Isn’t that what Joe Biden was projecting onto the Kurds and Co. in Iraq? Really?

I can see where such stuff could be attempted here, but unless I am totally off, the majority of even our leftier brethren would oppose it. A foreign invasion could only work if there were a secure base of support and supply. While I can see Honduras value as such, Texas stands in the way.

I also have a new love of Texas womens, and I don’t pity the fool major who now knows the eyes of texas are upon him.

Nov 7, 2009 - 12:19 pm 169. RAH:

I noticed the troll and was offended about his slur on the military. But I refused to comment because that is what they want and does nothing. His own words will either offend, or not. I am not responsible for the reaction and will not feed his ego.

Once I noted his handle I just ignored him, but so may others could not resist the bait.

I am against moderation and having a different opinion can get you called a troll at other forums. That has happened to me on Free Republic so I do not like moderators because they get power hungry.

So listen folks we can handle trolls by ignoring them If the troll still want to argue let them.

Nov 7, 2009 - 2:00 pm 170. Gaffe Prices:

Its worth saying that this is the blog equivalent of ‘phishing expeditions’ on twitter or fb. Keep on the lookout for the tell-tale warning signs…

further course correction @ me 136, I wrote:

I cite this as evidence in support of above comments to the effect of “Don’t feed the trolls”

I didn’t, and this is to demonstrate that this is as good as it can possibly get. My bad. apologies to all.

(Meant to say) -”I didn’t take the advice- “Don’t feed the trolls” and did (go ahead and feed the trolls).

I must confess, I am a recovering, binge, sometimes ‘feed the troll’ sort of person. Gotta steer clear of my anger issues.

Nov 7, 2009 - 4:24 pm

Sorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.